*The team of researchers from the University of Haifa was chosen by the European Center, which belongs to the European Union, to lead the research*
The increase in temperature has a decisive effect on the spread of West Nile fever in new areas of Europe and in neighboring countries where it had not appeared before, including in Israel, according to a new study conducted at the University of Haifa. The study was commissioned by the European Center for Disease Control (the ECDC in Stockholm), which belongs to the European Union. The research findings prove that the effect of temperature on the spread of the disease is more significant than that of relative humidity and that the effect of rain is not unequivocal. "The results of our study are further proof that global warming is leading to outbreaks of diseases transmitted by mosquitoes and other carriers that are sensitive to heat. The evidence for this is accumulating in many regions around the world," says Dr. Shlomit Paz, who headed the research team. The findings were recently published in the scientific journal PLOS ONE.
West Nile fever is a disease spread by repeated transmissions of the virus between birds through mosquito bites. The main danger of the disease for the person lies in the possibility of an inflammation of the membrane or brain tissue that can cause irreversible damage and even death in some cases. Populations that are at particularly high risk are the elderly and those with weak immune systems.
The research was carried out by a team of researchers from the University of Haifa led by Dr. Shlomit Paz and with the participation of Dr. Dan Melkinson and Gil Zioni from the Department of Geography and Environmental Studies, together with Prof. Manfred Green, Head of the School of Public Health. The study was carried out following the winning of the team of researchers in an international tender issued by the ECDC.
The current study examined the relationship between temperature, humidity and daily precipitation data and all cases of West Nile fever diagnosed in Europe, neighboring countries and Israel. "Using statistical tools, we discovered that following the heat waves, there was a dramatic outbreak of the disease associated with increased activity of the virus and an increase in mosquito populations," says Paz. According to her, these results were observed in different countries, including Israel.
According to Dr. Paz, these results are of great importance in light of the rising temperature trend throughout Europe and Israel as observed in recent years. She is currently conducting follow-up research on the subject for the European Center for Disease Control together with the French research center CIRAD. "The follow-up research focuses on additional factors that may have an impact on the transmission of the disease, such as the location of the mosquito populations or various human influences." She hopes that the results of the research will make it possible to develop a model that will provide a better prediction of the appearance of the disease in Europe, "Such a prediction could help the ECDC guide the various countries under its responsibility on how to prepare for the disease ahead of time and perhaps even mitigate its outbreak."
15 תגובות
From Wikipedia
NaturalNews (formerly Newstarget) is a website dedicated to alternative medicine and various conspiracy theories
And in Hebrew: Natural News is a site dedicated to alternative medicine and a selection of conspiracy theories.
Moshe Yoram
According to Nathan Faldor and other physicists, the Earth's heat system is so complicated that we are unable to predict global warming-cold processes. There are two types of difficulties:
1. Difficulty making reliable measurements in all the relevant spaces,
2. Difficulty building a computer simulation that will predict what will happen.
The article you mentioned points to another unreliability of temperature measurements, which has not been taken into account so far. That is, it belongs to difficulty number 1.
But due to difficulty number 2, the conclusions of the authors of the article that co2 cools the earth is also completely questionable.
The only thing that has been checked is that currently there is an abnormal increase in the amount of atmospheric co2, but we have no reliable evidence as to what causes this.
Thanks to everyone who tried to answer.
What do you say about the news in the link that comes from NASA that co2 cools the earth.
http://www.naturalnews.com/040448_solar_radiation_global_warming_debunked.html
If you are looking for your comment, it is almost certainly on the previous pages in case there are many comments. I don't censor the global warming deniers, there are enough other problems.
Oops. The passage I wrote is repeated twice.
When you reach the next section a second time
******
I have a feeling that my comments as well as others' comments have been censored. I wrote them here to the best of my memory and they are not. If they are censored it means that those who claim destructive warming do not tolerate "disturbing truth" when it contradicts their agenda.
******
You can stop reading, because starting from this section the text is the same as the previous text.
I have a feeling that my comments as well as others' comments have been censored. I wrote them here to the best of my memory and they are not. If they are censored it means that those who claim destructive warming do not tolerate "disturbing truth" when it contradicts their agenda.
