Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1
UM-Bot

Extreme weather could kill 150,000 per year

103 posts in this topic

Scaremongering on max...

4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The age of trump is pretty spoopy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Every disaster movie begins with somebody ignoring a scientist. 

6 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I blame Al Gore.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, ChaosRose said:

Every disaster movie begins with somebody ignoring a scientist. 

Every disaster movie is a movie.

 

 

 

4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We are not the first age to experience bad weather, nor will we be the last.  There have always been disasters. 150,000 per year is nothing when more than that have perished in single events.  Whole civilizations have been wiped out by droughts.  Cities and temples that are now under water weren't built there.  Dinosaurs lived when the earth was hot, mammoths when it was cold.  Times change, climates change with them.  Every age before us have adapted.  Our response is to whine and fight against the inevitable.   

6 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Life as we know it will never be the same again ...

~

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, AnchorSteam said:

Every disaster movie is a movie.

 

 

 

You might wanna google disasters we were warned about ahead of time. We have a habit of not listening to people who know ****. 

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, ChaosRose said:

You might wanna google disasters we were warned about ahead of time. We have a habit of not listening to people who know ****. 

Will the same Google search tell you all the disasters that didn't happen from scientific proclamation?

The Earth is changing all by itself.  Are we hurrying it up, maybe.  We'll just have to adapt or go the way of the dinosaurs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, ChaosRose said:

Every disaster movie begins with somebody ignoring a scientist. 

Movies aren't real though.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Big Jim said:

We are not the first age to experience bad weather, nor will we be the last.  There have always been disasters. 150,000 per year is nothing when more than that have perished in single events.  Whole civilizations have been wiped out by droughts.  Cities and temples that are now under water weren't built there.  Dinosaurs lived when the earth was hot, mammoths when it was cold.  Times change, climates change with them.  Every age before us have adapted.  Our response is to whine and fight against the inevitable.   

Compare that with the number of deaths attributable to coal-caused air pollution each year.

Not to mention cars.

So here's a disaster we can do something about.

Doug

4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Doug1o29 said:

Compare that with the number of deaths attributable to coal-caused air pollution each year.

 

Why don't YOU show your work?

Or is that just another slogan?

I am willing to bet that in the US it isn't even a tenth of one percent of what it is in China, and yet you guys are always either ignoring Pollution in China or giving them another 20-year pass on it. That was the case in the Paris accords, and also why it was a good idea to dump that nonsense. 

The entire focus of your movement seems to be agianst the West, where the highest pollution standards on Earth are already in effect.

Why is that?

5 hours ago, Doug1o29 said:

So here's a disaster we can do something about.

Doug

you are asking ... no, you are demanding that we take an awful lot of faith. And if we don't you will pass laws against us anyway. When I saw those schmucks on the Weather Channel and in Congress suggesting that "Deniers" be put in prison, that was when I knew you guys had lost the argument and True Colors had been shown at last.

Its like a Cult, or something.

After all these centuries, the Christians finally settled down and became reasonably quiet... and now we have to deal with this crap?

Jeez.... can't was have that Zombie Apocalypse instead?

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The science of research is largely formatted around a review of the research literature, developing a testable hypothesis, establishing methods of for testing the hypothesis, the results of the testing, and a discussion of the results. There is presented a link to the study in the above article. The study is well presented and goes to some length to explain the research methods. It would be enlightening and refreshing to see comments based on the merits of validity, reliability, or interpretation of the specific results of the study. Naivety is contagious.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Doug1o29 said:

Compare that with the number of deaths attributable to coal-caused air pollution each year.

Not to mention cars.

So here's a disaster we can do something about.

Doug

What do you suggest that we do?  Give up cars?  Go without electricity?  

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Anyone surprised that the EU continues to perpetrate the doom-mongering over climate change in an attempt to extort trillions of dollars from other nations?  I remember back in the 90's and early 00's when these same groups, and one's like them, were saying there would be massive increases in hurricanes and other catastrophic weather events only to see those predictions be proven totally false as we've seen the mildest hurricane seasons in recorded history and no major hurricanes for over 11 years while we see all their global surface temperature predictions fail over the past 25 years. 

