Average annual deaths from weather-related events in the period 1990-2006 – considered by scientists to be when global warming has been most intense – were down by 87% on the 1900-89 average. The mortality rate from catastrophes, measured in deaths per million people, dropped by 93%.
The report by the Civil Society Coalition on Climate Change, a grouping of 41 mainly free-market bodies, comes on the eve of an international meeting on climate change in Bali.
Indur Goklany, a US-based expert on weather-related catastrophes, charted global deaths through the 20th century from “extreme” weather events.
Compared with the peak rate of deaths from weather-related events in the 1920s of nearly 500,000 a year, the death toll during the period 2000-06 averaged 19,900. “The United Nations has got the issues and their relative importance backward,” Goklany said.
The number of deaths had fallen sharply because of better warning systems, improved flood defences and other measures.
Based on the -29C windchill here tonight, I’d include central heating among them.
cal2:”this UN guy impressed by china putting in thermometers and a weather channel.with 10000 there it should be a cornucopia of awesomeness for pure BS.”
Spot on Bro! No “deniers allowed”!!…this is going to be a cult love in with no critical analysis or counter argument and the bovine fecial matter is going to pile up so fast the cultists won’t even bother to contain their silly earth cult theology….a fly on the wall there could fill a 60 meg audio card with all the brainless zingers that will be tossed around as “accepted fact”.
I always love listening in on zealots when they are allowed to natter on among themselves unchallenged…always good for comedic relief…sooner or later they become so silly in their reasoning it becomes surreal.
Perhaps there will be some enterprising greenbots in the Confab lobby selling all natural hemp polar bear life preservers ;D
Some good climate posting at the samizdata thread in the UK, here’s a link:
http://www.samizdata.net/blog/
Joe B.
Thanks for the link. This guy debunks the science of AGW in a way that anyone can understand. Bets I have seen yet.
Just a few comments on the Roger/Kate tango.
The ad hominen attacks on here are mild compared to the crap on the G&Mail.
Kate doesn’t need anyone to defend her…
she has proven more than capable time and again
Roger…less than impressed
Laughable at best.
There are a lot of conservatives on this blog that are critical in their analysis’. Most of those seem to be critical thinkers, many exceptions of course!
Partisan rhetoric abounds to be sure. In my experience this is generally a well-read, well-written, open-minded blog. That is to Kate’s credit.
looks like this blog can be hijacked. gotta luv it.
http://bali-climate-change-conference.blogspot.com/2007/11/al-gore-finds-new-cause-of-global.html
I just have to say one more thing about the management style of this blog. And I direct this to the big brained Roger.
To address you earlier comment about Kate’s presence in the strings.
If Kate was on here debating everything with everyone all day long, it would be difficult for her to actually go and run her businesses and earn a living. Yes Roger … run a business to earn a living AND as a hobby, run this fabulous blog (best Canadian blog for several years running) that attracts a myriad of bright and witty folks. Why, even you have shown up.
And I don’t know about you, but I have never enjoyed visiting a place where the host wouldn’t shut up and just play the guitar.
Re: 90% reduction in weather related mortalities. I knew that shutting my porch light off would have a positive effect on the world population, the greenhouse effect, the melting of the ice caps, and climatic changes. And to think that all that was in there was a 50 watt “rough service” Peavy Mart bulb. One slight problem. Now, I can’t see where F@%$* I’m going after dark!!
roger – PhD satnds for “Piled Higer and Deeper”. You have piled it VERY high and VERY deep.
But, you are an uniformed new-comer, so you get a pass.
Otter: you said “Hey, don’t forget they recently took close-up photos of Titan and Hey! that moon is warming up, too!
Damn! We sure know how to spread it around, eh, john cross?”
Sure, some are warming, some are cooling. Here is some reading if you wish.
http://www.skepticalscience.com/global-warming-on-mars.htm
http://www.skepticalscience.com/global-warming-other-planets-solar-system.htm
http://www.skepticalscience.com/argument.php?a=40
Regards,
John
Otter: you said “Hey, don’t forget they recently took close-up photos of Titan and Hey! that moon is warming up, too!
Damn! We sure know how to spread it around, eh, john cross?”
Sure, some are warming, some are cooling. Here is some reading if you wish.
http://www.skepticalscience.com/global-warming-other-planets-solar-system.htm
Kate: the moderation queue swallowed by first post (I guess because it had too many links). Can you please release it.
Regards,
John
@Jeff Patterson:
Yes, it was there, and I was too hasty with my earlier reply.
