Study: Warm weather brings more crime
By Louis Sahagun, Los Angeles Times
A study broadens a notion held by the earliest criminologists: Periods of higher temperatures — on an hour-by-hour or week-to-week basis — are likely to produce more crime.
The study by Matthew Ranson of Abt Associates, a research and consulting firm in Cambridge, Mass., suggests global warming will trigger more crimes including murders and rapes over the next century, with social costs estimated to run as high as $115 billion.
Between 2010 and 2099, climate change can be expected to cause an additional 22,000 murders, 180,000 cases of rape, 1.2 million aggravated assaults, 2.3 million simple assaults, 260,000 robberies, 1.3 million burglaries, 2.2 million cases of larceny and 580,000 cases of vehicle theft, the study published this week in the Journal of Environmental Economics and Management says.
Another day, another article pushing the liberal narrative of Global Warming.
Global Warming + Climate Change = Junk Science
If the gorbot faux scientists computer models don’t match reality they they must be wrong.
NONE of the climate change extremists computer models match reality. At least no one has been able to point one out.
The mode;ls are wrong, therefore they are wrong.
Hey, where is the edit button?
Since I can not edit it I will repost it with edits.
Here’s what you need to know about Global Warming.
If it rains, it’s caused by Global Warming.
If it’s cold, it’s caused by Global Warming.
If there’s a drought, it’s caused by Global Warming.
If it snows, it’s caused by Global Warming.
Tornadoes? Caused by Global Warming.
Hurricanes? Caused by Global Warming.
Thunderstorms? Caused by Global Warming.
Sunshine? Caused by Global Warming.
Floods? Caused by Global Warming.
Great Lakes Frozen Over – Caused by Global Warming.
Any weather event – Now Linked to Global Warming.
Hypocrisy? – Learjet Liberals criss crossing the globe in private jets screaming about Global Warming.
Global Warming – One Big Hoax on the low information crowd.
If the gorbot faux scientists computer models don’t match reality then they must be wrong.
NONE of the UN climate change extremists computer models match reality. At least no one has been able to point one out.
The models are wrong, therefore they are wrong. It is simple, there is no other explanations, they are wrong. Period, end of story.
Bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla
I wondered how long it was going to take law enforcement to stick its nose into the global warming trough.
If you want a good laugh read some of the old predictions by the experts after hurricane Katrina.
go figure has a hard time with the truth so in response it resorts to baby talk.
Illustrative.
Cjpwbk
same poup, different story. Do you just pick one of your predictable responses randomly or is this a genuine new thought every time? Either way, it would be hard to tell.
… and now back to what matters.
No one here argues the assertion that Obama is a liar and that global warming is a theory not a fact.
AB, CJ, etc.
Define climate. Use a number and a unit of time.
I know that you can. It isn’t that hard.
But you won’t.
At least demonstrate to us that you understand the most basic concept here.
I will argue that what you say is not only wrong but just more of the same &#% $=÷/@*÷ that you say about everything.
Then it is settled. It isn’t even substantially argued:
Man Made Climate Change (aka global warming) is a theory. Not fact.
Obama lied when he said it was settled science.
gofigure, saying you’d argue something is not the same as doing it, you offer nothing of substance, just hate.
Obama wouldn’t know the truth if it hit him in the face.
If you want to really see how out to lunch the Global Warming crowd is, they now emphatically claim that the shift in geomagnetic poles is caused by Global Warming.
These people have no clue what science is whatsoever. They’ve never heard of cause & effect, and if they had, they’d realize that the magnetic north pole is currently over Hudson Bay and moving southward. That has more of an impact on weather than any amount of CO2 emitted into the atmosphere.
I refuse to argue with idiots
CJ, still can’t define climate, eh?
Why should anyone take you seriously if you don’t understand the most basic concept of the science?
CJ, the only thing settled here is that 97.1% of the 11,944 abstracts from peer-reviewed scientific publications between 1991–2011 endorsed the consensus position that humans are causing global warming. This according to cook, 2013. What can you offer to suggest anthropogenic global warming is false?
GF,
Reality. Is that enough?
Science is not determined by census. YOu must be aware of the argument that the funding process is tainting the integrity of the science.
Cosa,
Still haven’t grown up? eh.
I looked at the “evidence” you offered yesterday.
Did you look at it?
You should be embarrassed.
Does anyone have something of substance to add to the global warming argument?
Dog is right, It is like arguing with Pigeons. Maybe South Lake Tahoe should be called Pigeon-ville.
LiLChuckieMcPub-you obviously dont know what consensus means-a big word I know-where do you get your climate info?-oh never mind you can’t define the word climate anyway-why do hate SLT?-is it because you failed so miserably here and got run out of town?
TeaTotal, Some time ago Mr. McCoy said something like, and I’m paraphrasing here,”It’s liberal extremeists like TeaTotal and Old Long Skiis that are destroying this once great nation with there liberal agenda”. It was something like that, so it’s not a direct quote, but you get the general idea.
This gentleman(?) from Oregon has a screw loose. He hates Tahoe, espicially So. Shore and anybody with a view that isn’t really extreme far right wing. I’m glad he lives in another state and hopefully he has adult supervision and is taking his medication. Both of which I rather doubt as he still is talking nonsense here at LTN.
Keep up the good work, comrade TeaTotal! Together we shall rule the world with our socialist ways. Ha, Ha!!!I don’t know who you are or what your beliefs are but for whatever reason Mr.McCoy lumped us together. Maybe he’s been standing outside in the rain too long in Oregon and it’s affected him adversely. Whatever the case have a great day and try to ignore the gentleman(?) to the north.
