That was a really great episode. I don’t think of myself as a conservative at all, but I really enjoyed hearing Frum’s and Silber’s views. The point about how scientists used to be more republican 4o years ago or so, but have shifted to the democratic side since then, is enlightening. That, plus the observation that conservatism has been lately usurped by forces of unreason, plus your recent social/psychologial postings, has convinced me that we shouldn’t be looking at politics as the root cause of the anti-science & political shifts of the last couple of decades, we should instead be looking to understand the underly social-psychological dynamics for an explanation.

http://ajph.aphapublications.org/cgi/content/abstract/AJPH.2006.102947v1

Conclusions. Although considerable uncertainty exists in climate forecasts and future health vulnerability, the range of projections we developed suggests that by midcentury, acclimatization may not completely mitigate the effects of climate change in the New York City metropolitan region, which would result in an overall net increase in heat-related premature mortality.

So far as I can see, the inference that there will be more deaths in summer as climate warms is likewise entirely speculative. But do feel free to point out where in your earlier comment you provided the evidence that you ask for of me.

My prior expectation would be that no changes in either direction would be detectable from a 0.6 C global average change. Heat waves and cold winters fall into the category of weather-not-climate, on a local scale where the signal is lost in the noise. I would expect that there would be no significant change observable. Regulation would constitute an enormous cost for no discernible benefit, the money could be spent elsewhere to save many more lives.

However, many more people die from cold than heat, and global warming reportedly affects the winters more than the summers, polar regions more than tropical, night more than day, so if in future the temperature rose enough that there were to be a change, I would expect it to be in the direction of fewer deaths.

The argument was hypothetical, as I said.

In the absense of hard data you’ll just “have a hunch” and go with it? that doesn’t seem very scientific, almost more like that touchy-feely Social Science stuff…

http://climatecrocks.com/2011/08/03/d-r-tucker-can-the-gop-face-climate-reality-or-any-reality/

http://www.cmaj.ca/content/181/8/484.full

The inference that there will be less deaths in winter as climate warms is entirely speculative and only present in the denialist blog you link to.

The first thing you would have to show is that indeed winter deaths have decreased over time and that this decreased is less than the increase in heat-related deaths.

My hunch is that although considerable warming has been documented winter deaths have remained the same while heat-related deaths have possibly increased.