Hmm? The increase in average temperature from 1981 (the earliest on that chart) to now hasn't had any meaningful impact on people's standard of living. Why should a similar increase over the next 40 years be any different?
There shouldn't be any mass migrations either...
That doesn't answer the parent's question, which is that those events have been happening in the past few decades with seemingly no material effects.
All that threat modelling, ecosystem analysis, and understanding the consequences of current biochemical developments are just a bunch of alarmism, stressing us out for no reason...
No need to understand what their data, methodology and conclusions are at all.
Some of the areas with the highest predicted temperature increases are relatively dry places, such as Siberia and several deserts.
[1] >Since 2005, wet-bulb temperature values above 95 degrees Fahrenheit have occurred for short periods of time on nine separate occasions in a few subtropical places like Pakistan and the Persian Gulf. They also appear to be becoming more frequent. In addition, incidences of slightly lower wet-bulb temperature values in the 90 to 95-degree Fahrenheit (32 to 35-degree Celsius) range have more than tripled over the 40 years studied by Raymond’s team.
https://climate.nasa.gov/explore/ask-nasa-climate/3151/too-h...
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanplh/article/PIIS2542-5...
Furthermore, while every death to heatstroke is a tragedy, the numbers listed in the article you provided are quite low, in the order of 100 per year (and falling).
The Lancet article found that in the Americas there are about 37 excess deaths per 100,000 people per year, or about 1000 times per per capita than the 2011-2020 average in the NASA article.
I'm not denying that global warming may make some small-to-moderate part of the world uninhabitable (at least without access to electricity or running water). Indeed, half of Vietnam may be flooded.
Still, wet-bulb temperatures of 35 degrees is extremely hot and quite rare. I doubt we will see death tools in the millions per year in our lifetime, which is what it would need to be to match what cold weather or indoor air polution is already causing.
Those were deaths in the US, not globally or in the Americas. The US has just about the highest percentage of households with ACs of any country in the world and so is, broadly speaking, less susceptible to deaths from severe heatwaves even should they occur. Globally, the figure is more like five million [1] between heat and cold.
[1] https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/jul/08/extreme-temper...
What the headline doesn't show, is that from those 5 million, over 80% is cold related.
Also, if you travel a bit in third world countries, you may be surprised by how many have access to air conditioning, either in their own house or (in an emergency) some relative or neighbour nearby.
There's truly nothing new under the sun for human beings, we just keep play-acting out patterns etched by millions of years of evolution.
Like flying to the moon, and launching artificial satellites in greater numbers than naked-eye distinguishable stars, and some more to places so remote that even the sun is naught but a bright star; like flying above the clouds, around the world, and faster than sound; like refining metals from sand, poisoning it, etching on literally occult symbols (the word means hidden and they are smaller than light itself) and feeding them artificial lightning in order to trick it into doing our thinking for us; like transmuting metals and gasses to create weapons that can level cities and moderate-sized hills; like altering the global balance of fauna to be overwhelmingly us, our pets, and our livestock, with only a small fraction of the total now being wild animals; like wiping out entire diseases, learning to see colours beyond those our eyes can perceive (and also with sound) in order to look within living bodies; like having the power of Morpheus to keep someone asleep throughout as their heart is removed and replaced without killing them; like the power to read and write the language of life to bend it to our will, giving us spider-silk yeast?
I was clearly referring to psycho-social patterns, not arbitrary lists of technology.
Second: given how much we've changed our environment, our food, the substances we take for mental health, any take regarding our "nature" must account for the impact of this environment
Third: ditto nurture, as we now insist on educating ourselves to adulthood, and — in opposition to our earliest comprehensible written records — many of us are now in societies that reject things like slavery and husbands having arbitrary power over their wives (and increasingly, though to a lesser degree, religion); we have, essentially, domesticated ourselves.
(Yours would be a better insult had I not fallen off the top of the cognitive scoring mechanism when it was tested — which only means "at least +2σ" because it is poorly defined as a concept, but yours was still a woefully inept attempt at a put-down).
I rather hoped that #2 and #3 would have given a hint as to why #1 — but "communication is not a single-player game" isn't just something I'm telling you so you can be better.