• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Natural disasters less devastating in 2017: Munich Re

Renae

Renae

Banned
Suspended
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 26, 2007
Messages
50,241
Reaction score
19,243
Location
San Antonio Texas
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Conservative
Frankfurt am Main (AFP) - Natural catastrophes worldwide were less devastating in the first half of 2017 than the average over the past 10 years, reinsurer Munich Re said Tuesday, while highlighting the role of climate change in severe US storms.Some 3,200 people lost their lives to disasters between January and June, the German group found -- well short of the 10-year average of 47,000 for the period or the 5,100 deaths in the first half of 2016.
April floods and landslides in Colombia that claimed 329 lives were the deadliest single event.
Elsewhere, an April-June heatwave in India killed 264 people, while floods, landslides and avalanches claimed around 200 lives in Sri Lanka, 200 in Afghanistan and 200 Bangladesh.
Disasters inflicted a financial cost of around $41 billion in the first six months, Munich Re reported.
Click to expand...
https://www.yahoo.com/news/natural-disasters-less-devastating-2017-munich-103904188.html
 
Renae said:
Can't move buildings...
Click to expand...

I'd say there's been advancement in protecting buildings. [earthquake proofing, flood control, etc...]

Notice the places with the highest death tolls have lower building standards and general over-crowding.
 
[h=2]Climate change causes less devastating natural disasters[/h]
Funny, Al Gore didn’t say anything about 2017 being “less devastating”:
Frankfurt am Main (AFP) – Natural catastrophes worldwide were less devastating in the first half of 2017 than the average over the past 10 years, reinsurer Munich Re said Tuesday, while highlighting the role of climate change in severe US storms.
Some 3,200 people lost their lives to disasters between January and June, the German group found — well short of the 10-year average of 47,000 for the period or the 5,100 deaths in the first half of 2016.
Every year there is a long list of disasters somewhere (aka weather-porn items for Al Gore
icon_smile.gif

April floods and landslides in Colombia that claimed 329 lives were the deadliest single event.
Elsewhere, an April-June heatwave in India killed 264 people, while floods, landslides and avalanches claimed around 200 lives in Sri Lanka, 200 in Afghanistan and 200 Bangladesh.
In terms of costs — that’s 60 billion “saved” this year:
Disasters inflicted a financial cost of around $41 billion in the first six months, Munich Re reported.
That was less than half of the $111 billion toll in the same period last year, or the average of $102 billion over the past 10 years.
The most costly single event was flooding in Peru between January and March, which killed 113 people and inflicted damage worth around $3.1 billion, followed by Cyclone Debbie’s toll of 12 lives and $2.7 billion in Australia.
No one is suggesting one-year stats and ten year averages are meaningful. Unless you are Al Gore, then you need even less.
Here’s Gore using events exactly like these to sell his renewables salvation. From the transcript to the Al Gore speech:
In Australia, there may be less rain overall but much more in these big storm events.
A couple of months ago, there was a 1 in 500 year flood in NZ and similar in Brisbane a couple of years ago. Last week in Lagos Nigeria, this (slide) was in my state just two months ago and another 1 in 1000 years.
I was in Houston Texas last year training climate activists , there was 240b gallons came down, equivalent of 3 days of Niagara Falls flowing right into the middle of Houston. In one calendar year they had two 1 in 500 years and one in one 1000 years. [Footage of flood slides from Quebec, Guatemale, Columbia, Rio, Lima, Chile, Bangladesh, Guangzhou, UK, Spain, Madagascar].
Gore and others are using events that are happening anyway to imply that every flood/drought/storm/landslide/sticky-road is worse than it would have been unless we buy his snake oil. Where’s the ACCC when you need them?
Hearts go out to the actual victims of these events.
Wouldn’t it be something if we had models that worked that could predict them?
___________________________________________