From John West:
“I am in my 60s and I have lived through the Club of Rome’s prediction of mass starvation and energy shortages predicted by the world’s biggest brains and scheduled for the 1990s … didn’t happen I consider these shiny heads to be an arm of the Bilderbergers dedicated to destroying the middle classes and Western Society.”
Did you take the time to read the book “Limits to Growth”? They never predicted anything for the 90’s. The mainstream model predicts ‘global collapse’ in the 2030-2050 timeframe if rates of population & economic growth remain the same. they also present several alternate models, some even with ‘happy’ conclusions if we make the right choices.
Cornucopians like that idiot economist Milton Friedman have always doen their best to disparage and ridicule that important book, but I bet few of them actually read it.
We’re probably very close to Peak Oil now, and after that, once production declines, you’ll start seeing shortages, just like they predicted. Oil has peaked in the US in 1970, we could have seen the writing on the wall then, we chose to buy the nonsense from the cornucopians and we’ll pay the price soon.
This is a FINITE world. Deal with it.
‘Oil has peaked in the US in 1970’
No, It hasn’t, greenneck. Blocked from drilling by econuts, yes. Blocked from developement by congressional nuts, yes. 100 years give or take 500 supply if they would just let us get at it, YES!
500 year supply in Canada alone.
There is no Peak. Do we need alternatives? Yes, in the long run. Why not allow them to develope as they should, by innovation, and not shove a third-world status down our throats in order to get a measly 10% from solar, wind, water and geothermal now?
btw, did you know that the wind turbines in West Virginia were set right in the migration path of quite a few varieties of birds? Thousands get wiped out every year.
@GreenNeck:
You may disparage ‘cornucopians’, but there’s one advantage that they have over your crowd: the realization that long-term thinking anchored into technological optimism has the overall odds on its side. Long-term thinking rooted in pessimism, regardless of the underlying soundness of the logic, doesn’t.
Making bets on the ‘mob’ merrily going to its doom is like betting on an inside straight. Seductively plausible, but…
…what it misses is human resourcefulness, even if it’s the resourcefulness of the bailing bucket. Techno-optimism is a bet on human adaptability, not against it. That’s why technological optimism, provided that it’s feasible, has the better long-term odds.
If you want to check what I’m saying, you need go no further than the goldbug circuit. They’ve been anticipating hyperinflationary economic collapse since the 1970s (if not earlier for the pioneers) but that hyperinflationary collapse hasn’t come. A gold enthusiast that loaded up on the metal in 1981 would have been carrying it at a loss – a nominal loss – right up until about a year ago. Twenty-five years is a long time, and the long-predicted collapse hasn’t come at all.
Technology-based human resourcefulness wins in the long term. Had I know this in the mid-1980s, I would have traded in what investments I had for a then-new computer. I would have seen it was worth riding out the stigma of being a ‘nerd’.
otter:
I’d bet serious money with you on that.
Where were the ‘econuts’ in 1970? It is AFTER that the US opened up Alaska North slope, Gulf of Mexico offshore, all kind of new techonology and production STILL declined.
You just prove my point, if oil is as abundant as you claim you would not care about being blocked by a handful of tree-huggers. There would be countless places where drilling is welcome, as it is now the case in much of the world.
Is it tree huggers that cause North Sea production to decline at a rate of 12-14% a year, to the point the UK is again a net oil importer after 30 years as an exporter?
Hey, have they ever drilled in your property? They haven’t looked? Then you must have a couple million barrels there, right?
Peak Oil is only tangentially connected to reserves; it is all about rate of production. As for Canada’s tar sands, yes there is tons of oil there, more than in the Middle East. So why aren’t we producing like the Middle East? Maybe because we need 1,000 cubic feet of natural gas and lots of water for each barrel produced. And a lot of the oil left on the planet is like that: harder, costlier and slower to produce.
Even the optimists out there finally realize Peak is at most a decade from now. And nobody needs to ‘shove’ anything for that reality to hit home.
@Daniel M. Ryan:
You make good points, but I say that in order for human ingenuity to make progress, it needs to acknowledge the need for a change first. The problem I have with many ‘cornucopians’ is that they take the easy road of telling people exactly what they want to hear: don’t change your life, be happy, the ‘market’ will make sure you can keep driving your SUVs and eat junk food for generations to come. This kind of hubris is our worst enemy. Just like those who thought the Titanic could not sink.
First, there is no such thing as ‘the market’; there are inventors, scientists and entrepreneurs who see a problem, roll up their sleeves and fix it. Saying ‘There is No peak’ like Mr. Otter above is not optimism; it is wishful thinking. That’s not how progress is made.
