The planetary climate catastrophe announced, for when exactly ?

We do not know because the experts are not unanimous.

What we know perfectly, on the other hand, is the cause of the final catastrophe. The end of the world will result from the revolt of our Mother, the Earth. Tired of our irresponsible behavior, it will cause catastrophes that will sweep humanity from the face of the planet.

How do we know that ?

This is what the competent authorities are telling us !

Thus, in 2019, the Secretary General of the United Nations affirms :
« Climate disruption is happening now … It is progressing even faster than the world’s top scientists have predicted … Every week brings new climate-related devastation. Floods. Drought. Heatwaves. Wildfires. Superstorms⁴ ».
Where do these catastrophic findings come from ? Not from the works of the « best scientists in the world » since, as he himself says, « they did not predict it ». Mystery then.

The same year, the Pope soberly confirms :
« The increase in the intensity and frequency of extreme weather phenomena and the desertification of the soil are causing immense hardship⁵ ».
What, as we will see later, is, ironically, denied by data from a Catholic university which seems to be more connected with the “Big Boss” than its representative on earth.

Finally, last year, a UN press release commenting on a UNDRR⁶ report⁷, triumphantly titled :
« Climate change, the driving force behind the doubling of natural disasters over the past 20 years⁸ ».
This same press release informs us of :
« The progression of natural disasters … [up] sharply compared to the last twenty yearsthese floods — which have doubled … [and] a significant increase in other categories of phenomena, including droughts, forest fires and extreme temperatures »,
and the author of the report concludes :
« If this level of growth in extreme weather events continues over the next twenty years, the future of mankind looks very bleak ».

– — — — — — –

« Doublingprogressiongrowth … », this time it seems serious because these statements come from scientists. Which, without a doubt, must be based on solid and verifiable data.

And these data come from CRED (Center for Research on the Epidemiology of Disasters⁹), a research unit of the Catholic University of Louvain. It is part of the School of Public Health located in Brussels, Belgium.
He collaborates in international studies on the humanitarian and health consequences of natural disasters. To this end, it manages a database¹⁰ which lists natural disasters occurring throughout the planet.
Its results are reproduced, among others, by an online publication from the University of Oxford¹¹.

And they indicate that for 21 years, and contrary to mantras repeated by believers:

  • the number of natural disasters decreases steadily :
  • the number of deaths remains low and stable, except for earthquakes (Geophysical) which do not seem to be linked to the climate :
  • the number of people affected including the famous « climate refugees » has not shown any increase, quite the contrary :
  • the amount of economic damage, proportional to the number and intensity of disasters, shows no significant increase :

These trends are, moreover, confirmed by the report itself. The graph below, which is taken from it, clearly shows the slow decrease in the number of natural disasters for the period 2000–2019¹²:

Finally, as it is always useful to confirm results using different sources, we can consult the latest report¹³ from the British insurer AON, a multinational player in the fields of risk management and reinsurance. And, although its criteria for selecting disasters differ a little from those of CRED, it also reveals the absence of any significant evolution over the past 21 years :

Finally, taking into account that between 2000 and 2020:

  • the world population rose from 6.1 to 7.8 billion people, an increase of 28% ;
  • the number and cost of the infrastructures built have increased proportionally ;
  • progress has generated new potential targets, such as server farms ;
  • urbanization has led to increasing exposure to risks;

it is probably safe to say that the number of deaths, people affected as well as the amount of economic damage resulting from natural disasters have all, in relative terms, either declined or remained stable over these years.

All of this data is known and easy to find for anyone who takes the trouble.

This is the topicality of the facts that we see today.

A reality that most decision-makers and the media « forget » to report in order to content themselves with producing catastrophic forecasts which, once again, are systematically denied by the reality of the past years.

But, apart from the obvious reasons of interest and power, how to explain this discrepancy between reality and the discourse supposed to describe it ?

Is it, as the American psychologist Steven Pinker believes, because :
« We judge serious and responsible those who spread fear through terrifying prophecies, while those who express more measured points of view are seen as complacent and naive¹⁴ » ?

