Friday, January 26, 2007

The Dumbest Global Warming Story (so far)

It will be hard to top the following "scientific" study for stupidity:
"The global increase in surface temperature (known as global warming) was found to impact on mortality through ill health, particularly among the elderly and in summer. This study sets out to explore the impact of global warming on suicide mortality, using data from Italy."

And the results?
"For males, increasing anomalies in monthly average temperatures associated to a higher monthly suicide mean from May to August and, to a lower extent, in November and December. In January, on the other hand, increasing anomalies in monthly average temperatures appeared to be coupled to a lower number of suicides. For females, the links between temperature and suicides are less consistent than for males, and sometimes have a reverse sign, too."

So men are in trouble with global warming? Temperatures will start rising, and I'll be mysteriously drawn to throw myself out the window. A hot day comes along, and I'll just want to shoot myself. I start sweating, and I'll want to dig through the medicine cabinet for something to overdose.

By the way, an interesting limitation of the study:
"The use of monthly data, instead of daily data (unavailable), is another major limitation of this study."

Let me get this straight: These suicides may have gone up during the coldest days of the month, but we are going to attribute increased suicides to global warming?

Another curious thing which was not mentioned in the extract I read: During the period of the study (1974-2003), Italy's economy was going downhill. You don't suppose that could have caused an increase in suicides among men, do you? Nah, it's gotta be the global warming...

(hat tip to DrudgeReport for the link)


William R. Barker said...

Here's what I was talking about "over there" re: WSJ and "continuing education," Ed...

(*GRIN*) (*WINK*)

If EVERYONE in America read the WSJ six days a week... no doubt I'd change my tune concerning "this once great nation."



EdMcGon said...

Don't get me wrong about the WSJ, because it is a good read. But there are plenty of good websites to read conservative commentatary online, such as and RealClearPolitics.

William R. Barker said...

Ed... it's not about "conservative commentary" per se, it's about facts and opinions penned by some of the most brilliant and accomplished people in the world.

I'm not talking simply the WSJ's editorial "voice," I'm talking the caliber of the opinion piece contributors. Hell... even the "Letters to the Editor" portion is above and beyond anything you'll find in a New York Times or Washinton Post. People who read the WSJ are simply smarter and better informed by and large than people who don't. You can argue what comes first, the chicken or the egg, but the fact is that to compare the WSJ to or even is to miss the point.

Anyway... all I can do is advise. Others can take or leave that advice.


* BTW... I'm not a big guy... but is a useful and informative site.

** BTW #2... (*GRIN*)... this post isn't about me wanting to "have the last word." It's just that I really feel strongly about this, Ed, and I want you to benefit from the Journal the way I do.

EdMcGon said...

I will admit Townhall can be a bit "preachy" at times, but there are some excellent writers on there, such as Stossel and Sowell. And Mary Katharine Ham is one of the best young conservative bloggers out there.

Regarding WSJ, my dad gets it and usually saves me a copy if there's something I need to read. Otherwise, I get plenty of opinion off the internet.