From NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT\
By Paul Homewood
https://news.un.org/en/story/2020/10/1075142
Every year official agencies like the UN and WMO tell us that weather disasters keep getting more frequent. Their evidence, they say, comes from the disaster database WM-DAT.
And every year I and others inconveniently point out that the apparent increase is not due to disasters becoming more common, but that we are now much better at recording them.
EM-DAT know this full well, because they wrote about it in their Annual Review for 2006:
https://www.emdat.be/publications?page=5
Critics have hit back by noting that the number of deaths from weather disasters has massively shrunk over the years, something EM-DAT admit themselves, hardly supporting those hysterical claims of the UN.
How Dare We Criticise The Experts!
EM-DAT were not having this. So in their new review for 2022, they wrote this:
In short, they argue that if we exclude all of those mega disasters, the mortality trends have actually been increasing. Take that, you stupid deniers!
But what they fail to point out is that the number of recorded disasters has been rising exponentially since 1900, for reasons already outlined. If they worked the average number of deaths per disaster, they would see a drastic reduction.
https://www.emdat.be/publications?page=5
The death toll appears to be rising for the same reason as the number of disasters does, the fact that we now religiously record them all, something we have only been doing since the 1990s. And, as their chart also shows, the death toll has been declining since then.
To be fair they do acknowledge this problem, and advise that it is “impossible to draw conclusions”:
But that does not stop them from publishing these sort of misleading charts year after year, or allowing the UN to use them to spout lies.
Good report by Paul, but it won’t change the basic dynamic: for the left feelings are more important and accurate than data, and for the right data first then a little feelings. Never have I convinced a CAGW True Believer anything to do with Climate and don’t try anymore.
Prepare a one-page, double-spaced summary of Dr. Roger Pielke, Jr.’s work that includes one of his graphs on that page. Point to the graph, explain its import and give the paper to the CAGW TB. You will have gone farther than all of the discussions and op eds in the world in doing your part. F-’em if they can’t take a joke.
While deaths per decade have dramatically decreased, relative deaths per capita have all but vanished.
1920 had a global population of 1.9B while 2021 had 7.7B and apparently 2023 saw the population grow to over 8B.
The drop in climate deaths is even more significant given the vast increase in relative exposure from increased population
But noting the differences in data collection interferes with our fundraising message! Clearly, we must act now!
Climate experts as usual. I’m not sure if they are stupid or crooked.
Why not both?
How do they explain the obvious (figure B) steady drop in decadal deaths from 1990 to 2020? That covers a climatologically significant 30-year period. In fact, from the period where Man’s CO2 emissions began becoming significant in 1960 there have been no increases in decadal deaths through 2020. A lack of correlation has a lot to do with rebutting causation.
Pay no attention to that inconvenient statistic behind the curtain of insignificance. WE speak “The Truth” when we tell you it is of no concern and will only mislead you from our preferred “True Path” of Climate Confusion
Concerned folks should sign up for Polar Hunts to keep bear populations under control and help protect Inuit natives … https://www.canadianhigharcticadventures.com/polar-bear-hunts/
I note their brochure doesn’t includes a POV photo of a charging bear or musk ox. On my first moose hunt after moving to Alaska my buddy asked me if I had a pistol to handle close-in encounters with Brown (Grizzley) Bears that densely inhabited the area in which we would be hunting. I said; “Sure, a .357 Magnum.” He said: “OK, just be sure to file off the front sight before we go.” I responded; “What!?” He said; “Yeah, its so it doesn’t hurt as much when the bear shoves it up your ass.”
A .44 Magnum is the minimum required for Brown Bear; I now have a .454 Casull for appropriate occasions. Since I can no longer navigate rugged terrain and have no desire to rough-it and sleep on the cold ground sans my wife’s cooking, such rare occasions now would include blasting some a-hole’s engine block or blowing up his Tesla’s battery. For normal occasions my 9 mm’s and .38 Specials’ will do the trick.
I’ll keep that in mind — for any hunting trips.
A Desert Eagle is the best.
That should give the bear pause when you give it “the speech.”
“Uh-uh-uh…I know what you’re thinkin’ – Did he fire six shots or only five? To tell you the truth, I’ve forgotten myself in all this excitement. But since this is the .44 Magnum, the most powerful handgun in the world, and would blow your head clean off, you have to ask yourself a question. Do I feel lucky? Well do ya, punk?”
When I was up too close to a Kodiak Brown Bear I couldn’t have gotten past a subaudible “Uh.”
I have been posting Willis’s excellent where is the emergency post from 2 years ago and one clownish individual is trying to claim that since the post is two years old it’s no longer valid.
So now, any change over two years, not thirty, is now climate.
So if WE is listening, maybe time to update the post, if any new data is available. Plus comments are no longer allowed.
I’m sure you are busy buts it the single most valuable post I reference and post so any update is appreciated
Anyone using or referencing the EM-Dat database MUST read:
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2021/10/21/em-dat-disaster-database-creating-data-disasters/
Kip,
In this 2021 thread I asked you if you intended to ask Regina Below if she raised the serious data reporting problem in her capacity as reviewer of this scandalous UN report (referred to in the thread).
You replied:
“Chris ==> I intend to follow-up with EM-Dat as a result of these two UN reports.”
Were you able to follow-up with EM-DAT and, if so, what were the results?
Many thanks,
Chris
“Experts”. Just gets me laughing, especially when it comes to anything “climate…”. I consider them to be grifters and conmen. The data they usually offer is easily debunked and they should be dealt with like any other criminal. And made fun of when possible.
And here it is, The Climate Disaster To End All Disasters
Quote:“Lunch under the intricate metal trusses and glass roof of Blenheim Palace’s Orangery has, for decades, been a highlight of visiting the Baroque landmark in Oxfordshire. Yet thanks to climate change, lunch under the skies will soon be a thing of the past.
Children are not going to know what lunch is anymore
“There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics” (Mark Twain).
We need two categories and two sets of data as we have two types of disasters.
– “Natural” non-human induced weather related disasters & – Human co2 emission caused weather related disasters.
They will be defined as such –
If human death toll <2 = category 1
If human death toll >2 = category 2
“MEGA!” disasters are by definition all category 2.
A question.
Figure B shows mostly increases since the 1950’s. Aside from the population increasing, so have cars on the road.
Driving on slick roads in the winter can be dangerous. How much snow does it take for an event to be considered a “disaster”?
These people (UN, WMO) are worthless, the world would be better off without them.