Old Long Skiis
Cj. I agree that consensus alone from published research does not prove anthropogenic global warming. I am aware that funding could lead to favoritism in climate research. But you can’t say that the fossil fuel industry is somehow a funding underdog here?
If you are sincerely interesting in seeking the truth regarding anthropogenic global warming science, you should read this article in the Wall Street journal from 2009 written by Hans Von Storch.
http://m.us.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052748704238104574601443947078538?mobile=y
Here is a more current, 2013 interview in spiegel online. You can find more on Dr. Storch as well. No one will get away with untruths, especially on a topic as important as fossil fuels polluting our atmosphere.
http://m.spiegel.de/international/world/a-906721.html#spRedirectedFrom=www&referrrer=https://www.google.com/
GF,
I have many times on these pages espoused my interest in climate research. I’ve alway supported climate research.
It is the misrepresentation of the truth by people that want to tax the rest of us to support their lives based on their lies that I have a problem with.
I think I said that well, don’t you?
CJ, yeah I get where you are coming from. I think your concerns are partially validated by Dr. Storch.
Could you see also the misrepresentation of the truth by people that want to “pollute” the rest of us to support their lives based on their lies that I have a problem with.
(Polluters being the fossil fuels industry and Fox News).
Gordorn, don’t be fooled. None of the ‘skeptics’ on here are working with a valid definition of the term ‘climate’.
They will say things like ‘look at the polar vortex, certainly that shows that climate change is BS’
GF,
Please name one lie that Fox News promulgates.
That is a liberal myth.
As far as I can tell Fox goes to great efforts to bring on different points of view, they just brought on James Carvel.
I’d be less skeptical if the “solution” to this so-called man made climate change didn’t consist of bigger government, more taxation, more State control, and less liberty for the little people. All the while, the Climate Change Evangelists continue to fly private jets, surround themselves with motorcades and large contingents of support staff, paid for by those of us who are being forced to ‘cut back and conserve’.
Cj. I simply used the same words to characterize opponents of climate change as you used to characterize people who misrepresent truth.
Also Cj,
You said that you “have many times on these pages espoused my interest in climate research”
I would not rely on business, media outlets, or politicians for climate research. Be it fox, NBC, PBS etc. they all are entertainment news not unbiased outlets for science.
Fox keeps talking about a cold winter disproving global warming. I see it too frequently to take them seriously. It sparks discussion sure, but news media is not accurately representing science these days.
Dog, the solution is to burn less fossil fuels, which has nothing to do with ” bigger government, more taxation, more State control, and less liberty for the little people”
And no one is accusing Americans of cutting back and conserving. Fossil fuels encourage quite the opposite.
Oh? And why is the EPA banning most of the existing wood burning stoves available today? Why is Obama having the EPA legislate coal-fired energy plants out of existence? Why are they trying to force trucks to double their gas mileage by 2020?
These are all coercive measures by big government, forcing people to abide by arbitrary laws in the name of ‘conservation’. And all extremely expensive for us ‘little people’.
Dogula, I really cant understand why you would be against a increase in better mileage. This is something both concervatives and Liberals want. I lived southern Cali in the 70s and we were having stage 3 smog alerts on a regular basis. I also remember having to wait in line every other day to get gas. Better gas mileage is better for the country economically(so we dont have to be reliant upon oil from other countries) and enviromentally.
I am sure you dont believe that polution is a good thing under any circumstance.
Dog, Wood stoves at least don’t burn fossil fuels, rather they recycle young carbon before it is released through timber decomposition. We should facilitate more wood stoves, not less, because the alternative is to burn fossilized (old) carbon.
Coal produces about twice the carbon as natural gas per btu. So to transition from coal to natural gas is obvious.
Increasing efficiency in vehicles also is an obvious way to reduce carbon. It happened overseas decades ago and is finally happening in the US whether you like it or not. The technology allows for it, consumers want it to save money, and it is better for our atmosphere.
You may not agree, but these regulations are not arbitrary for the reasons i describe above. Conservation is not expensive, American over consumption is what is expensive simply because we live in large homes, drive inefficient vehicles, and eat more food. Americans consume more natural resources than any other large nation, primarily extracted from foreign soil. Such is contrary to the principles that founded this great country and is contributing to the warming of the only atmosphere that we have, and we need that stuff to breath.
“Please name one lie that Fox News promulgates.
That is a liberal myth.
As far as I can tell Fox goes to great efforts to bring on different points of view, they just brought on James Carvel.”
In February 2003, a Florida Court of Appeals unanimously agreed with an assertion by FOX News that there is no rule against distorting or falsifying the news in the United States.
Why would Fox news have to even go through that kind of a lawsuit?
Google “fox news lies list” for yourself. Do you remember the Bill Or’Reilly quote about wondering how tides work? The channel is pure rubbish. You like it because you see a strong readership int heir viewers of people who will fall for your own BS.
And the two studies that shoe that Fox viewers are less informed and worse, more misinformed, than any other group in the nation.
Of course you love them.
Coal also releases (unregulated amounts of)mercury directly into the atmosphere and the extraction process is even worse. Coal is really dirty.
If you enjoy eating the fish you catch, you might think twice about supporting coal.
Don’t you need coal fired electricity plants to charge up a Prius?
Dog, here is a link to a recent Fox News report on global warming. A panel of four climate change deniers and not one scientist? Is this is the source you are counting on? No wonder you disagree with the scientific consensus…..
http://youtu.be/ujfDc4UTzMA
You can re-read my initial statement on why I remain skeptical of the whole anthropogenic climate change issue. It still stands.
Yeah, that is a ‘false dichotomy’, which is a logical fallacy.
It isn’t a legitimate reason.
And you don’t believe in ice core data, because the earth is too young.
“Don’t you need coal fired electricity plants to charge up a Prius?”
*facepalm*