 
Jack Hays said:
[h=2]Climate change causes less devastating natural disasters[/h]
Funny, Al Gore didn’t say anything about 2017 being “less devastating”:
Frankfurt am Main (AFP) – Natural catastrophes worldwide were less devastating in the first half of 2017 than the average over the past 10 years, reinsurer Munich Re said Tuesday, while highlighting the role of climate change in severe US storms.
Some 3,200 people lost their lives to disasters between January and June, the German group found — well short of the 10-year average of 47,000 for the period or the 5,100 deaths in the first half of 2016.
Every year there is a long list of disasters somewhere (aka weather-porn items for Al Gore
icon_smile.gif

April floods and landslides in Colombia that claimed 329 lives were the deadliest single event.
Elsewhere, an April-June heatwave in India killed 264 people, while floods, landslides and avalanches claimed around 200 lives in Sri Lanka, 200 in Afghanistan and 200 Bangladesh.
In terms of costs — that’s 60 billion “saved” this year:
Disasters inflicted a financial cost of around $41 billion in the first six months, Munich Re reported.
That was less than half of the $111 billion toll in the same period last year, or the average of $102 billion over the past 10 years.
The most costly single event was flooding in Peru between January and March, which killed 113 people and inflicted damage worth around $3.1 billion, followed by Cyclone Debbie’s toll of 12 lives and $2.7 billion in Australia.
No one is suggesting one-year stats and ten year averages are meaningful. Unless you are Al Gore, then you need even less.
Here’s Gore using events exactly like these to sell his renewables salvation. From the transcript to the Al Gore speech:
In Australia, there may be less rain overall but much more in these big storm events.
A couple of months ago, there was a 1 in 500 year flood in NZ and similar in Brisbane a couple of years ago. Last week in Lagos Nigeria, this (slide) was in my state just two months ago and another 1 in 1000 years.
I was in Houston Texas last year training climate activists , there was 240b gallons came down, equivalent of 3 days of Niagara Falls flowing right into the middle of Houston. In one calendar year they had two 1 in 500 years and one in one 1000 years. [Footage of flood slides from Quebec, Guatemale, Columbia, Rio, Lima, Chile, Bangladesh, Guangzhou, UK, Spain, Madagascar].
Gore and others are using events that are happening anyway to imply that every flood/drought/storm/landslide/sticky-road is worse than it would have been unless we buy his snake oil. Where’s the ACCC when you need them?
Hearts go out to the actual victims of these events.
Wouldn’t it be something if we had models that worked that could predict them?
___________________________________________
Click to expand...

Six months of data. How unscientific! Lol
 
vegas giants said:
Six months of data. How unscientific! Lol
Click to expand...

Global Hurricane Frequency – 1978 to Present
Global Hurricane Frequency (all & major) — 12-month running sums. The top time series is the number of global tropical cyclones that reached at least hurricane-force (maximum lifetime wind speed exceeds 64-knots). The bottom time series is the number of global tropical cyclones that reached major hurricane strength (96-knots+). Adapted from Maue (2011) GRL.​
 
vegas giants said:
Six months of data. How unscientific! Lol
Click to expand...

U.S. Tornadoes (EF1-EF5) – Annual Count
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) – National Climatic Data Center (NCDC) – Click the pic to view at source​
 
Jack Hays said:
U.S. Tornadoes (EF1-EF5) – Annual Count
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) – National Climatic Data Center (NCDC) – Click the pic to view at source​
Click to expand...

Looks prettt Normal...to be all over the board with some upticks and some downward trends.
 
Jack Hays said:
U.S. Tornadoes (EF1-EF5) – Annual Count
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) – National Climatic Data Center (NCDC) – Click the pic to view at source​
Click to expand...

Graphs without any supporting data? Now that is REALLY unscientific!
 