And with that said, a healthy dose of pessimism is not always bad. This is why we buy life and fire insurance. Buying gold to protect yourself against hyperinflation may have been a bad bet, at least for us in North America, but you bet Germans in 1922, Italians in the 1930s, Brazilians in the 1980s all wished they had gold.
So many horses in New York City —- The Chicken Littles were crying out ‘We-Will-Run-Out-of Hay !!’
“This is a FINITE world. Deal with it.”
I am aware this is a finite world and I do deal with it. I don’t worry about. Humanity will have it’s run then go away at some point in the future unless we achieve quality space travel. That will allow colonization of other finite planets over and over again. That is is the 7th century wogs don’t take over the world.
Here is the quote re the Club of Rome and it’s fear mongering.
“In 1972, in an influential and widely-publicized report entitled “The Limits to Growth,” the Club of Rome predicts that the world’s population will hit 7 billion by 2000. As a result, there will be worldwide starvation as population growth outpaces the world’s ability to feed itself. The price of natural resources such as gold, copper, tin, and particularly oil will skyrocket during the remainder of the century as supplies dwindle.”
No shortages so far.
“Just like those who thought the Titanic could not sink.” GreenNeck
Just who were ‘those’ ?
The builder, Harlan & Wolfe ? Nope.
The owners, White Star Line ? Nope.
It was, you guessed it —- The Media !! Hype, hype.
Read a few more of the “End Is Near” predictions that didn’t happen.
HERE
“In 1972, in an influential and widely-publicized report entitled “The Limits to Growth,” the Club of Rome predicts that the world’s population will hit 7 billion by 2000. As a result, there will be worldwide starvation as population growth outpaces the world’s ability to feed itself. The price of natural resources such as gold, copper, tin, and particularly oil will skyrocket during the remainder of the century as supplies dwindle.”
“No shortages so far.”
Fair enough. The above is not from the book, at least not verbatim; it is an interpretation of it.
And as you know the rate of growth has indeed slowed down. In the 1970s the world has been hit by 2 oil crises and many recessions that have delayed growth to some extent. What is 10 or 15 years? In history, that’s a blip.
‘Skyrocketing’ resource prices is pretty much what we see today, no? Oil was 12$ in 1999, almost hit 100$ 8 years later. Same with copper, platinum, etc.
This ‘doomer’ has loaded up on gold 10 years ago, and resource stocks in the 2000-2002 period. I am making a killing now, and know I’ll make even more.
John and Otter, I’m with GreenNeck on Peak Oil. It’s very unlikely that another cheap and easily accessible field like Ghawar in Saudi Arabia will ever be found again and that field is filling with water. Reserves of crude of that quality are diminishing worldwide.
For the best education on the oil and gas, go over to Investor Village, registration is easy, and find the Clayton Williams (symbol CWEI) board. Besides being first class investors in the oil&gas industry, many of them work in the industry. They’ve been posting for years. They are pragmatists. A lot of the reasoned and knowledgeable minds over there subscribe to Peak Oil as not far around the corner.
But, draw your own conclusions.
Fine enough, GreenNeck. If you got into gold as of 1997, you have little to complain about. We’re used to having sneerers come in here, to the point where it’s refreshing to exchange comments with someone who’s ‘deigned’ to put his money where his mouth is. I do have to extend congratulations on picking up on these trends; long may you enjoy your profits.
Nevertheless, you’ve missed the point that human ingenuity has been throttled quite a bit through government intervention. The drilling for oil has been hampered by greenie-inspired regulations, and Peak Oil’rs have been wrong in the past. Given these two points, the Peak Oil theory looks like a mythification of Peak Regulation. So, it’s no wonder why the theory’s been greeted with a lot of skepticism.
Is this the time for Peak Oil to come true? I don’t know. If you want to take the very long-term view, it seems unlikely that fossil fuels will be the mainstay as of 2157. They certainly weren’t in 1857.
Those with open minds may want to read this article entitled “Peak Oil Again? Is “social meltdown” imminent?” by Ronald Bailey, from November 6, 2007, in Reason. http://www.reason.com/news/show/123349.html
Note that 77% of the world’s oil is owned by govenments, who milk it for tax revenue (surprise, surprise).
BTW, the first moaning about “running out” of oil in the USA occurred about three monthe before the first well was drilled. same old, same old…
“This is a FINITE world. Deal with it.”
Only to “finite” intellects.
…..phhhhttt no wonder you greentards are meat for globaist wolves. You get scared at shadows and you swallow everything Big brother and his minions tell you…you’re a prey species!! … and the rest of us who create solutions and adapt are getting sick of carrying your dead weight.
Lookit the scared green rabbits scatter in all directions …right into the globalist trap.
@Terrence:
I’ve seen that article. I for one don’t buy the ‘social meltdown’ dramatization. Even if oil starts declining now, it will be slow enough for us to adapt, but it would also mean very high prices and stunted economic growth.
As for CERA and Daniel Yergin, those guys have fired so many blanks with their over-the-top optimist scenarios that they don’t have much credibility, to this guy anyway. Yergin forecasted in 2001 that US natural gas production would raise by 15% by 2006, thanks to massive drilling efforts. The drilling was done, but production dropped 5% instead. They’re also on record with predicting oil at 35$ now.
The other thing is that ‘reserves’ are not all equal. CERA includes oil shale, which can barely be exploited commercially now. The reality is, we don’t find big oil fields anymore. Brazil mega-find last month of 8 billion barrels was the first this decade. Such fields were found routinely 50 years ago. Most additions to reserves nowadays are ‘reserve growth’ due to technical advances (when not downright phony).
In any event, I’m not trying to convince anyone. You all can see what’s going on. If I mention Peak Oil in an AGW thread, it is that I’m convinced we’ll have to reduce fossil fuel use soon, AGW or not. However, I know nothing will be done, unless things get real bad. That’s human nature. So I prepare for it as best as I can. Loading up on energy/PM stocks is one very ‘capitalist’ way to do it.
And if I’m wrong? No big deal. C’est la vie.
Addressing the alleged “finite” earth resources that the globalists want to regulate us with, and green rabbits anguish over,…It bears repeating that all organic resources are acculturate and infinately renewable.
Technology evolves and adapts as well…but it’s hard to get that across to the Luddites in the green hysteria cult.
WL Mackenzie Redux:
You should think before you talk. Calling me a ‘globalist’! Yikes. I have no time for ANYONE on the Left or the Right. Politically I’m an anarchist – nobody gets to tell this guy what to do.
What are YOU doing exactly to ‘create solutions and adapt’? Except calling others names and denying anything needs be done?
Just like you I don’t expect ANYTHING good to come out of the ‘globalist wolves’. But I also refused to be a slave of the corporate world. And unlike others I’ve done something about it.
I don’t have a boss, live off-grid, grow my own food, cut my own firewood, and have parked my investments where I’ll think they’ll do best in the coming times.
Greeneck, are you confusing oil extraction from refining capacity? There are still huge deposits of oil worldwide, in the tarsands, in the Arctic, likely under the ocean. Obviously, we have picked off the most accessible first, so cost of exploration and extraction will rise. I remember reading the Oil Minister in Saudi Arabia remarking the stone age didn’t end because we ran out of stones, and the oil age won’t end because we run out of oil.
The good news we will come to our senses before we let the developing world burn it all while we save them from climate change, then actually develop a viable alternative, rather than shipping our wealth to China and India, thus getting those oil-ummahs off our back. Sounds like win-win to me.
The peak oilers ignore man’s ingenuity and resilience to adapt to changing circumstances.
From those I have met or worked with it usually stems from of a lack of belief in themselves.
They use fear to manipulate others and rail at those who don’t buy into their fear.
So they don’t have to roll up their sleeves themselves and solve the problem they hold onto the adolescent belief that he world has to start over in some way in order to truly correct itself.
Instead the adult looks at today’s problem and works at solving it from there without heaping on fear at every turn.
Technology will fill the gaps when there is enough profit in it for those capable of creating answers as they have done throughout millennias.
The vulture mentality of doom and gloomers always diminishes mans capability to adapt to a changing world in order to create panic for twisted and cynical reasons.
Cynisism is as a cheap way of looking smart because one can be right sometimes but yet those that use it rarely take responsibility when they are wrong or when things do go right.
To cynics predicting negative outcome is very low risk and done automatically without much thought.
For example have we ever heard of a Scientist acknowledging he was wrong when the 70’s Global cooling scare never happened or the supposed mass starvation of the 80’S?
It is in the nature of the conservative character to have endless belief in humanity’s ability to adapt and change to technological issues like high oil prices usually because they are the very ones who have found the solutions in the past.
That’s why shrill fear mongers like GreenNeck and their brethren have a tough time selling books on arson to firemen/women.
