"The World Meteorological Organization should immediately retract this flawed study and issue a formal statement publicly correcting the record." ... The facts fly in the face of the reporting. The WMO and its authors chose to misrepresent disaster data as gathered by one of the most reputable agencies in the world, the Centre for Research on the Epidemiology of Disasters (CRED) in their EM-DAT database. ... The CRED system’s counts rose as it received reports from more and more sources over the years. Comparing totals from the 1970s with 21st century data is not only inappropriate, but also a blatant misuse of statistics to bolster a pre-ordained conclusion of increasing destruction.
"Science corruption increased during the 1960s and literally overwhelmed science during the 1970s due to increasing complexities which were met by incompetents through corruption and overwhelm of rationality. Science bureaucrats ran with the corruptions of science instead of correcting them. That result was an inevitable characteristic of the bureaucracies due to the darkness of operating behind closed doors...When rational persons try to correct errors in the bureaucracies, they are called whistleblowers and forced out if not thrown in jail, as endless examples have shown...Then during the 1990s, bureaucrats took their stupidity a step further in requiring a statistical analysis with every number published in the biological sciences...Now days, laboratory scientists are so overwhelmed by everything other than science that they find it impossible to get much done. That degree of overwhelm makes it easy for corrupt scientists and nonscientists to scandalize real scientists out of science for trying to correct errors."
The spectacle of COP26 and the attendant drama is a perfect example of poorly understood scientific ideas marshalled for political ideologies. Official speakers and protestors alike point to hurricanes, tornadoes, floods, and fires as proof of climate change and impending catastrophe, despite the lack of evidence showing long-term trends for these extreme weather events. ... Just as eugenicists a century ago were confident that their policies for “racial health” would be a great boon for future generations, climate envoys and activists demand costly policies, now, for the benefit of our grandchildren and great-grandchildren.
The COP26 participants and their cheerleaders are disturbingly certain of their policies’ impacts centuries down the road – and, with an excess of confidence (or hubris), they consistently misrepresent virtually every extreme weather event as a code red for the planet.
Paul Homewood: "It is absolutely clear that the number of strong tornadoes has declined since the 1970s. Alarmingly, however, this page has been 'disappeared', and the link now comes up with this:
Fortunately Wayback still has a copy of the original web page, and I also have it on file. It is blindingly apparent that NOAA found their original assessment far too inconvenient, something that should be kept out of the public domain at all cost."
Bjorn Lomborg: "Hurricanes in 2021 were unprecedented — as in unprecedentedly few. Globally, 2021 had the fewest hurricanes ever in the satellite era (1980-2021). Globally, 2021 had some of the fewest strong hurricanes in the satellite era (1980-2021). With 16 strong (Cat 3+) hurricanes, 2021 was the second-lowest strong hurricane year since 1980. Globally, 2021 was a weak hurricane year. When measured by total energy (Accumulated Cyclone Energy), 2021 was the 9th weakest year. Did you see that reported anywhere?
Hurricanes in 2021 were weak and exceptionally few. But we heard lots about North Atlantic hurricanes. Conveniently, North Atlantic is the only basin where hurricanes are stronger. Does this leave us well-informed?. But we hear lots about names storms (hurricanes + weaker storms). Ever-easier to detect, so numbers keep climbing (4 of 2020s 30 named storms wouldn't have been named in 2000!). Not as relevant, but hey, scary numbers."