Or, more prosaically, as the French philosopher Michel Onfray put it succinctly :

« There are people who believe what they see, and then others who see what they believe¹⁵ ».

Sources

[1] « The world is going to end in 12 years » declared, in 2019, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Democratic representative of N.Y.: https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/01/24/ocasio-cortez-says-world-will-end-years-she-is-absolutely-right/

[2] « Only 96 months to save the world » said Prince Charles in 2011 : https://www.independent.co.uk/climate-change/news/just-96-months-to-save-world-says-prince-charles-1738049.html

[3] « We have 500 days to avoid a climate catastrophe » affirms, in 2014, Laurent Fabius, French Minister of Foreign Affairs : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sLvMXtGkLAc

[4] https://www.un.org/sg/en/content/sg/statement/2019-06-30/secretary-generals-remarks-climate-summit-preparatory-meeting

[5] http://www.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/messages/pont-messages/2019/documents/papa-francesco_20190901_messaggio-giornata-cura-creato.html?fbclid=IwAR3ddHi6HC2hUn7uyYGujttsJgljmzACEeKSa06RiRJMdiR39mS-hFaMz1c

[6] United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction : https://www.undrr.org/

[7] https://www.undrr.org/sites/default/files/inline-files/Human%20Cost%20of%20Disasters%202000-2019%20FINAL.pdf

[8] https://news.un.org/fr/story/2020/10/1079642

[9] https://www.cred.be/

[10] https://public.emdat.be/

[11] https://ourworldindata.org/natural-disasters

[12] Strangely, we are not entitled to an identical graph for the previous decade when it shows an annual increase in the number of natural disasters ! But, in reality, this increase coincides with a gradual increase in the number of countries reporting such disasters. If we adopt the principle of parsimony which favors the most economical explanation and therefore asks not to introduce new hypotheses as long as those already stated are sufficient ; and if we postulate that the number of disasters varies little annually and is simply proportional to the territory considered ; so, if more countries report it, more disasters will be recorded. And this is exactly what we observe during the first period 1980–1999. Then, in the second period, 2000–2019, the stabilization of the number of reporting countries coincides with a stabilization of the number of recorded disasters, which appears to confirm the initial assumption.
On the other hand, to compare the absolute figures of these two periods, as they are, whereas they are based on different numbers of reporting countries, and to detect a « doubling » there seems much less reasonable.
Aware of the unconvincing nature of such a comparison, the authors of the report try to avoid any reproach thanks to a small cryptic sentence : « While better recording and reporting may partly explain some of the increase in events … ». « Partly » ? « Mostly » would be more appropriate !
For a more complete review of the UNDRR report : https://ludwik-budyn.medium.com/fake-news-at-the-un-2bbbad36ed49

[13] http://thoughtleadership.aon.com/Documents/20210125-if-annual-cat-report.pdf

[14] Pinker, Steven. (2018) Enlightenment Now: The Case for Reason, Science, Humanism, and Progress. Viking.

[15] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aEWOfWCIWno

--

--

--

Licencié en Sciences chimiques Licencié en Histoire, Pensée et Civilisation juives ULB

Love podcasts or audiobooks? Learn on the go with our new app.

Recommended from Medium

Going Carbon Neutral Using Free Markets

Todd Sanford — Climate Scientist

How to Stop Complaining About Climate Change and Actually Do Something About It

Decarbonizing Through Digitalization

New agenda of costs and opportunities of the climate crisis

A Bridge to West Texas

5 Ways to Save More Fuel

An Hour Before Ida: Reflections on Hurricane Katrina

Get the Medium app

A button that says 'Download on the App Store', and if clicked it will lead you to the iOS App store
A button that says 'Get it on, Google Play', and if clicked it will lead you to the Google Play store
Ludwik Budyn

Ludwik Budyn

Licencié en Sciences chimiques Licencié en Histoire, Pensée et Civilisation juives ULB

More from Medium

Blending Cross-Sectoral Approaches for Peaceful Cooperation Over Water

Music as an Agent of Environmental Change

Mosaic of the air: partitioning the acoustic space

Opinion: COP26 lacked the aggression necessary to fight climate change