Jack Hays said:
[h=2]Climate change causes less devastating natural disasters[/h]
Funny, Al Gore didn’t say anything about 2017 being “less devastating”:
Frankfurt am Main (AFP) – Natural catastrophes worldwide were less devastating in the first half of 2017 than the average over the past 10 years, reinsurer Munich Re said Tuesday, while highlighting the role of climate change in severe US storms.
Some 3,200 people lost their lives to disasters between January and June, the German group found — well short of the 10-year average of 47,000 for the period or the 5,100 deaths in the first half of 2016.
Every year there is a long list of disasters somewhere (aka weather-porn items for Al Gore
icon_smile.gif

April floods and landslides in Colombia that claimed 329 lives were the deadliest single event.
Elsewhere, an April-June heatwave in India killed 264 people, while floods, landslides and avalanches claimed around 200 lives in Sri Lanka, 200 in Afghanistan and 200 Bangladesh.
In terms of costs — that’s 60 billion “saved” this year:
Disasters inflicted a financial cost of around $41 billion in the first six months, Munich Re reported.
That was less than half of the $111 billion toll in the same period last year, or the average of $102 billion over the past 10 years.
The most costly single event was flooding in Peru between January and March, which killed 113 people and inflicted damage worth around $3.1 billion, followed by Cyclone Debbie’s toll of 12 lives and $2.7 billion in Australia.
No one is suggesting one-year stats and ten year averages are meaningful. Unless you are Al Gore, then you need even less.
Here’s Gore using events exactly like these to sell his renewables salvation. From the transcript to the Al Gore speech:
In Australia, there may be less rain overall but much more in these big storm events.
A couple of months ago, there was a 1 in 500 year flood in NZ and similar in Brisbane a couple of years ago. Last week in Lagos Nigeria, this (slide) was in my state just two months ago and another 1 in 1000 years.
I was in Houston Texas last year training climate activists , there was 240b gallons came down, equivalent of 3 days of Niagara Falls flowing right into the middle of Houston. In one calendar year they had two 1 in 500 years and one in one 1000 years. [Footage of flood slides from Quebec, Guatemale, Columbia, Rio, Lima, Chile, Bangladesh, Guangzhou, UK, Spain, Madagascar].
Gore and others are using events that are happening anyway to imply that every flood/drought/storm/landslide/sticky-road is worse than it would have been unless we buy his snake oil. Where’s the ACCC when you need them?
Hearts go out to the actual victims of these events.
Wouldn’t it be something if we had models that worked that could predict them?
___________________________________________
Click to expand...

Six whole months of data. This is amazing folks. This type of ground breaking longitudinal study means no one is doing any cherry picking here. Six whole months!!!! LOL
 
Renae said:
https://www.yahoo.com/news/natural-disasters-less-devastating-2017-munich-103904188.html
Click to expand...
sigh

• Many natural disasters have nothing to do with climate change (e.g. tornados, tsunamis)

• Even with more extreme weather, there is always some variability, including effects from El Ninos / La Ninas

• The location of a disaster can have a huge effect on how many people are actually affected by it. E.g. a massive flood in New York City will affect far more people than the same size/volume flood in rural Louisiana.

Ultimately, this isn't much different than saying "it's cooler today than it was yesterday, therefore global warming is a hoax" (or, conversely, "it's hotter today than it was yesterday, therefore climate change is real"). It's not a valid method to evaluate the veracity of the claim.
 
Visbek said:
sigh

• Many natural disasters have nothing to do with climate change (e.g. tornados, tsunamis)

• Even with more extreme weather, there is always some variability, including effects from El Ninos / La Ninas

• The location of a disaster can have a huge effect on how many people are actually affected by it. E.g. a massive flood in New York City will affect far more people than the same size/volume flood in rural Louisiana.

Ultimately, this isn't much different than saying "it's cooler today than it was yesterday, therefore global warming is a hoax" (or, conversely, "it's hotter today than it was yesterday, therefore climate change is real"). It's not a valid method to evaluate the veracity of the claim.
Click to expand...

Hey he has SIX MONTS OF DATA....how dare you
 
Renae said:
Ten year trend.
Click to expand...
Are you referring to this?

"Twice as many tornadoes struck the US in the first quarter of 2017 as the average for the last 10 years, Munich Re researchers found."

In fact, the article doesn't discuss any trends at all.
 
vegas giants said:
No he presented six months of data and some graphs with NO DATA
Click to expand...

You should read more carefully.




