This is what we will continue to get by sharply reducing world economic growth, particularly growth in developping nations, to reduce CO2 by a few increments:
Military ships and helicopters were trying on Saturday to reach thousands of survivors of a super cyclone that killed more than 1,600 people and pummeled impoverished Bangladesh with mighty winds and waves.
Cyclone Sidr smashed into the country’s southern coastline late on Thursday night with 250 kph (155 mph) winds that whipped up a five meter tidal surge. It was the strongest cyclone since a 1991 storm that killed some 143,000 people in Bangladesh.
143,000 dead from a hurricane? This is not global warming, this is poverty. The death toll from the worst storm in the US in recent history was well under a hundred. Because even our poor are rich compared to the rest of the world.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hurricane_Katrina : At least 1,836 people lost their lives in Hurricane Katrina and in the subsequent floods, making it the deadliest U.S. hurricane
What gives?
The difference is still extreme. 1,836 Vs. 143,000. Katrina was brutal. Being, at one point anyway, a force 5 hurricane it was likely every bit as powerful as the one that hit Bangledesh.
The point is, I think, is that if we follow through on all this catastrophic warming nonsense Bangladesh will never get out of poverty.
Problem was that on another blog in NZ, the fact that Coyote made this simple error caused the commenter to proclaim that “That guy can’t get the simplest facts right.” and hence write off the whole blog… I’m a big skeptic myself and a huge Coyote fan.
http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2007/11/55_of_gdp.html#comment-368822
Hey Bob, Katrina was not even close to the deadliest hurricane in US history. Check out Galveston, TX in the 1900’s.