 

Fortunately for the truth seekers, the weather and climate observations are not cooperating with the fear-mongering tactics and these people are being exposed as liars, or at best, ignorant fools.  Eventually, they will be exposed for the political hacks that they are as the real climate science emerges from this time of politically motivated scientific darkness.  The fact is that climate change is not as they represent and we can take a much more pragmatic, and less costly, road to environmental responsibility and progress that will not destroy the lives of millions of people so that the rich of the world can take even more money from the poor and middle classes societies while they can live their corrupt and hypocritical lifestyles that destroy the environment more than almost anyone else.  I'm looking at you Al Gore!!!

Edited by Noxasa
3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Big Jim said:

What do you suggest that we do?  Give up cars?  Go without electricity?  

Use more efficient engines, less electricity, generate electricity is less polluting manners (coal being the very worst way of generating it).

http://www.catf.us/fossil/problems/power_plants/

http://news.mit.edu/2013/study-air-pollution-causes-200000-early-deaths-each-year-in-the-us-0829

And if our cars generate less pollution, then walking and cycling in towns will become less unpleasant.

But the downside, is that there will be even more people on the planet ..... so it may not be an ideal solution :P 

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Big Jim said:

What do you suggest that we do?  Give up cars?  Go without electricity?  

The US is already converting to wind power.  There are already more than 100 wind farms generating at least 170 megavolts each.  Eight more are under construction.  There is one offshore wind farm.  We generate about 5% of our power from wind and will reach 20% by 2030.

I don't know where you're from, but there is a good chance you're already on wind power.  A year from now, Tallahassee will be powered by wind farms in Oklahoma.  You don't have to have one right next door.  There are more than a thousand windmills in northwestern Oklahoma with more up in Kansas.  Over twenty new ones have gone in this month (July).

We can now light the electric bulbs in those big coal-burning plants along the Ohio River cheaper than they can do it themselves.

Whether Trmp likes it or not, coal is yesterday's technology.  It is dirty, expensive and inefficient.  Economics will phase it out even if environmental laws don't.

 

Electric cars:  Tesla has built a battery plant in Nevada.  Each battery is a little larger than a D-cell.  They say they can make batteries "faster than a machinegun can fire."  Tesla is betting big that electric cars will be here shortly.  India is converting to electric cars; they will finish the job by 2030.  And guess what:  they're using American technology and paying the Chinese to make it.  China is also converting.  They have a workforce of over a million people on it and are planning to quadruple it.  How did we ever let all those jobs go to China?  And Trump brags about 200,000 new jobs.  We're fighting over the scraps.

What happened?  Why are electric cars suddenly big?  The answer is mass production.  When we built electric cars one-at-a-time by hand, they were expensive.  But we are about to start building them on assembly lines.

 

Conversion to clean energy is already in progress, even in Trumpland.

Doug

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

150,000 people COULD die per year due to extreme weather caused by Global Warming   Climate Change Sudden Climate Change Donald Trump. But only if you believe the computer models.

Hey, 150,000 per year could die if I play Call Of Duty 2 for 6 months. And the "deaths" in that game would be no more real than the deaths in this "prediction".

Edited by RoofGardener
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

14 hours ago, AnchorSteam said:

Why don't YOU show your work?

It's not my work.  I'm a dendrochronologist - I study tree rings.  That's all about medicine.

Goodarz, D., S. V. Hoorn, A. D. Lopez, C. J. L. Murray and M. Azzati.  2005.  Causes of cancer in the world: comparative risk assessment of nine behavioural and environmental risk factors.  The Lancet 366(9499).

Clancy, L., P. Goodman, H. Sinclair and D. W. Dockery.  2002.  Effect of air-pollution control on death rates in Dublin, Ireland: an intervention study.  The Lancet 360(9341).

Torrey, L. A., F. Bray, R. L. Siegel, J. Ferlay, J. Lortent-Tieulent and A. Jemal.  2012.  Global cancer statistics, 2012.  CA:  Cancer Journal for Clinicians.  American Cancer Society. 65(2).

There are hundreds, probably thousands of research articles on this.  Show a little initiative and look up some.

14 hours ago, AnchorSteam said:

I am willing to bet that in the US it isn't even a tenth of one percent of what it is in China, and yet you guys are always either ignoring Pollution in China or giving them another 20-year pass on it. That was the case in the Paris accords, and also why it was a good idea to dump that nonsense. 