​







Natural disasters less devastating in 2017: Munich Re

Part-DV-DV1841974-1-1-0.jpg

Disasters inflicted a financial cost of around $41 billion in the first six months, Munich Re reported (AFP Photo/SVEN HOPPE)
More
Frankfurt am Main (AFP) - Natural catastrophes worldwide were less devastating in the first half of 2017 than the average over the past 10 years, reinsurer Munich Re said Tuesday, while highlighting the role of climate change in severe US storms.
Some 3,200 people lost their lives to disasters between January and June, the German group found -- well short of the 10-year average of 47,000 for the period or the 5,100 deaths in the first half of 2016.
April floods and landslides in Colombia that claimed 329 lives were the deadliest single event.
Elsewhere, an April-June heatwave in India killed 264 people, while floods, landslides and avalanches claimed around 200 lives in Sri Lanka, 200 in Afghanistan and 200 Bangladesh.
Disasters inflicted a financial cost of around $41 billion in the first six months, Munich Re reported.
That was less than half of the $111 billion toll in the same period last year, or the average of $102 billion over the past 10 years.
The most costly single event was flooding in Peru between January and March, which killed 113 people and inflicted damage worth around $3.1 billion, followed by Cyclone Debbie's toll of 12 lives and $2.7 billion in Australia.
Three major storms in the United States, each causing around $2.0 billion of damage but no casualties, made up the rest of the top five costliest disasters.
"The high number of severe thunderstorms in the US is presumed to have been at least partially influenced by a natural climate phenomenon," the reinsurer said.
Warm water off the northeast coast of South America and a cooler ocean further west created weather pattens making tornadoes and hail more likely in the US, it said.
Twice as many tornadoes struck the US in the first quarter of 2017 as the average for the last 10 years, Munich Re researchers found.









 
Visbek said:
Are you referring to this?

"Twice as many tornadoes struck the US in the first quarter of 2017 as the average for the last 10 years, Munich Re researchers found."

In fact, the article doesn't discuss any trends at all.
Click to expand...

It does not even talk about total tornadoes which is hilarious
 
Jack Hays said:
You should read more carefully.


[FONT=&]


​







[/FONT][FONT=&]Natural disasters less devastating in 2017: Munich Re

Part-DV-DV1841974-1-1-0.jpg

Disasters inflicted a financial cost of around $41 billion in the first six months, Munich Re reported (AFP Photo/SVEN HOPPE)
More
Frankfurt am Main (AFP) - Natural catastrophes worldwide were less devastating in the first half of 2017 than the average over the past 10 years, reinsurer Munich Re said Tuesday, while highlighting the role of climate change in severe US storms.
Some 3,200 people lost their lives to disasters between January and June, the German group found -- well short of the 10-year average of 47,000 for the period or the 5,100 deaths in the first half of 2016.
April floods and landslides in Colombia that claimed 329 lives were the deadliest single event.
Elsewhere, an April-June heatwave in India killed 264 people, while floods, landslides and avalanches claimed around 200 lives in Sri Lanka, 200 in Afghanistan and 200 Bangladesh.
Disasters inflicted a financial cost of around $41 billion in the first six months, Munich Re reported.
That was less than half of the $111 billion toll in the same period last year, or the average of $102 billion over the past 10 years.
The most costly single event was flooding in Peru between January and March, which killed 113 people and inflicted damage worth around $3.1 billion, followed by Cyclone Debbie's toll of 12 lives and $2.7 billion in Australia.
Three major storms in the United States, each causing around $2.0 billion of damage but no casualties, made up the rest of the top five costliest disasters.
"The high number of severe thunderstorms in the US is presumed to have been at least partially influenced by a natural climate phenomenon," the reinsurer said.
Warm water off the northeast coast of South America and a cooler ocean further west created weather pattens making tornadoes and hail more likely in the US, it said.
Twice as many tornadoes struck the US in the first quarter of 2017 as the average for the last 10 years, Munich Re researchers found.









[/FONT]
Click to expand...

Do you know that there are many tornadoes that don't strike landfall and it is only chnace that directs how many actually do? This is hilarious
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom