actually it does.
define disaster?
an earth quake his russia...thousand die.
a more powerful earthquake hit California...
they picked up their lawn furniture.
which was the disaster and why?
RE: climate related death risk
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
climate related death risk
Your example wouldnt be fair because Russian infrastructure hasnt been improved since the USSR was in reign in many areas. Their buildings are made of concrete slabs that haven't always been earthquake proofed so it makes sense that they would lose stability and kill many people.
California lives on an earthquake zone. They have regulations for every building to be made earthquake-safe. So over time, better buildings, less issues with earthquakes. That doenst mean there are less earthquakes, just like with areas with more storms, their preparation for storms (sea walls, anti-flooding design) doesnt mean there are less storms. they are simply more prepared, which means less deaths.
Posted using Partiko Android
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
well that's exactly the point isn't it?
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
If you define disaster strictly by deaths then you are right, but if there is a hurricane every few weeks and we live in metal waterproof domes to protect ourselves, that isnt a better quality of life than living outside with LESS storms.
Technically according to your argument, living in storm proof domes and never seeing the light of day is preferable to freedom in the outdoors, because no one is dying and therefore there are no "disasters".
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit