Between 2024 and 2050, climate change will mean 40 million additional children will be stunted Over-Bayesianism at its worst.
Critics have asserted the 40 million number relies on unrealistic high-emission scenarios (RCPS.5), ignores adaptation, and exaggerates causal links between climate and so-called stunting.
This is just one more example climate change nonsense.
You cannot take data and throw it at the wall and see what sticks, then make a paper out of it, and get instant credibility. Worst, they amplify the "worst case scenario" while ignoring the likely case (which would be 12 million, assuming all other claims were factual, which they are not).
It fails to address the core "fix", which is nutrition programs which can reduce stunting 20-50% faster than emission cuts. So, we know the REAL "problem" of stunting has to do with nutrition and NOT climate change at all.
In short, it is another nonsense, bullshit "peer reviewed" (LMAO) article which lacks any reasonable analytical conclusion at all. |
