Number three in Craig Kelly’s series 20 reasons why the Wuhan Flu is the final nail in the climate alarmists’ coffin.
Climate Alarmists not only struggle with science, but most are mathematically challenged as well.
They think emotionally rather than with logic or reason, resulting in climate alarmists having great difficulty conceptualizing numbers and putting things in proportion and perspective.
Greta Thunberg’s apocalyptic message ‘People are dying of climate change’, resonates with the young, naïve and gullible who struggle to put things into proportion, and are brainwashed into gluing themselves to roads and marching in streets carrying signs: ‘You will die of old age, we will die of climate change’.
However, the Wuhan Flu outbreak has given those susceptible to being recruited into the climate cult an opportunity to have a greater understanding of proportion and the risk of death from climate change-induced bad weather.
At the time of writing, the number of deaths attributed to the virus (and that includes those that have passed due to the virus, with the virus and even a suspicion of having the virus) is approaching 250,000.
Alone this number is shocking, we are able to give it a sense of proportion by the fact that around 60 million people every year, including an estimated 290,000 to 650,000 that die annually from seasonal influenza-related illness, over 600,000 from Malaria, 950,000 from HIV/Aids, 1.2 million from road accidents. 3.9 million from respiratory diseases, 9.5 million from cancer, and 17.8 million from cardiovascular diseases.
Further, if we spread that 60 million annual deaths evenly throughout the year, since January 1, approximately 20 million people have died of all causes around the world, therefore 98.75% of deaths so far this year are from causes other than the Wuhan Flu.
See Also: RIP Climate Hysteria: 20 Ways The Pandemic Killed The Alarmists’ Crusade
Now going back to Greta’s hysteria, and ignoring the fact that there has been a 98% decrease in deaths from natural disasters over the past 90 years (that’s deaths from; floods, storms, wildfires, droughts, famines, cyclones, hurricanes, and tornadoes).
If, for the sake of an argument we accepted Greta’s prophecy (after all how could she be wrong about predicting the future) and there is a 100% increase in deaths from natural disasters for those between 15 and 49 years of age (an additional 4,500 deaths per annum — let’s call them deaths from climate change) people in this 15 to 49 years age bracket would still be:
- 18 times more likely to die from an alcohol disorder than from ‘climate change’
- 21 times more likely to die from a drug overdose than from ‘climate change’
- 24 times more likely to die from malaria than from ‘climate change’
- 100 times more likely to die from self-harm than from ‘climate change’
- 148 times more like to die in a road accident than from ‘climate change’
- 150 times more likely to die from HIV/AIDS than from ‘climate change’
- 230 times more likely to die from cancer than from ‘climate change’.
Hopefully, a greater sense of proportion resulting from the virus will help ensure that our limited resources are not wasted on virtue-signaling and environmentally damaging ‘green energy’ in the delusional belief that this will save people from bad weather when there are so many other more pressing issues in society that are likely to shorten a person’s life – putting another nail into the alarmists’ coffin.
Read more at Spectator AU
Greta Dumberg is a certified moron. She has limited IQ, so you cannot reason with her.
Redford needs to stay Home and not make anymore movies and no more ads for United Airlines Understand Redford?! and quit being a fool fro the Sierra Club Greenpeace EDF and NRDC as well Hollywood Hypocrite
How many have died in Canada since the Liberals allowed the Chinese flu in? How many died from climate?
As a result of climate hysterians constantly invoking “the science” it is often a priori assumed that they are receptive to facts and reason. Unfortunately this is not the case. The terms “science” and “scientists” could be replaced by the terms “church” and “high priests” in this context – it would be far more accurate. We are looking at an emotion-driven belief system that is largely a reflection of the spiritual impoverishment that has taken hold in developed countries in modern days – it is essentially an Ersatz religion. The movement has all the hallmarks of a fundamentalist religious sect: its central beliefs revolve around a concept very similar to original sin, it sells indulgences and it mercilessly persecutes heretics. Its tenets are considered to be “beyond debate”; one is expected to have faith in the pronouncements of the movement’s priestly caste, rather than discuss their merit. As has been noted elsewhere, it is not a coincidence that the little girl with its “visions of CO2” is eerily reminiscent of figures like Jeanne d’Arc and similar martyrs (most of whom were reportedly also plagued by visions). The statistics on causes of death are not new, including the fact that deaths from inclement weather have essentially crashed to a negligible residual over the past century. As a rule such data points are simply ignored by the faithful, they make as if they didn’t exist. This is why the secretary general of the UN (a “former” Marxist) a short while ago started a speech with the bald-faced lie that the exact opposite is happening (i.e., he asserted that a record number of people is perishing from weather-related incidents). He didn’t even bat an eyelid and despite the fact that this statement was widely mocked by skeptics (i.e., heretics), it was never retracted. In short, your assumption that facts and figures will become more important elements of the debate in the wake of the Wu-flu is erroneous. It won’t matter one whit.