Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

A Climate of Violence?

Soulskill posted about a year ago | from the venus-must-be-a-postapocalyptic-hellscape dept.

Earth 184

Rambo Tribble writes "U.S. researchers have come to the conclusion that a changing climate can drive increased violence in human society. Their findings are to reported in Science (abstract). 'They report a "substantial" correlation between climate and conflict. Their examples include an increase in domestic violence in India during recent droughts, and a spike in assaults, rapes and murders during heatwaves in the U.S. The report also suggests rising temperatures correlated with larger conflicts, including ethnic clashes in Europe and civil wars in Africa.' Marshall Burke, one of the authors, said, 'This is a relationship we observe across time and across all major continents around the world. The relationship we find between these climate variables and conflict outcomes are often very large.' Add this to the developing scarcity of water due to global warming and the prospects for a peaceful future do not bode well."

cancel ×

184 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Isn't this well known? (3, Informative)

mozumder (178398) | about a year ago | (#44457389)

That temperature affects violence, according to many studies?

http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2011/07/hot-weather-violence/ [wired.com]

Solution: move everyone to cold places!

Re:Isn't this well known? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44457721)

That's bull shit, we should stomp that fucker before it gets too cold to go outside.

Re:Isn't this well known? (3, Insightful)

thisisnotreal (888437) | about a year ago | (#44457789)

this is why canada is so nice!

Re:Isn't this well known? (1)

Spy Handler (822350) | about a year ago | (#44457851)

So, more violence in hot drought-prone areas.

Less suicide in cold places.

Sounds like a wash.

Stereotypes (5, Funny)

i kan reed (749298) | about a year ago | (#44457397)

Can't this explain the South and the Middle East all in one fell swoop?

Yes it can! But only if you're willing to be intellectually lazy and refuse to acknowledge multi-input systems. Today, I'm feeling exactly that lazy.

Re:Stereotypes (4, Funny)

i kan reed (749298) | about a year ago | (#44457487)

FYI: I'd be less lazy, but it's too damn hot and humid.

Re: Stereotypes (1)

bugnuts (94678) | about a year ago | (#44457589)

Tldr

Re:Stereotypes (1)

rwa2 (4391) | about a year ago | (#44457729)

I'm all in favor of finding technical solutions to political problems.

Bring on the Frigidaire peacekeepers!

http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/science/2012/08/air_conditioning_haters_it_s_not_as_bad_for_the_environment_as_heating_.html [slate.com]

Re:Stereotypes (1)

davester666 (731373) | about a year ago | (#44458529)

Why the hell do you think the police lock people up in the cooler!

Re:Stereotypes (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44458109)

FYI: I'd be less lazy, but it's too damn hot and humid.

My AC's broke. Them's fightin' words!

Re:Stereotypes (0)

Holi (250190) | about a year ago | (#44458125)

Your right, it's hot and humid and your lazy, now let's fight

Weird (1)

Anon, Not Coward D (2797805) | about a year ago | (#44457399)

So if a mega blizzard struck on the next winter, leaving thousands isolated and on short supplies... they will be chanting "peace and love"?

Maybe the correlation can be explained just by time: there are social factors that are leading to increasingly more violent societies (e.g. increasing awareness of social rights).

Re:Weird (3, Insightful)

Lendrick (314723) | about a year ago | (#44457637)

Probably not.

Most likely it's notjust heat so much as deviation from what people find the most comfortable.

Re: Weird (1, Informative)

O('_')O_Bush (1162487) | about a year ago | (#44457785)

I would agree with this. Something else that tends to happen (super unsubstantiated blanket anecdote) is that people tend to drink more hard liquor in the cold, because it warms the body (feeling). That also increases rates of domestic violence and rape.

I am also growing weary of all the doom saying. I acknowledge that AGW is a serious problem that needs to be solved ASAP, but there are also many positive benefits to a warmer climate (such as extended growing seasons in the world's breadbasket zones, and expanded growing areas as warm moves to higher latitudes), but these things seem very un-PC for the scientific (and Slashdot) to talk about.

Re: Weird (4, Informative)

RazzleFrog (537054) | about a year ago | (#44457879)

It's not un-PC - it's just incorrect. It's not just about temperatures going up. It's about wild variations in the weather patterns (droughts in some areas and floods in others), melting of the ice-caps wiping out coastal cities (where most people live), and impaired food production in countries that already have borderline temperatures.

Re:Weird (0)

RazzleFrog (537054) | about a year ago | (#44457779)

Wouldn't the megablizzard fall into Climate Change or are you making the common mistake to assume that climate change just means higher temperatures?

Re:Weird (2)

CrimsonAvenger (580665) | about a year ago | (#44457931)

Wouldn't the megablizzard fall into Climate Change

No, it would fall under "weather".

Now, the weather we have may be a result of climate change (or not), but no single weather event is "proof positive of climate change!!!", no matter how many times people say it....

Re:Weird (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44458257)

I wish the crazy world of climate change would f-off and get down to real science. SD posting all this climate stuff proves how crazy and stupid people have become. I don't know who is more crazy and American or a climate fool? Dirty science whores will say anything for money. SD = idiot dot

FUD (2)

singingjim1 (1070652) | about a year ago | (#44457405)

facepalm....

Re:FUD (1)

i kan reed (749298) | about a year ago | (#44457471)

Really, doesn't only the "F" part apply to this kind of lazy analysis? It doesn't cast uncertainty or doubt on things in order to reinforce the de-facto standard. Kind of a misapplication.

Duh, it's called stress. (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44457413)

Just like anything else that causes stress, it causes people to get upset and lash out.

No shit. (3, Interesting)

NeutronCowboy (896098) | about a year ago | (#44457441)

Besides the fact that the DoD already incorporates climate change in their threat assessments (see http://www.acq.osd.mil/ie/download/green_energy/dod_sustainability/2012/Appendix%20A%20-%20DoD%20Climate%20Change%20Adaption%20Roadmap_20120918.pdf [osd.mil] and http://www.acq.osd.mil/ie/download/green_energy/dod_sustainability/2012/Appendix%20A%20-%20DoD%20Climate%20Change%20Adaption%20Roadmap_20120918.pdf [osd.mil] ), there's the bleedingly obvious conclusion that if an area goes through enough environmental changes that mass migration is better than staying put, conflict with the surrounding areas is guaranteed.

I mean, when New Orleans was evacuated during Katrina, that already sparked enough conflict. Now imagine that the change is permanent and that it's not just a major city evacuating, but an entire geographical area. We'll find out just how far we have evolved from chimps (hint: not very much).

Climate does not change that fast (5, Insightful)

SuperKendall (25149) | about a year ago | (#44457807)

New Orleans had to be evacuated in days.

With climate change, you are talking about sea levels rising an inch or two per DECADE. Or heat / cold profiles of an area changing also over decades. Plenty of time for people to move on if they decide they don't like whatever changes are occurring.

But most people will stay, no matter what particular climate you find "unlivable" you'll find plenty of people already living in those conditions...

What? (3, Informative)

tyroneking (258793) | about a year ago | (#44457453)

I think either the BBC article or the /. summary is incorrect. It's well known /damn obvious that extreme climactic events cause violence in society. What's new is that they can correlate with numbers, "for each 1 standard deviation (1) change in climate toward warmer temperatures or more extreme rainfall, median estimates indicate that the frequency of interpersonal violence rises 4% and the frequency of intergroup conflict rises 14%." The /. summary is misleading and could cause the casual reader to pass by the article because it seems over obvious.

Re:What? (2)

phantomfive (622387) | about a year ago | (#44457791)

Headlines, abstracts, and conclusions in scientific papers are often exaggerated or incorrect, for various reasons. Then news stories about those papers are even more incorrect, for other reasons.

In this paper, the statistics are so tricky, that it's dangerous to draw any conclusions without reading the paper (and I haven't gotten my science magazine yet for this week). The results could change drastically depending on how you define 'extreme rainfall,' for example.

A question I would really like to see (when I get a chance to read the paper) is how they dealt with the fact that armies don't fight as much during winter. Could the entire observed increase be explained by that? We don't know until we read the paper.

Re:What? (1)

tyroneking (258793) | about a year ago | (#44457895)

That's a good question about armies not fighting in the winter - I thought it was because of military strategy training that should surely point to the failures of the French and German armies when facing foes during the winter.

Re:What? (1)

phantomfive (622387) | about a year ago | (#44458327)

Yeah, and even if they are willing to fight and win, most armies are going to have their mobility limited at least a little from snow, and their supply chain complicated.

Re:What? (1)

tyroneking (258793) | about a year ago | (#44458387)

Yes, certainly if they are the invading force and they have lengthened supply lines anyway. Interesting actually, what will happen when global warming flips the switch and parts of the world are dropped into permanent winter; will the US be as dominant in the new ice age?

Re:What? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44458641)

So now "global warming" effects are indistinguishable from "the coming ice age" effects?

Re:What? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44458097)

Its a meta-analysis.The validity of results depend upon there being no bias towards publishing papers that find a certain relationship between climate and violence. I tend to doubt this is the case, especially in a field as politically charged as climate science. The work is still interesting but the confidence of the authors is unwarranted due to the well know publication bias "explanation" for the effect. They have a section addressing this but it includes some ad hoc claims (exactly how to address publication bias is a huge problem in many fields, most people are aware of it but do not appreciate the true extent of the issue).

Finally just from a philosophy of science perspective they have no underlying theory to predict a certain relationship between climate change and human activity. So this work could at best be said to be in the data gathering, adductive stage. It is very unwise to continue publicizing information of this quality to the layperson. The physicists handled it correctly with the ftl neutrino thing. Who will get fired if this effect turns out to be an artifact?

Their final paragraph:
"Numerous competing theories have been proposed to explain the linkages between the climate and human conflict, but none have been convincingly rejected and all appear to be consistent with at least some existing results. It seems likely that climatic changes influence conflict through multiple pathways that may differ between contexts and innova-tive research to identify these mechanisms is a top research priority. Achieving this research objective holds great promise, as the policies and institutions necessary for conflict resolution can only be built if we understand why conflicts arise. The success of such institutions will be increasingly important in the coming decades as changes in climatic conditions amplify the risk of human conflicts."

Obligatory (5, Funny)

Sponge Bath (413667) | about a year ago | (#44457463)

It's not the heat, it's the humanity.

Now I know why... (1)

static0verdrive (776495) | about a year ago | (#44457465)

Now I know why I punch my air conditioner when it's not working!

Re:Now I know why... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44457909)

Because you're the Fonz?

So... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44457483)

So you are gonna explaim that poverty happens due to heatwaves and hot tempareatures.... Not because there is strong political-economical exploration by superpowers... make sense.

Meanwhile, in chilly northern Ireland (1)

Alioth (221270) | about a year ago | (#44457495)

I guess this is why hot, sunny and sweltery northern Ireland has had such a violent past...oh wait, it's freezing cold and pisses with rain most of the time.

How strong is the correlation?

Re: Meanwhile, in chilly northern Ireland (2)

bugnuts (94678) | about a year ago | (#44457661)

A counter example doesn't remove the correlation. Outliers always exist. There can be all sorts of violent cold places, but if warm places are more often violent (with an appropriately small p) the stats hold up.

Re:Meanwhile, in chilly northern Ireland (2)

Baloroth (2370816) | about a year ago | (#44457875)

The findings were related to changes in weather patterns: an unusually hot summer, drought, things like that. The study didn't seem to draw any conclusions about average climate vs. violence, but about deviation from average climate vs. violence. So, if Ireland gets a particularly warm summer, violence and crime are likely to go up.

Re:Meanwhile, in chilly northern Ireland (2)

timeOday (582209) | about a year ago | (#44457949)

Does Ireland actually have a violent past / present? I think not. It has a persistent a low level of violence that is politically motivated. The murder rate is 1/4 of the US, i.e. 1/37 of Venezuela or 1/76 of Honduras . Between 1000 and 3000 people died in the civil war, a century ago. During the 40 year period of The Troubles, 3500 people died, including combatants, on both sides - under 100 per year on average. Maybe Ireland seems violent because it's in such a quiet neighborhood.

Re:Meanwhile, in chilly northern Ireland (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44458087)

Does Ireland actually have a violent past / present?

Maybe as ongoing conflicts go the recent one was relatively benign but in the more distant past it was a quite sanguinary place. Irish/Scottish history is pretty gory/depressing all in all.

Cloudy with 50% chance of homicide (0)

eGuy (545520) | about a year ago | (#44457497)

I can imagine future forcasts, "Cloudy with a 50% chance of homicide". I would imagine 0% chance of homicide in a blizzard or hurricane, so it kinda makes sense. Kinda.

Re:Cloudy with 50% chance of homicide (2)

CanHasDIY (1672858) | about a year ago | (#44457745)

LOL, "Cloudy with a 50% chance of homicide" sounds like it would be a great album title for the non-existent death metal group, The Whethermen

FIFY (1)

avandesande (143899) | about a year ago | (#44457517)

Change increases violence....

Re:FIFY (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44458007)

that's why we should get rid of coins entirely

Climate change. . . (3, Insightful)

Salgak1 (20136) | about a year ago | (#44457521)

. . . . is there ANYTHING it can't do ???

Re:Climate change. . . (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44457947)

. . . . is there ANYTHING it can't do ???

It can't make corporations and their shills face reality.

Re:Climate change. . . (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44458119)

Believe it or not, when things change in an environment, everything within it changes too. Unfortunately everything includes us. So yes, despite your sarcasm, climate change can effectively induce change in "ANYTHING" we care about or can affect us.

Re:Climate change. . . (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44458141)

slow down sales of Al Bore's book.

Re:Climate change. . . (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44458391)

Solve world hunger? Create world peace? Reduce our dependance on fossil fuels?

RTFA (4, Interesting)

schneidafunk (795759) | about a year ago | (#44457537)

The last paragraphs are a pretty strong refutation:

Instead, Dr Halvard Buhaug, from the Peace Research Institute Oslo, Norway, concluded that the conflict was linked to other factors such as high infant mortality, proximity to international borders and high local population density.

Commenting on the latest research, he said: "I disagree with the sweeping conclusion (the authors) draw and believe that their strong statement about a general causal link between climate and conflict is unwarranted by the empirical analysis that they provide.

"I was surprised to see not a single reference to a real-world conflict that plausibly would not have occurred in the absence of observed climatic extremes. If the authors wish to claim a strong causal link, providing some form of case validation is critical."

False negative gambit (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44458287)

I was surprised to see not a single reference to a real-world conflict that plausibly would not have occurred in the absence of observed climatic extremes.

In related news, Dr Halvard Buhaug has released definitive evidence that chemotherapy and cancer are not correlated as he could find cases where chemotherapy patients did not have cancer.

Re:RTFA (0)

Brett Buck (811747) | about a year ago | (#44458477)

Well, I read the summary, and you read some obscure article. The summary meets the standard for a slashdot posting (inflammatory, hysterical, and wrong) The only thing missing it that it isn't a dupe, otherwise it would be perfect/ The article is rational, based on sound arguments, and complete, in other words, not to our standards.. Please don't upset my apple cart like this again.

Let me be the first to say... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44457547)

Duh.

This is not news ... (1)

MondoGordo (2277808) | about a year ago | (#44457551)

I heard about a similar study a decade ago ... and because someone has to say it ... correlation != causation.

Re:This is not news ... Nostradamus predicted it (1)

rwa2 (4391) | about a year ago | (#44457673)

When I was a kid, I heard that Nostradamus sorta predicted the world wars ("Hissler" did the second one). For the unknown future, he wrote something about a 3rd world war, then a drought, followed by an eerily worded "everlasting peace".

But I have no citations.

Re:This is not news ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44457775)

"Did you know that more murders are committed at 92 degrees than at any other temperature? At lower temperatures, people are easy-going. Higher, it's too hot to move. But just at 92, people get irritable." - It Came From Outer Space, 1953

well documented (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44457559)

it has been well documented, in Iraq and Afghanistan for examples, that violence picks up when it is hot.

What's all the fuss? (3, Funny)

cold fjord (826450) | about a year ago | (#44457591)

Now what is all the fuss about climate change causing violets? I happen to think that violets are a lovely flower, and there should be more of them. In fact I think the world would be a more beautiful and peaceful place if there were more violets. More violets would mean more good jobs and satisfying work .... Eh?..... Just a minute ......

I have just been informed that climate change may cause more violence. Well then... never mind.

It was an homage. [dailymotion.com]

Re:What's all the fuss? (1)

fustakrakich (1673220) | about a year ago | (#44458533)

Not violets.. violins...

I see. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44457597)

All that extreme heat over the Pentagon for the past 70 years.

before climate lets blame culture (or even race!?) (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44457633)

Yes, i also suspect climate may effect the violence levels in a population but i am amazed that BBC (and the rest of the "political correct" -usualy left-wing!- crowd) systematicaly choose to ignore the more obvious, and probably most significant, reasons...

Opposite trend in US (5, Insightful)

Tony Isaac (1301187) | about a year ago | (#44457641)

In the US, violent crime rates have been decreasing for decades, while temperatures have been breaking records.

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/tables/table-1 [fbi.gov]

Re:Opposite trend in US (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44457921)

Yeah, I live in Oklahoma and that trend jives with the statistics that the OSBI published. In the previous 4 years, we've had record high temperatures and drought across the state and yet the statistics on violent crime follows the federal trend of decreasing rates.

http://www.ok.gov/osbi/Publications/Crime_Statistics.html

Re:Opposite trend in US (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44458405)

I'm not sure who I'd trust to provide statistics on crime, but it sure as hell wouldn't be government.

Re:Opposite trend in US (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44458445)

Sales of air conditioning units have been increasing.

Trends (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44457649)

So now that we've hit the low in average temperatures, global re-heating is going to reverse this disturbing trend?

http://blogs.berkeley.edu/2010/06/16/a-crime-puzzle-violent-crime-declines-in-america/

Ahh (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44457651)

but since it's climate CHANGE, the effects will cancel out. You're stuck with the old global warming paradigm.

Why do you think the NSA wants to watch Americans? (1)

WOOFYGOOFY (1334993) | about a year ago | (#44457681)

This is the only real reason I can think of for the NSA program spying on Americans. They think things are going to get very ugly. Very ugly.

If you *really* care about freedom and civil liberties and don't just enjoy getting apoplectic over those *ideas* , you might want to consider doing everything you can to make sure the environmental preques for those things continues to viable. No food, no liberty. Trust me.

Correlation is not causation (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44457695)

Does it apply here?

Re:Correlation is not causation (1)

Holi (250190) | about a year ago | (#44458295)

Correlation does not always imply causation, but it sometimes can.

Re: Correlation is not causation (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44458703)

Correlation is all there is! - David Hume

How does more arable land and food mean violence? (2, Interesting)

SuperKendall (25149) | about a year ago | (#44457735)

Rising temperatures means you can grow more crops in northern lands. Over all it means more total arable land, not less. It also means a more hospitable climate to live in up north so it's not like you lose livable habitat either, that also expands.

Thus the whole basis of the claim the article makes is nonsense.

Re:How does more arable land and food mean violenc (1)

Holi (250190) | about a year ago | (#44458349)

Unless you are growing crops that thrive in the northern latitudes. Then the rising temps damage your crops and you have to figure out what crops you can now grow. It also can mean that the quantity of arable land declines due to lack of water. As the breadbelt heats up and since we have already used a lot of the available water we could lose a large section of our agriculture. Drought and depleted aquifers are our biggest threat when it comes to food production and rising temperatures do nothing to help that situation out.

Re:How does more arable land and food mean violenc (1)

SuperKendall (25149) | about a year ago | (#44458751)

Drought and depleted aquifers are our biggest threat when it comes to food production and rising temperatures do nothing to help that situation out.

It just means adjustment of where you grow, and the lands potentially opening up for growing food are a lot wider than the lands lost.

Drought is less common if the seas really rise and the earth warms, because it means more water vapor entering the atmosphere. Cooling is what removes water from the ecosystem, not warming.

Re:How does more arable land and food mean violenc (1)

GameboyRMH (1153867) | about a year ago | (#44458541)

I suppose you've seen this already and simply chose to ignore it:

http://www.skepticalscience.com/global-warming-positives-negatives-intermediate.htm [skepticalscience.com]

None of those items are "science" (0)

SuperKendall (25149) | about a year ago | (#44458725)

Look at that list.

