jump to navigation

Well, Hearing About It 24/7 Certainly Is November 6, 2015

Posted by geoff in News.
trackback

Climate change is killing our sex drive, bringing down U.S. birth rate, study says

Comments»

1. digitalbrownshirt - November 6, 2015

That explains why Latin America and Africa are so empty.

2. Sobek - November 7, 2015

Lefties get all hot and bothered thinking about Gaia. But then they murder their children, so it’s actually a wash.

3. lauraw - November 7, 2015

Yeah, the effect of a heat wave in August is a rounding error on the million+ babies aborted every year.

I got through the whole article and it says, “Temperature’s role has probably been pretty negligible…”

So what’s the whole point of the article? The headline, of course. That’s all they wanted to put out there. Create a false impression among the empty-heads who are then going to parrot it around the water cooler like it’s gospel. I hate the MSM.

4. digitalbrownshirt - November 7, 2015

That’s how drive by journalism works. The headline is the only thing that matters because they know damned well that the audience they’re reaching doesn’t read the article.

5. lauraw - November 7, 2015

It kills me to see this blather about global warming and how meat causes cancer come out on the MSM, and then hear members of my family parroting it unthinkingly to me, days later. News blurblets do so much damage. Everybody trusts the stream of bs that is flowing by our ears all day long. Sickens me.

6. geoff - November 7, 2015

Heh – I didn’t even read the article because it sounded ridiculous. I was just making fun of the headline. But you guys made me feel bad by reading it yourselves, so I went and looked up the original publication:

Maybe Next Month? Temperature Shocks, Climate Change, and Dynamic Adjustments in Birth Rates

Looks like most of the strength of their correlation is from the 1931-1969 period, when air conditioning wasn’t very common. When they project the trend to the 2070-2099 time period, they predict that births will decline by 2.6%, if the number of days over 80oF triples, and if air conditioning use doesn’t increase. The thing is, it looks like they use their temperature-fertility relationship derived for 1970-2010, but the correlation is only 2/3 as strong if you use data from 2000 – 2010 (which is far more relevant).

So basically, he’s shown that, based on climate change models that he “scaled” to hopefully improve their accuracy (which is currently too poor to be quantified), you might see ~1% decline in birthrates if the population demographics stay the same, the geographical distribution of the population stays the same, and nobody buys more air conditioners.

Also, his model does a poor job of capturing the dip in birth rates from Nov-Jan. Seems like that would undermine is theory.

But I thought global warmists would be happy with a reduced birth rate – it’s like a negative feedback to slow down CO2 generation.

7. Sobek - November 7, 2015

Who cares, anyway? If we start to run out of people, we can import more from Syria or Iraq. Problem solved.

8. daveintexas - November 9, 2015

Skepticism is healthy


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: