Slashdot Mirror
A Climate of Violence?
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."
That temperature affects violence, according to many studies?
http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2011/07/hot-weather-violence/
Solution: move everyone to cold places!
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.
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).
Sometimes it's better not having signature
facepalm....
Just like anything else that causes stress, it causes people to get upset and lash out.
http://www.slate.com/blogs/moneybox/2013/05/06/wildling_egalitarianism_why_bad_weather_leads_to_more_economic_equality.html
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 and http://www.acq.osd.mil/ie/download/green_energy/dod_sustainability/2012/Appendix%20A%20-%20DoD%20Climate%20Change%20Adaption%20Roadmap_20120918.pdf), 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).
Those who can, do. Those who can't, sue.
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.
It's not the heat, it's the humanity.
Now I know why I punch my air conditioner when it's not working!
========
77 77 77 2e 6d 65 6c 76 69 6e 73 2e 63 6f 6d
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?
Oolite: Elite-like game. For Mac, Linux and Windows
Change increases violence....
love is just extroverted narcissism
. . . . is there ANYTHING it can't do ???
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."
Some people die at 25 and aren't buried until 75. -Benjamin Franklin
I heard about a similar study a decade ago ... and because someone has to say it ... correlation != causation.
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.
much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
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
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.
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.
Does it apply here?
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.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
"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.
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
An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
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/ . I guess we can add this to the list.
planet texture maps and more
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...
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
"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.
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.
Birth is the leading cause of death.
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.
"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!
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.
Sorry, teleporters just kill you and then make a copy. A perfect, soul-less copy.
What ever it takes to sell more guns and justify more surveillance
I suppose you've seen this already and simply chose to ignore it:
http://www.skepticalscience.com/global-warming-positives-negatives-intermediate.htm
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
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.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
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.
My karma is not a Chameleon.
...of "Duh" magazine.
East winds? You mean when someone farts in your general direction from a specific Cartesian location and the ionized air burns your nostrils.
My karma is not a Chameleon.
"Sorry it was hot out and I don't have AC, please refer to the following studies stating it was not my fault"
Wow what kind of brush do you use to apply gloss that thick?
You want to make the only rice that will still grow a patented product from Monsanto and friends? I suppose you could try to grow rice in Russia or something once you have enough water. Funny thing, that's a point that keeps coming up on that list, not enough fresh water. Bah I'm sure it's no big deal, just more alarmism. We can mine water from asteroids or something right? Maybe open some of those eco-friendly and energy-efficient desalination plants.
Funny how you only point out localized problems on one side when they're on both sides of the chart.
Increase in wildfire has little to do with agriculture? Maybe it's just another localized problem but the crops by me aren't made of asbestos, they burn pretty well in my experience.
But it's OK, we can grow more crops in Canada and Russia and Northern Europe and China and sell that stuff to the starving poor people near the equator. Bam, free market solved the problem.
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
So by this logic then, it makes sense because WW2 started in the tropics and desert! (Oh wait, no it didn't.)
Well, WW1 then certainly? ...ah, no.
-Styopa
This was already discovered in the movie Predator 2, we didn't need science to back up a well known fact already.
You can expect things to get worse faster and faster, and you can expect the government to state one day "We can no longer afford to send FEMA out to you" and relief will be up to you.
Fewer people, the only answer.
"If any question why we died, Tell them because our fathers lied."
Winter keeps the riff-raff indoors. Summer drives them outside, to prey upon each other and other, relatively more innocent, folks.
We need Globular Cooling. For the Children.
The violence is not directly caused by global warming but by the conditions to lead to global warming and social injustice across the planet making people angry.
I mean, global warming and the causes - insensitiveness to that issue, isn't the same callousness cause for increasing accumulation of wealth and power to less and less individuals on the top of the pyramid, depriving the increasingly larger lower parts of basic necessities? Just look at US "minimum wage" not covering basic living expenses at full hour work week? There may be many examples, not only on wages, but also on social (female, racial, political and minority suppression) issues.
there you go... one of many references to the same sort of study... http://www.psychology.iastate.edu/faculty/caa/abstracts/2000-2004/01A.pdf
Good on ya, mate !
So, crime should be falling in the U.S. Midwest, right, since it's August and only in the 70s?
So you just admitted that you easily ignore large amounts of information off-hand, and you've used an ad-hominem for the second time now.
I will not compete at that level.
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
Watch it - everybody is sweating all the time, everybody is aggressive. A movie about Global Warming.
Of course news about a fake are Fake News.
Religion, Politics, Natural Resources.
Just a guess, but it might not be
climate change -> violence
so much as:
climate change -> ecological disaster -> famine -> poverty -> desperation -> violence
Most of us don't live in a hunter/gatherer society, and even when we did, we didn't just go out and pick whatever happened to grow. Agriculture started in the jungles and on the plains thousands of years ago when people figured out that it was nice that the seeds they'd tossed were plants when they returned after a few seasons or years. Now, Big Ag raises most of the global food supply, and if the climate shifts faster than it can acquire suitable replacement lands and develop the supporting infrastructure (think irrigation and transportation), the financial consequences won't be limited to the equities markets. It will ripple throughout the supply chain with food prices showing the biggest leap just like then did when gasoline hit $4/gal a few years ago. (Notice those prices didn't come down much even after fuel prices abated).
There's a huge web of inter-related business interests that will be destabilized. Everything from feed, seed and weed manufacturers & distributors to the grain elevators, transportation and local banks and insurance brokers that service the industry. The likes of Monsanto, Archer Daniels Midland and United Fruit are worldwide and have considerable pull. They don't just stand by and watch, and they don't fight fair, either.
It's not the climate per se that leads to the predictable intergroup conflicts, it's the economic instability that drives one geopolitical entity to risk war when diplomacy fails or necessity of the starving masses threatens to upend their apple carts. That's why China has invested in countries on every continent and they've been developing a massive military along with an inquisitive cyber-spying ring. They have well developed culture of power and historical appreciation for the long term implications of the interesting opportunities that come with rapidly shifting geopolitical advantage.
I find it interesting that a few posts up the /. board, there's one that deals with the evolutionary advantage or cooperation over competition. Especially as it comes during a period when anthropogenic climate change may require a mindset reset in terms of the failing nationalistic economic financial competition which nearly unraveled completely due to the irrational exuberance in the derivatives markets which has yet to be addressed in any real of meaningful fashion. Alan Greenspan may have unknowingly led us to an evolutionary tipping point for which history my be incapable of acknowledging the depth or breadth of his contribution.
And so it goes... *
the word economy has also been tanking during the period of the "study." but the advantage of these kinds of "studies" is that they distract people from the real problem, i.e., the sociopaths who pay for such "studies."
tom arnall
> "Add this to the developing scarcity of water due to global warming and the prospects for a peaceful future do not bode well."
"The short period of relative peace in a small section of human society won't last much longer into the future."
FTFY.