http://news.yahoo.com/ s/ afp/ 20090525/ bs_afp/ chinaenergyinveststimulus

Can we have any more projections and models?

They provide amusement with their constant over the top predictions until they are proven to be plainly wrong.

Who needs proof, right Michael? Just open your mouth…

If you read the article, it wasn’t “untested speculation”. It was based on an analysis of data:

“They found a significant correlation between low-birth-weight babies and hot temperatures during the second and third trimesters.”

Granted, this is not the same level of proof as a controlled trial, but it is suggestive nonetheless.

Not so windy: Research suggests winds dying down
WASHINGTON (AP) — The wind, a favorite power source of the green energy movement, seems to be dying down across the United States. And the cause, ironically, may be global warming — the very problem wind power seeks to address.

http://www.econ.ucsb.edu/~olivier/DGG_09.pdf

“Using individual-level data on more than 37.1 million births, we find that exposure to extreme hot temperatures during pregnancy leads to lower birth weights. We combine this finding with estimates of the distribution of future daily temperatures from state of the art climate change predictions. We then use these predictions of the effect of climate change on the distribution of daily temperatures to estimate the predicted effect of global climate change on future birth weights by the end of the century. These estimates imply that mean birth weights will decrease on average by 0.22 percent (7.5 grams) among whites and by 0.36 percent (11.5 grams) for blacks by the end of the century. Further, the impact is not spread evenly through the birth weight distribution. We find an estimated 5.9% increase in the probability of a low birth weight birth (defined as less than 2,500 grams) for whites and a 5.0% increase for blacks.
…
Our detailed historical temperature data allow us to date specifically each shock to the conditions experienced in utero. We are thus able to estimate not only the effects of exposure to extreme temperature while in utero, but to explore how this effect varies according to the timing during gestation. This allows us to shed light on the mechanisms at work in fetal programming. Of particular interest, we find that as much as 95 percent of the effect of in utero exposure to very hot ambient temperatures occurs for exposure during the second and third trimesters.”

Not a medical journal. Actually not a journal regarding weather or meteorology either

I guess we could go the the APA and get reports of anxiety disorders and the DSM-Iv regarding climate induced fears.

It seems Political journals are in an epidemic of writing opinions outside of their field.

They provide amusement with their constant over the top predictions until they are proven to be plainly wrong.

One would have thought that good research on this would have identified this years ago.

Road particles pose ‘higher risk’
Children may be at greater risk from the microscopic particles in traffic pollution than was previously thought.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/ 2/ hi/ science/ nature/ 8092182.stm