Say, Will “Climate Change” Make Ebola Breakouts Worse?
You had to know that someone was going to go down the road in wondering about “climate change” and Ebola, and the answer is yes and no and maybe and possibly and “hey, we’re going to make you think about it because Hotcoldwetdry is involved with everything, and why are you still driving a fossil fueled vehicle, you Gaia hater you!”
(Washington Post Weather Gang) The Ebola outbreak is “out of control” in parts of West Africa, says the head of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Could climate change hasten the spread of the deadly virus? Perhaps, but the linkages are complicated, according to limited scientific literature on the topic.
Complicated. Kinda like the climate itself, but, then, Warmists have declared that the religion, er, science, is settled, and their super awesome computer models are perfect, and any issues with reality mean real world data is wrong. Let’s jump to the conclusion regarding dry and wet conditions and Ebola
Given the mixed-bag forecast, it remains unclear whether we will see an increase or decrease in Ebola outbreaks from precipitation patterns alone. But given that periods of drought are expected to increase, and more water vapor is available for rainfall in a warmer atmosphere, one can imagine that the climate change-Ebola link is non-zero.
Got that? Non-zero. A way of saying “we’re dooooooomed!!!!” Let’s jump back a bit
Ebola is a disease caused by the Ebola virus. Scientists don’t currently know how the disease originates, nor how to cure it. They know the virus is transmitted via contact with an infected animal. It appears that in most cases, Ebola outbreaks begin when humans eat infected bush meat – wild animals like bats and monkeys — which is cooked and used for sustenance in regions where food is scarce.
But Climastrologers know that the link is there, and it’s all because you refuse to turn your A/C up a few degrees, use hairspray, and don’t line dry your laundry. And because they think it might possibly maybe have something to do with eating tainted meat
Further, the interplay between climate change and deforestation potentially positions humans closer to infected animals. As deforestation stuns the habitat, people are often left to hunt “survivor species,” like bats, which are one of the most common natural reservoir of the Ebola virus. Yale’s Environment 360 writes:
It’s like they have some sort of Hotcoldwetdry Tourettes, having to throw in “climate change” with real issues, in this case, deforestation.
Kris Ebi, an expert on climate change and health at the University of Washington, is concerned that climate change stresses on agriculture may force more people to eat bats and other animals that carry the disease.
“We already know climate change is weakening crop yields,” Ebi told Al-Jazeera America. “When there’s high food insecurity, how will people go about making sure that they have enough food for their families?”
I wonder what they did when the world was in the midst of one the Holocene cool periods, or the last glacial age? Changes in climate will always cause “food insecurity” somewhere, and better conditions elsewhere. At the end of the day, though, even the World Health Organization states that the link to bats, specifically fruit bats, is not 100%. They are considered a natural host, but, they just don’t know. In fact, as the article notes “Scientists don’t currently know how the disease originates, nor how to cure it.” But, Climastrologers are sure there is a link between Ebola and “climate change”.
BTW, the first known outbreak was in 1976, a time period when scientists and news outlets were freaking out of the possibility of a coming ice age.
But, Ebola and “climate change” are doom!
After his 20-year old son overdosed on drugs, Mike Stollings decided to post a photo of his body at the funeral home on Facebook out of grief and guilt. The...Read More
Remember the 1930’s? CO2 was well below 3500ppm. There weren’t a lot of cars on the road. Air travel was
The Orange County Register editorial board is calling for an independent scientific investigation into the fraud of global warming. A
Of course, the Grey Lady’s main investigative journalists, the ones who get published on the front page, aren’t involved. Instead,