“I don’t have a boss, live off-grid, grow my own food, cut my own firewood, and have parked my investments where I’ll think they’ll do best in the coming times.”
It’s easy to live on the fringes of a society that is based in rule of law where most others do the heavy lifting so you can afford your childish anarchism while playing the market. The word hypocrite comes to mind.
greenneck – that’s great. You don’t have a boss, you grow your own food, you aren’t obliged to the corporate world. Could I trouble you to answer a few questions?
I’m presuming you are vegetarian. Oh – do you grow your own grain, harvest and process it. Same with meat/fish proteins. Cheeses. Fruits?
Now, since you aren’t obliged to (a slave to?) the corporate world, could you explain how you happen to have a computer? Do you have a mine (for the metal)? Plastics? A lab to develop the technology of computers? The knowledge base to do so? What about electricity? The internet and satellites?
And what exactly, apart from growing your own food (???) and cutting down your trees, have you done about the climate?
“It’s easy to live on the fringes of a society that is based in rule of law where most others do the heavy lifting so you can afford your childish anarchism while playing the market. The word hypocrite comes to mind.”
I’ve paid my dues. I’ve worked 85,000 hours in my life although I’m still under 50. I’ve raised and paid college for my children. For several years I’ve paid more in income taxes than most people make gross.
Here you have it :
Revelation 16:8-9
“And the fourth angel poured out his vial upon the sun; and power was given unto him to scorch men with fire.
And men were scorched with great heat, and blasphemed the name of God, which hath power over these plagues: and they repented not to give him glory.”
Funny, no carbon dioxide emissions mentioned here. I figure it is going to get plenty hot, and one can only hope this angel plays favouritism.
ET:
You’re a bit facetious, I say.
Where did I say I’m a Luddite? Or a hermit?
I’ve spent enough of my life making other people rich by working in a cubicle. That’s what I got out of. Of course I still buy stuff like computers.
As for food, no, I’m not vegetarian, what for? Ever heard of raising animals, hunting and fishing? I do all that. As for grain, all I have is corn. Spuds are a main staple here. And yes, I still do buy stuff at the store from time to time.
What I do for the climate? I hardly ever drive.
Green,
What you owe your country doesn’t end when you retire from the career that was available to you because you live in such a country.
There is no ‘Paid in Full’ citizenship unless of course, you have served in the military, in action, to defend said country. That is the only exception.
@Claude:
“That’s why shrill fear mongers like GreenNeck and their brethren have a tough time selling books on arson to firemen/women.”
Based on the reactions I’ve got here, I’d say if someone is fearful, it’s not me. If you want shrillness, re-read your post.
Where did I mention nay kind of doomsday? Fearmongering is one thing, being aware of the world around us and preparing accordingly is another.
If you think oil production can continue to climb at 2% a year (to match demand) for the foreseeable future, then go ahead, and arrange your life on that assumption.
The people who ‘promote’ Peak Oil are not typically wild-eyed end-of-the-world types. Many are geologists and industry specialists. Some do believe technology will save the day, some don’t. All they say is that in the short to mid-term, prices will remain high and could go even higher. To me the easiest solution is CONSERVATION. What is ‘fearsome’ about that? And yet, just say that word, and you’re labeled a leftard who wants to end civilization as we know it.
John,
Point taken, I’ve never said ‘Paid in full’. And I’m not retired, just doing different work. I don’t plan to ever retire anyway, as long as my health endures.
Active military service is indeed the highest contribution you can make to your country. There are others, like volunteering, that’s what I do.
QUOTE:I’m all for hearing people out on this issue, but I can’t help but chuckle when climate change deniers all too often use their anecdotal observations as evidence, which leads me to believe that these are often operating as the sole basis for their beliefs, rather than scientific articles either for or against their stance. Case in point:
I beg to differ, I’ve yet to hear anyone(besides Suzuki) in the past two years put their scientific reputaion on the line and say “Yes, Man is causing GW.” Hosts like Adler have left open invitations to anyone who will support this.
It is the Left-tards who are proping up fake statistics like this one: All Scientists agree that GW is man made.
Green,
Good on you. I do admire your life-style. I aspire to a form of minimalist myself. I am old, but cannot/don’t want to retire.
An old MD friend of mine said the worst think you can do in old age, if you are healthy, is retire.
Do like the battery bunny and keep on keepin’ on. Only good stuff will come from that. There is nothing worse than a useless listless life.
That we live in extremely interesting times, makes life, if one pays attention, a lot of fun. Participating in this kind of exchange is part of it.
Cheers,
J