I would like to briefly repeat my claims (which may have been censored) in order to enlighten the eyes of the readers, my claims are that the destructive warming model does not completely match the measurements. The main point of scaremongering is that a deliberate blurring is created between a situation of "moderate warming" (which is not dangerous) and a situation of "accelerated warming" which may be destructive. By this blurring they are frightening, since the fear is based on accelerated warming (which is not proven!) while there is no (serious) dispute that there is a proven moderate warming (which, as mentioned, is not dangerous).
Below are more details (sorry if I repeat claims from above but it is not possible to do normal editing in the small window). All the apocalyptic visions about warming were based on the *acceleration of global warming*, (the acceleration of global warming is also called the "hockey stick model"). According to the models of accelerated warming by the year 2100 there will be a temperature increase of 2 to 4 degrees Celsius. The apocalyptic visions are not based on *average moderate warming* as it has been in the last 120 years (approximately). The average moderate warming at 120 is a warming of up to a degree Celsius every century. A warming of XNUMX degrees Celsius in a hundred years is not dangerous. Dangerous: in the last thousands of years there have been warmings and coolings at the same moderate rate (XNUMX degrees Celsius in a century) and no disaster has happened. Therefore there is no "meat" for scaremongering when there is warming at the aforementioned moderate rate.
The global warming scaremongers have claimed that there is clear evidence for the hockey stick model, therefore according to the hockey stick model we are working towards a warming rate of 2 degrees to 4 degrees by the end of the 21st century. In the last 16 years (from the beginning of 1997 to the end of 2012) the global warming outline has returned to the outline The moderate warming (which is not dangerous as mentioned) and in no way to the hockey stick model. All models of the hockey stick are mainly based on measurements in the 16 years preceding the last 16 years (the years from the beginning of 1981 to the end of 1996). It should be noted that all 90 years between 1890 and the end of 1980 were on a moderate warming pattern of less than XNUMX degrees Celsius per century.
So, out of the last 120 years, only 16 years between the beginning of 1981 and the end of 1996 are suitable for hockey stick models. All other years (94 years out of 120 years) do not fit the hockey stick model. In this state of affairs it is clear that the hockey stick model has completely failed, so there is no basis for fear at least in the coming years.
All that needs to be done in the coming years (the next 16 years) is *not to do any special* (and insanely expensive) action regarding global warming. If the next 16 years will be moderate warming (as it has been all along, with the exception of the years 1980 to 1996) - the hockey stick model can be finally buried. If the warming is accelerated again as it was in the years 1981 to 1996 (only!) we will think about what to do.
I repeat once again the main point of my words, because this is the important point that the global warming scaremongers obscure:
*Moderate warming* is not dangerous, *accelerated warming* may or may not be dangerous, the models of accelerated warming have been *debunked*, therefore there is no danger at the moment regarding the warming.
I have a feeling that my comments as well as others' comments have been censored. I wrote them here to the best of my memory and they are not. If they are censored it means that those who claim destructive warming do not tolerate "disturbing truth" when it contradicts their agenda.
I would like to briefly repeat my claims (which may have been censored) in order to enlighten the eyes of the readers, my claims are that the destructive warming model does not completely match the measurements. The main point of scaremongering is that a deliberate blurring is created between a situation of "moderate warming" (which is not dangerous) and a situation of "accelerated warming" which may be destructive. By this blurring they are frightening, since the fear is based on accelerated warming (which is not proven!) while there is no (serious) dispute that there is a proven moderate warming (which, as mentioned, is not dangerous).
Below are more details (sorry if I repeat claims from above but it is not possible to do normal editing in the small window). All the apocalyptic visions about warming were based on the *acceleration of global warming*, (the acceleration of global warming is also called the "hockey stick model"). According to the models of accelerated warming by the year 2100 there will be a temperature increase of 2 to 4 degrees Celsius. The apocalyptic visions are not based on *average moderate warming* as it has been in the last 120 years (approximately). The average moderate warming at 120 is a warming of up to a degree Celsius every century. A warming of XNUMX degrees Celsius in a hundred years is not dangerous. Dangerous: in the last thousands of years there have been warmings and coolings at the same moderate rate (XNUMX degrees Celsius in a century) and no disaster has happened. Therefore there is no "meat" for scaremongering when there is warming at the aforementioned moderate rate.