Some of the items are solved by simply adjusting the genetic makeup of crops (rice output). Or you can just move where rice grows to someplace that has the cool nights required.

Other issues are very very local (water in Colorado river basin) and ignore the fact that climate CHANGE means unknown adjustments to any given region - overall warming may bring more water to some region even as it warms. There's been no real change in snowpack levels over the decades so far.

Increases in wildfire have very little to do with agriculture, but there it is I guess to pad out the list and distract you from how bad the rest of the arguments are.

Once again the alarmists like you like to wear the mantle of "science" while not actually using science in any way - the list is entirely fear based and has a bunch of inty regional issues to balance out a massive benefit like "Russia and Canada and Northen Europe and China can grow vastly more crops"

You're like a five year old with a superman cape, pretending you are saving the world while meanwhile you are just pissing all over the globe.

wait a minute (1)

slashmydots (2189826) | about a year ago | (#44457739)

"a spike in assaults, rapes and murders during heatwaves"
Ummm it's way too hot outside to assault, rape, or murder anyone actually. This cannot be a correct correlation.

Hilarious. (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44457763)

EVERYTHING is apparently related to 'global warming' - wait a minute! They slipped up there, they're supposed to say "climate change", because the climate is ALWAYS changing, so they can never be wrong, no matter what happens!
But they forgot to put 'man made' in front of 'global warming'.

There is no such thing. The entire thing is a sickening scam.

www.climatedepot.com

Climate of Stupidity (4, Funny)

Silvrmane (773720) | about a year ago | (#44457777)

This has to be one of the more ridiculous claims to come out of the alarmosphere about climate change I've ever heard. There's a cool list of things that are supposed to be attributable to climate change (according to the alarmists): http://blog.heritage.org/2009/11/17/global-warming-ate-my-homework-100-things-blamed-on-global-warming/ [heritage.org] . I guess we can add this to the list.

Re:Climate of Stupidity (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44458035)

Higher temperatures mean everything moves around more on an atomic level, causing a higher incidence of collision. Man may have the ability to exercise choice, but at the end of the day these tiny glancing blows and crashes reflect themselves in man's actions: more collisions, more violence. We are what we're made of, after all.
 
(Yes, I'm kidding.)

Re:Climate of Stupidity (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44458131)

Really, ridiculous? When the habitable zones are moving, but political boundaries stay the same nothing will happen? Populations can either lay down and die when their territory turns into a desert, or try to trade up to better territory that somebody else is already on. There isn't a market or a price to make that kind of territory exchange, so it's sorted out with the good old fashioned barter of "I'll kill you and take your stuff".

Re:Climate of Stupidity (3, Interesting)

tgd (2822) | about a year ago | (#44458589)

This has to be one of the more ridiculous claims to come out of the alarmosphere about climate change I've ever heard. There's a cool list of things that are supposed to be attributable to climate change (according to the alarmists): http://blog.heritage.org/2009/11/17/global-warming-ate-my-homework-100-things-blamed-on-global-warming/ [heritage.org] . I guess we can add this to the list.

Urban climatology and the sociological (health/violence/etc) are a significant area of research these days. Its not a ridiculous claim, its an important area of research because there are significant changes happening, particularly around public health. I haven't gone through this in any detail -- the study could be junk, but dismissing this area of research out of hand is actually dismissing one of the most near-term impacts of shifting climates. It'll be a long time until NYC is underwater, but the southwest is already showing public health changes because of increased heat and humidity. And those changes impact everyone, because the people least able to handle the changes are the people who tend to have their healthcare paid for by public sources.

And, for what its worth, I'm so hot today I could punch someone.

Re:Climate of Stupidity (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44458631)

It's sorta already on the list. See #32.

Another Excuse (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44457861)

Just what we need! Another excuse for lack of personal responsibility.

So can I sue the automobile manufacturers and various production industries for liability in causing climate change that thereby lead to violence that thereby lead to the death of a family member?

Jeez! Give me a break. I gotta stop reading /.

Re:Another Excuse (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44458217)

Actually, you should START reading it. Because your comment clearly shows that you didn't read the topic you commented on.

