It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

It's Not Your Imagination: The Number Of Disasters Just Keeps Rising

page: 1
7
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 16 2011 @ 09:28 PM
link   



I won't speculate on what's causing the increase, however it is an ever growing phenomena. It seems that alot more of these occurances may be on the horizon. California is overdue for another large earthquake:


www.abovetopsecret.com...



Yellow Stone is due for another erruption soon, of super volcano proportions--which could have coincidentally been awakened by the Japanese earthquake:


www.abovetopsecret.com...






Click here to view data.
edit on 16-3-2011 by v1rtu0s0 because: (no reason given)




posted on Mar, 16 2011 @ 09:30 PM
link   
Woah, thats insane! Do you really think that this might all be coincidence or maybe something was pre-determined?



posted on Mar, 16 2011 @ 09:38 PM
link   
If I were to speculate, I would notice an increase in the ability for us to create these disaster like earthquakes with underwater nukes, or even bad weather from global warming....


reply to post by Leemo
 



edit on 16-3-2011 by v1rtu0s0 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 16 2011 @ 09:39 PM
link   
Only time will tell of events to come...



posted on Mar, 16 2011 @ 09:41 PM
link   
I don't suppose you stopped to consider that maybe it's the reporting that is increasing instead of the events?

Because we didn't hear about every single thing going on in the world back in 1970 which is when that graph starts seems to point at media and information from the internet growth more than anything else.

It's is your imagination: The number of reports just keeps rising.



posted on Mar, 16 2011 @ 10:00 PM
link   
Or maybe the world's population has increased by a couple billion since 1970. More people are affected by natural events. More people moving into areas prone to natural disaster.



posted on Mar, 16 2011 @ 10:03 PM
link   
We're talking about large events, folks. Those have been easily detected since the 1970's.



posted on Mar, 16 2011 @ 10:04 PM
link   
No, I think just the number of disasters getting reported on is increasing, thanks to the 24 hour news cycle.



posted on Mar, 16 2011 @ 10:12 PM
link   
Good points by all. We can debate historical records all day.

All I can say for sure, though, is that we are only 2 1/2 months in to 2011, and it has certainly been an interesting year thus far...



posted on Mar, 16 2011 @ 10:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by v1rtu0s0
We're talking about large events, folks. Those have been easily detected since the 1970's.


Looking at the above graph, the large events don't really seem to have gone up. Looks as if some years are worse than other but no real increase in the large events.



posted on Mar, 16 2011 @ 10:26 PM
link   
From the original source of the graph "EM-DAT"



EM-DAT contains essential core data on the occurrence and effects of over 18,000 mass disasters in the world from 1900 to present. The database is compiled from various sources, including UN agencies, non-governmental organisations, insurance companies, research institutes and press agencies.


www.emdat.be...

I think it is likley due to population growth and reporting of events. still very interesting, thanks op for posting.



posted on Mar, 16 2011 @ 10:31 PM
link   
From the guys who made the chart:

Moreover, as can be seen in Figure 1, there is a positive trend in the prevalence of total events over the sample period. However, this trend is somewhat deceptive as it appears to be driven by improved recording of mild events, rather than by an increase in the frequency of occurrence of total events. Furthermore, truly large events—i.e., conceivably more catastrophic—are rare.

idbdocs.iadb.org...

It is an article about the economic impact of disasters.
Catastrophic Natural Disasters and Economic Growth

edit on 3/16/2011 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 16 2011 @ 10:48 PM
link   
2010 was the worst year in the last decade for disasters according to ISDR (international strategy for disaster reduction)


Geneva – Some 373 natural disasters killed over 296,800 people in 2010, affecting nearly 208 million others and costing nearly US$110 billion, according to the Centre for Research on the Epidemiology of Disasters (CRED).


And it could get worse


“These figures are bad, but could be seen as benign in years to come,” said Margareta Wahlström, UN Secretary-General for Special Representative for Disaster Reduction. “Unless we act now, we will see more and more disasters due to unplanned urbanization and environmental degradation. And weather-related disasters are sure to rise in the future, due to factors that include climate change.”

this is how they class a disaster


Since 1988, CRED has maintained an International Disaster Database known as EM-DAT. It includes all disasters from 1900 until present, which meets at least one of the following criteria: 10 or more people killed; 100 or more people affected; a declaration of a state of emergency by country authorities; or an appeal for international assistance by country authorities.

source cred.be...



posted on Mar, 16 2011 @ 10:53 PM
link   
I'm laughing at most of you because your just now catching up to the most obvious news on the planet. Last year scientist were proclaiming that this was all completely normal. Everyone said the christians were fear mongering and crying chicken little. Now its funny how the tables are turned. Read revelations folks. Explains everything that's happening and is to come.


 
Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com
 



posted on Mar, 16 2011 @ 11:06 PM
link   
reply to post by dadfortruth1
 




Geneva – Some 373 natural disasters killed over 296,800 people in 2010

According to EM-DAT, the Haiti earthquake was responsible for 222,570 of those deaths.

It will get worse but not because there are more earthquakes or other natural disasters. It will be due to growing populations in underdeveloped nations, more people will be killed and affected when natural disasters strike.

Earthquake damage can be mitigated. Note the difference in casualties between the Haiti and Chile earthquakes. But in Japan the great number of casualties was the result of the tsunami, something for which there is no mitigation. With growing coastal populations and infrastructure, tsunami, as rare as they are, will cause huge losses.

edit on 3/16/2011 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 16 2011 @ 11:14 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


yes i agree with you totally Phage.

i did take notice of the "worst year in the last *decade*" part of the quote. we are having a bad couple of years, but we have had them before. the only differance is the population is alot larger now.

to ag893


Last year scientist were proclaiming that this was all completely normal

and they probly still are, lets wait till 2013 for the "i told you so"
edit on 16/3/11 by dadfortruth1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 16 2011 @ 11:18 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 




Earthquake damage can be mitigated. Note the difference in casualties between the Haiti and Chile earthquakes. But in Japan the great number of casualties was the result of the tsunami, something for which there is no mitigation. With growing coastal populations and infrastructure, tsunami, as rare as they are, will cause huge losses.


To add to what Phage is saying (because he is totally correct). Also consider how many buildings collapsed in Haiti compared to Japan. If we had 10 earthquakes that hit poorly built cities one year and 10 that hit structurally sound buildings the following year, the first year would appear more devastating.

In reality, it just shows that some nations are better planned and better built.



posted on Mar, 16 2011 @ 11:23 PM
link   
I would say mainly what that graph proves is that you can't trust graphs, which I will demonstrate with another graph




The graph in the OP takes a minuscule tiny trend i.e. the last 30 years, and extrapolates that to make it look like there is a huge rise, when it's all about in accordance with historical norms.

edit
Forgot to include source
linky
edit on 16-3-2011 by davespanners because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 16 2011 @ 11:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by v1rtu0s0
We're talking about large events, folks. Those have been easily detected since the 1970's.


Forget it, the ostriches will always seek to bury their heads in the sand.
As you mention, these "large events" simply don't fly under the radar, no matter when they happened to have occured. In fact, they were probably even more notable in years past because there were fewer of them, therefore making them more significant.



posted on Mar, 17 2011 @ 01:15 AM
link   
I just counted up some statistics: the number of quakes that were at least a 7.5, since 1980. "They were underreported" is not a valid argument here; 7.5's are always reported, especially after 1980...

From 1980 to 1990, there were 16 quakes at least 7.5.
From 1990 to 2000, there were 37.
From 2000 to 2010, there were 58.

Something is making that count go up by 21 per decade. That's just earthquakes, but "all disasters" seems to have a similar correlation.

Oh; I made a nice time-accurate animated GIF of all those quakes, compressing 30+ years into two minutes, if anyone's interested. It's over here.



new topics

top topics



 
7
<<   2 >>

log in

join