The global warming scaremongers have claimed that there is clear evidence for the hockey stick model, therefore according to the hockey stick model we are working towards a warming rate of 2 degrees to 4 degrees by the end of the 21st century. In the last 16 years (from the beginning of 1997 to the end of 2012) the global warming outline has returned to the outline The moderate warming (which is not dangerous as mentioned) and in no way to the hockey stick model. All models of the hockey stick are mainly based on measurements in the 16 years preceding the last 16 years (the years from the beginning of 1981 to the end of 1996). It should be noted that all 90 years between 1890 and the end of 1980 were on a moderate warming pattern of less than XNUMX degrees Celsius per century.
So, out of the last 120 years, only 16 years between the beginning of 1981 and the end of 1996 are suitable for hockey stick models. All other years (94 years out of 120 years) do not fit the hockey stick model. In this state of affairs it is clear that the hockey stick model has completely failed, so there is no basis for fear at least in the coming years.
All that needs to be done in the coming years (the next 16 years) is *not to do any special* (and insanely expensive) action regarding global warming. If the next 16 years will be moderate warming (as it has been all along, with the exception of the years 1980 to 1996) - the hockey stick model can be finally buried. If the warming is accelerated again as it was in the years 1981 to 1996 (only!) we will think about what to do.
I repeat once again the main point of my words, because this is the important point that the global warming scaremongers obscure:
*Moderate warming* is not dangerous, *accelerated warming* may or may not be dangerous, the models of accelerated warming have been *debunked*, therefore there is no danger at the moment regarding the warming.
another one
Probably not all of them.... Haim's "sources" claim that there has been no warming for 16 years. I went to check the source of the sources. And see it's a miracle - they say something else. The source does not say there is no warming. The source says that there is a new model that according to the new model the rate of warming is lower than expected from the predictions of other models.
Well, enough with your nonsense, there is no more energy to argue with people who don't want to listen.
Miracles - we all know how to look at a graph.
You see there is a slowdown. Models will not help you and certainly not absolute sizes.
What's more, I don't understand what this animal "long-term average" is.
And 0.09 degrees in four years is not that little by the way - it's an increase in less than 50 years.
Life
Here's what they really said:
The UK Met Office has revised one of its forecasts for how much the world may warm in the next few years. It says that the average temperature is likely to be 0.43 C above the long-term average by 2017 - as opposed to an earlier forecast that suggested a warming of 0.54 C.
The explanation is that a new kind of computer model using different parameters has been used. The Met Office stresses that the work is experimental and that it still stands by its longer-term projections. These forecast significant warming over the course of this century.
The forecasts are all based on a comparison with the average global temperature over the period 1971-2000. The earlier model had projected that the period 2012-16 would be 0.54C above that long-term average - within a range of uncertainty from 0.36-0.72C. By contrast the new model, known as HadGEM3, gives a rise about one-fifth lower than that of 0.43C - within a range of 0.28-0.59.
Life
Besides the fact that you are quoting nonsense …..
Except for the following fact:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2217286/Global-warming-stopped-16-years-ago-reveals-Met-Office-report-quietly-released–chart-prove-it.html
Apart from the fact, of course, that there has been no increase in surface temperature measurements for sixteen years...
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2217286/Global-warming-stopped-16-years-ago-reveals-Met-Office-report-quietly-released–chart-prove-it.html
To Moshe Yoram!
Global warming is manifested. Among other things in the disintegration of the glaciers in the Pole, which are clearly visible.
The glaciers will drift in the sea and melt, which will lead to a rise in the sea level and cause floods, which will lead to a chain reaction. such as damage to fresh water sources.
The rate of the process is faster than the rate that can be stopped (as what is happening today around the globe is burning everywhere, there is no possibility of organizing a global drastic step that will reduce the emission of carbon dioxide) so all that remains is to hope for the best.
Very simple - if you read the science website you know that there is, if you read websites of tycoon enthusiasts you thought that there was no or that there was a debate between the scientists.
What's going on here? Is there global warming?, is there no global warming? Can someone explain? Or even simple facts from basic data of temperature change is a matter of money and politics.