I'm not sure of the actual statistics, but you may be right.  China is a lot dirtier than the US.  But they started a lot dirtier than we did and they are also doing a lot more.  They developed a 30-year plan to deal with the problem and they're about a decade into it.  In another twenty years they'll have the mess cleaned up.  Where will we be in twenty years?  Oh! Dear!  What if we make the world clean and safe to live in and we didn't have to?

The Paris Accords are voluntary.  It's up to each country to assess its own situation and take what action it deems appropriate.  That's why these things haven't worked in the past.  Except for Trump, every President since Reagan has talked a good line, but done nothing.

By joining Syria and Venezuela we have removed ourselves from the negotiation process.  That means we have no input into future standards and the trade laws needed to implement them.  How smart was that?

14 hours ago, AnchorSteam said:

The entire focus of your movement seems to be agianst the West, where the highest pollution standards on Earth are already in effect.

Why is that?

 If by "western" you mean northern Europe, then we already do have the highest pollution standards.  In the US we have them, but we don't enforce them very well.

"Against the west?"  India is buying cars and solar products made in China with American technology.  How did we ever let that happen?  We are even buying some from them.  All I'm saying is that maybe we ought to put our technology to work for us.

14 hours ago, AnchorSteam said:

you are asking ... no, you are demanding that we take an awful lot of faith. And if we don't you will pass laws against us anyway. When I saw those schmucks on the Weather Channel and in Congress suggesting that "Deniers" be put in prison, that was when I knew you guys had lost the argument and True Colors had been shown at last.

I have to agree - they're schmucks.  The reason people say things like that is they don't know as much as they are pretending to.  If they had the answers, they'd simply tell you.

Remember tobacco?  Phillip-Morris knew for years that their product was dangerous and killing people, but they tried to silence critics and sew confusion under the guise of "free speech."  They could have and I think should have been held legally responsible.  Instead, we let them off.  Even now, we haven't taken effective action against tobacco.  And that's pretty much the situation with polluters and global warming today.  I say let the know-nothings yammer - that's free speech.  But hold those who know better, responsible for their actions.

"Take it on faith."  There are hundreds of peer-reviewed articles on climate change coming out every month.  Even professionals can't keep up.  You don't have to take anything on faith.  Just do a little reading.

 

What convinced me that global warming was real is a little data test I did about 15 years ago.  I took the annual average temperatures for Fort Smith, Arkansas and used global temperature anomalies to predict them.  I got an r^2 value of 0.99.  That's an astounding level of agreement.  How is that possible if that list of global temperature anomalies is wrong?  Is the record for Fort Smith also wrong?  And in a way that corroborates the global list?  How did those observers 100 year ago know to record false temps so that we would see them and think the climate was getting warmer?

You're asking me not to believe the evidence that's right under my nose.  I don't foresee much success in that endeavor.

Doug

 

Edited by Doug1o29
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, RoofGardener said:

150,000 people COULD die per year due to extreme weather caused by Global Warming   Climate Change Sudden Climate Change Donald Trump. But only if you believe the computer models.

Hey, 150,000 per year could die if I play Call Of Duty 2 for 6 months. And the "deaths" in that game would be no more real than the deaths in this "prediction".

Put that in perspective.  150,000 isn't that many when you look at how many die from coal smoke each year, or traffic accidents, or lack of adequate health insurance.

But they all seem to be linked.  We could reduce coal smoke pollution and slow global warming at the same time.  It's a win-win.  Why not do it?

Doug

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Doug1o29 said:

Put that in perspective.  150,000 isn't that many when you look at how many die from coal smoke each year, or traffic accidents, or lack of adequate health insurance.

But they all seem to be linked.  We could reduce coal smoke pollution and slow global warming at the same time.  It's a win-win.  Why not do it?

Doug

What are the numbers? How many do die from coal smoke each year?  Coal smoke and nothing else?  Or lack of adequate health insurance, and nothing else?  The only category you list with verifiable exclusive numbers is traffic accidents.  According to you there should be many death certificates on file where the cause of death is listed as "coal smoke" and an equal or greater number with the cause of death certified as "lack of adequate health insurance".  As you claim, each of these should account for at least 50,000 deaths, if we take these three categories together, or 150,000 if we take them separately.  Can you produce, say, even 10 death certificates where a coroner signed off on these being the exclusive cause of death?  How do the current numbers compare with those from a century ago when coal was in much wider use and was even used to heat many homes?  As you said, "You're asking me not to believe the evidence that's right under my nose."  With these allegations your asking us to believe evidence that may not exist.  