Shakespear (3, Interesting)

NaiveBayes (2008210) | about a year ago | (#44457869)

"I pray thee, good Mercutio, let's retire. The day is hot; the Capulets, abroad; And if we meet we shall not 'scape a brawl, For now, these hot days, is the mad blood stirring." - Romeo and Juliet, Act 3, Scene 1, right before a massive and fatal fight.

This Is What You Chose? (2)

rebmemeR (1056120) | about a year ago | (#44457941)

The science is clear: Climate crisis is coming; We're making it happen; Onset may take only decades from now. Desertification, devastation to agriculture, habitat loss, ocean damage, increasing competition for resources, violence (and quite possibly wars), and billions of human fatalities. We choose to put CO2 and methane into the atmosphere. We superstitiously reject the technology which has the most power to save us: nuclear energy. Nuclear energy emits no greenhouse gas. Nuclear "waste" is a fallacy; current reactors burn their fuel only 4%; the rest can be burned by fast reactors. And if you think nuclear is expensive, think about about a carbon tax, and stop NIMBY litigation. A vote against nuclear is a vote for climate crisis.

BS (1)

Murdoch5 (1563847) | about a year ago | (#44457969)

Again another great reason why we can blame everyone and everything else and never ourselves. The increase in violence is because people don't want to "display" self control. It could be 100 degree's C and that doesn't mean you can go rape someone. You're just are responsible at 20 degree's C as you are at 100, science just wants to give you away out of being responsible for your actions. I will love the day when a new survey finds that people who want a scapegoat use surveys like this to justify why they act the way they do.

Chicago (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44458045)

Anyone who's ever driven thru the west side of Chicago in winter and in the summer would've been able to tell you this, all for the price of a gallon of gas (and maybe bullet proof vest?) instead of who-knows how-much was spent for some sciencey-type people to do this "research"

Elsewhere in the city of wind, people get to be very bad, aggressive and stupid in their driving on especially hot days. Cant be too much different elsewhere I would imagine. The real focus though is change - if it is hot for sufficiently long, things return to normal, but a "wave" wreaks havoc. For some reason, the west side is excepted from this - as long as its hot, expect to see shootings.

Last paragraph is the best! (1)

exabrial (818005) | about a year ago | (#44458169)

"I was surprised to see not a single reference to a real-world conflict that plausibly would not have occurred in the absence of observed climatic extremes. If the authors wish to claim a strong causal link, providing some form of case validation is critical."

Global Climate change is a serious issue, but 'science' like this only strengthens the opposition to any real change. Once again, climate 'science' is now just fear mongering. Way to go!

Going Troppo (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44458241)

Australia has an expression for this erratic behaviour in increasing temperatures, they call it: "going troppo" [uwyo.edu]

Though I think the heat is just an excuse to explain that they are drinking too much alcohol instead of water, it is the alcohol that is making them bat-shit crazy.

Different cultures handle excessive alcohol differently; some like to beat the shit out of each other; some like to get darwin awards.
Russians like to drown [independent.co.uk] in heatwaves cooled by vodka.

Substantial correlation (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44458433)

It's funny how supposed scientists claim to derive causal relationships (a changing climate can *drive* increased violence in human society) from correlation, however substantial.

If I were to extrapolate on this pattern, I would claim a substantial correlation between changing climate and stupid and unwarranted conclusions. Clearly, climate must be driving an increase in stupidity.

Coincidence !! (1)

dchinu (2657935) | about a year ago | (#44458525)

What ever it takes to sell more guns and justify more surveillance

Actually Santa comes every year (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44458569)

The spontaneous and unspontaneous eruptions of violence, they may well be caused by ionised wind. Especially east winds. The sun inonizes them, and people commit all sorts of violent crimes. This is old research done by either Oxford, or MIT.

Ah the voodoo I mean science of it all. (1)

Stumbles (602007) | about a year ago | (#44458773)

Its just neat how science can make up all sorts of reasons why people do the voodoo they do and completely ignore the most basic one; choice.

A story ripped from the files... (1)

guevera (2796207) | about a year ago | (#44458781)

...of "Duh" magazine.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>