Coffee With Scott Adams — Knowledge Archive May 24, 2026
Scott Adams Philosophy Archive
Search ideas
Episodes Episode #2182 Segments
MainContent Climate & Environment

Back to episode — Episode 2182 Scott Adams - UFOs, Hunter, Trump Indictments, Lots More Fun

Context —

Well, there's a new photo of Wagner leader Prigozhin allegedly in Russia, and he's just shaking hands with some African guy who's visiting. So that's true, right? Prigozhin's fine. He's just hanging out in Russia. Sure. Yeah, there was even CNN reported that. They reported that there was a picture of him. They didn't report the library thing. They just said there's a picture of him, which is fair.…

← Previous segment →

ng his RV around St. Petersburg? No, no, he's not driving his RV around. If he's alive, he's certainly controlled by Putin at this point.

Did you read in the news that it was the warmest summer? How many of you think we had the warmest summer because of climate change? The news said so. Well, it may be. It might actually be the warmest summer, but I'd like to give you a counterpoint which doesn't necessarily refute everything you've heard but gives you context. So here's some better context from Alex Epstein. He said anyone commentating responsibly on summer temperatures must acknowledge four facts. All right, see if you agree with these four facts. Cold-related deaths are much greater than heat-related deaths. Do you know that? The number of people who died because it's too cold is way higher than the number of people who die because it's warm. So in theory you could imagine that depending on where it got warmer, it would save lives, right? So as the cold places got warmer but the places that are already hot didn't get warmer or didn't get much warmer, we'd be better off, wouldn't we? Well, and then the reverse would be true. If the hot places got hotter and the cool places got colder, that probably would be worse. But according to Alex, Earth is warming slowly and less in warm places. Oh, so that's good. So the warming is more concentrated in the cold places, which should save lives. Fossil fuels, number three, fossil fuels make us safer from dangerous temperatures. Yeah, what would you do if you didn't have fossil fuels? Wouldn't you be more exposed to what the weather can do if you can't sit in your car or heat your house? And anti-fossil fuel policies increase the danger from cold. Indeed. Well, that makes sense. If fossil fuels protect you from temperature extremes, then not having them would make you less safe.

So I think a lot of this turns on these two points. It's better to be warmer than cold, and it's not warming as much in the places that are already

Context —

warm. Now this is my problem with averages. If somebody told you that the average temperature of the Earth was going up, that's pretty scary, right? But what if they told you that it's warming up in the places that are too cold and the places that are already hot? Nobody lives there because it's a desert anyway, for example. Now that's the extreme. I'm exaggerating the effect here, but that's your…

Next segment → →