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Big Jim said:

What are the numbers? How many do die from coal smoke each year?  Coal smoke and nothing else?  Or lack of adequate health insurance, and nothing else?  The only category you list with verifiable exclusive numbers is traffic accidents.  According to you there should be many death certificates on file where the cause of death is listed as "coal smoke" and an equal or greater number with the cause of death certified as "lack of adequate health insurance".  As you claim, each of these should account for at least 50,000 deaths, if we take these three categories together, or 150,000 if we take them separately.  Can you produce, say, even 10 death certificates where a coroner signed off on these being the exclusive cause of death?  How do the current numbers compare with those from a century ago when coal was in much wider use and was even used to heat many homes?  As you said, "You're asking me not to believe the evidence that's right under my nose."  With these allegations your asking us to believe evidence that may not exist.  

http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs292/en/

http://economics.yale.edu/sites/default/files/clay-130415.pdf

 

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

1 hour ago, Big Jim said:

What are the numbers? How many do die from coal smoke each year?  Coal smoke and nothing else?  Or lack of adequate health insurance, and nothing else?  The only category you list with verifiable exclusive numbers is traffic accidents.  According to you there should be many death certificates on file where the cause of death is listed as "coal smoke" and an equal or greater number with the cause of death certified as "lack of adequate health insurance".  As you claim, each of these should account for at least 50,000 deaths, if we take these three categories together, or 150,000 if we take them separately.  Can you produce, say, even 10 death certificates where a coroner signed off on these being the exclusive cause of death?  How do the current numbers compare with those from a century ago when coal was in much wider use and was even used to heat many homes?  As you said, "You're asking me not to believe the evidence that's right under my nose."  With these allegations your asking us to believe evidence that may not exist.  

According to the World Health Organization, air pollution (all kinds, of which coal is the major component) killed seven million people in 2012.  http://www.who.int/mediacentre/news/releases/2014/air-pollution/en/  Makes 150,000 seem small and insignificant, doesn't it?

Here's one for China:  366,000 deaths in 2013:  https://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/18/world/asia/china-coal-health-smog-pollution.html  But that's the New York Times.  They aren't very good with anything environmental.

Here's one for China and India, which together make up three million deaths a year:  http://www.healthdata.org/news-release/poor-air-quality-kills-55-million-worldwide-annually

Here's another one, this one by Yale University:  http://economics.yale.edu/sites/default/files/clay-130415.pdf

Coal smoke is the single largest component of air pollution.  Here's a list of the stuff you breathe in:  http://www.ucsusa.org/clean-energy/coal-and-other-fossil-fuels/coal-air-pollution#.WYonX0-Wzcs

I'm sure I could find a report by WHO or other organization on deaths attributable to coal smoke with a little work.  At any rate, if just half of those seven million deaths are from coal smoke alone, that's still 3.5 million people.  And that makes 150,000 deaths due to warming seem unimportant.  If you'd like to research this further, I suggest Google Scholar.

 

As you can see, the numbers are all over the map.  It'll take some time to come up with better-quality data.  In the meantime, you can put up something to support the contention that coal does not cause millions of deaths each year.

 

Why don't you believe this?  Probably because you don't cook or heat with coal or wood.  I heated with wood for six years.  The house always smelled of wood smoke. 

Coal is the number two cooking and heating fuel, right behind wood.  That's how most people are exposed:  in their homes.  Not industrial pollution, but poor people poisoning themselves because they have no other choice.

Electric stoves and cheap wind power offers another choice.

Doug

P.S.:  While you're at it, check out "Black Lung Disease."  It's  caused by inhaling coal dust.  A problem for people who work around coal.

Doug

 

 

Edited by Doug1o29
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks, Doug and Essan.  I had no idea.  However, the use of coal for cooking in third world countries and the lack of pollution control in China and India doesn't seem related to the use of coal in the U.S. to produce electricity in plants using modern technology to reduce pollution as much as possible.  I appreciate the work you put into your answer but I admit I didn't follow every link.  Your interest in the subject far exceeds mine.  

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.