Skip to comments.
Natural disasters have quadrupled in two decades: study (Oxfam study largely blames global warming)
AFP on Yahoo ^
| 11/25/07
| af
Posted on 11/25/2007 6:23:44 PM PST by NormsRevenge
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-38 last
To: w1andsodidwe
A foot of snow in the Philadelphia, PA area is now a disaster, requiring federal funds to recover from same. Used to be a great holiday fun event, now a disaster!
21
posted on
11/25/2007 7:11:45 PM PST
by
GregoryFul
(is a bear a bomb in a bull?)
To: torchthemummy
The world suffered about 120 natural disasters per year in the early 1980s, which compared with the current figure of about 500 per year, according to the report.Gotta love the "about" references not to mention the nice even 120 and 500 figures.
22
posted on
11/25/2007 7:14:51 PM PST
by
torchthemummy
("A Tagline Presidential Endorsement Forfeits A Presumption Of Objectivity")
To: NormsRevenge
If GW caused it, it can't be a
natural disaster, can it?
After all, us hominids caused GW.
Saint Al told me so.
23
posted on
11/25/2007 7:14:58 PM PST
by
Izzy Dunne
(Hello, I'm a TAGLINE virus. Please help me spread by copying me into YOUR tag line.)
To: NormsRevenge
24
posted on
11/25/2007 7:59:04 PM PST
by
onedoug
To: NormsRevenge
More than four times the number of natural disasters are occurring now than did two decades agoThey used to call most of these occurences bad weather.
25
posted on
11/25/2007 8:11:38 PM PST
by
RoadKingSE
(How do you know that that light at the end of the tunnel isn't a muzzle flash?)
To: NormsRevenge
Well, clearly this is the fault of the U.S.
At the end of his second term, before he pardoned the rogues’ gallery, Bubba signed the Kyoto proposal on behalf of the U.S. subject to Senate approval.
The Senate voted 95 - zero against the Kyoto proposal. Trust me, there were not 95 Republican U.S. Senators in December 2000. There were lots of Dimocratz who agreed Kyoto was an idea that stunk like week old feesh.
Still, all of these calamities are Booooshes’ fault, bring in the Savages and the stage crews!
Idjuts.
26
posted on
11/25/2007 8:45:38 PM PST
by
Rembrandt
(We would have won Viet Nam w/o Dim interference.)
To: NormsRevenge
I have fortunately lived long enough to call this for what it is. Baloney.
27
posted on
11/25/2007 8:50:19 PM PST
by
Kirkwood
To: NormsRevenge
Oxfam is really making good use of that $25,000 that Chris McBrainless, er, McCandless gave them before heading off to Alaska.
To: JennysCool
I can see how there would be more disasters, particularly floods. Flooding can be caused by deforestation and poor farming methods, and by poor maintenance. The increase in wind-related disasters could just be caused by the increase in population in areas more vulnerable to wind damage. the same for population increases in flood-prone areas. The world has gained 2 billion people since 1980.
29
posted on
11/25/2007 9:09:38 PM PST
by
VanShuyten
("Believe me or not, his intelligence was perfectly clear...But his soul was mad.")
To: Beowulf; Defendingliberty
~~Anthropogenic Global Warming ~~
To: NormsRevenge
early 1980s....
So the proper headline should read
“Oxfam Acknowledges That Life Under Reagan and Thatcher Was Paradise!”
I don’t trust leftist activists to make any honest and careful comparisons. Did they review centuries of data or just the past 25 years? Oh, you say that we have no good data for a lot of this stuff before 1980? So this trend, even if it were real (big if) could be a short-term cycle.
Did they compare exact specs of every kind of flood and disaster in every locale, or simply how many “disaster declarations” were issued by governments and/or media?
Did they take account of the added 2 billion in populations and where those people might be living, the greatly increased numbers living on coastlines and in vulnerable areas, etc.? A big flood is just as bad for anyone caught in it, but it would be worthwhile to know whether they are describing any serious climate changes or rather the press of human populations into more vulnerable areas???
I doubt that Oxfam bothered with any serious analysis. Anyone know?
31
posted on
11/25/2007 10:21:45 PM PST
by
Enchante
(Democrat terror-fighting motto: "BLEAT - CHEAT - RETREAT - DEFEAT")
To: NormsRevenge
"She added..."
nuf said. estrogen overload alert!
To: NormsRevenge
"Oxfam study largely blames global warming"
Surpised they didn't blame the guns...
33
posted on
11/25/2007 11:55:21 PM PST
by
endthematrix
(He was shouting 'Allah!' but I didn't hear that. It just sounded like a lot of crap to me.)
To: NormsRevenge
If the worlds population is an ever increasing number would’nt the number of those affected buy any event also increase? To put it this way if my Wife and I have no children and our house gets flooded only 2 people are affected, then ten years later my wife and I have 3 Children and the same house get flooded then 5 People have now affected. Using just those statistics thats over a 100% increase in those affected but that doesn’t prove the cause is global warming, but just an increase in those affected. It also doesn’t take in to account any other factors such as poor drainage systems, the timing of the storm that caused the flooding (tides are generally higher during full moons, or rental stores where one could buy or rent a pump could be closed at the time of the storm), it doesn't even account for too many people living in area thats too small for them.
To: NormsRevenge
BTW if global warming is true then there is need to worry about the cost of heating fuel there won’t be any need for it.
To: NormsRevenge
Reminds me of crime statistics, which are really reported crime.
36
posted on
11/26/2007 12:51:24 AM PST
by
LZ_Bayonet
(There's Always Something.............And there's always something worse!)
To: NormsRevenge
More than four times the number of natural disasters are occurring now than did two decades ago, British charity Oxfam said in a study Sunday that largely blamed global warming.
Busy creating another teat to milk.
37
posted on
11/26/2007 1:50:51 AM PST
by
aruanan
To: stylin19a; w1andsodidwe
I 2nd that assessment. He is the winner.
38
posted on
11/26/2007 5:05:52 AM PST
by
FreedomPoster
(Guns themselves are fairly robust; their chief enemies are rust and politicians) (NRA)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-38 last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson