Climate Change -- conspiracy theory or is it time we all drive a Prius?

Quote: rxwine

Might as well tell SOOPOO how much more you know about anesthesia while you're at it.

Shouldn't take you more than a week to tell anyone what you know better than their expertise and experience.

Why would I try that? I know nothing about the subject short of being put under. Unless he were to offer something that makes no sense I am going to trust him on the subject. He can speak on it because he knows about it. It is tested and proven.

Same as he said above that he would ask me about title insurance. That is also tested and proven (in case law and such.)

However, neither of us is going to just blindly believe.

Quote: SOOPOO

Let’s be honest at least. There are no facts, no evidence, no anything that would convince you that climate change is ‘real’. Your mind is 100% closed to that idea. And you just hide behind ‘I think for myself’. You know me well enough to know ‘I think for myself’. But included in that thinking is using the knowledge/training/experience of those who have it in areas where I don’t. If there is a ‘title insurance’ issue I’ll listen to you. If there is an ‘anesthesia’ issue you should listen to me. Neither of those two things mean we don’t ‘think for ourselves’.

good points

I'd only suggest we consider the source. None of the language in the Washington Post article comes from the source they cite. The graph that is shown was [it seems*] created by the Post author and she wanted to emphasize the increase in the Americas. My first thought was that the increase is so remarkable, some better explanation is being avoided by an activist author. I am trying to determine now if the increase, a remarkable thing uncited by that source, is due to data included now that was never there before. In other words, brand new data being manipulated to suggest an increase from zero. Stay tuned.

Evidence so far? The source, not hyperventilating over this, has a disclaimer "The global dengue surveillance system is still under development ... further data will be added as they become available"

https://worldhealthorg.shinyapps.io/dengue_global/

* what is the red capping on the columns on the chart? no key? That's odd

I'm Still Standing, Yeah, Yeah, Yeah [it's an old guy chant for me]

The 'hockey stick' increase in cases in the Americas has a likely explanation, you have to go to the official reports that are in pdf, latest 2022

Quote: the PDF for the Americas 2022

As of EW 52 of 2022, the highest number of dengue cases in the Region have been reported by the following countries: Brazil with 2,363,490 cases (84.1%), Nicaragua with 97,541 cases (3.5%), Peru with 72,851 cases
(2.6%), Colombia with 69,497 cases (2.5%), and Mexico with 59,918 cases (2.1%). Distribution of incidence of
dengue by subregion is presented in Figure 4. Note that the case counts for the ten countries in the Region
account for 2,663,297 total cases or 94.7% of the total cases of dengue.

in other words, in 2022, the reporting for total cases worth citing is for 10 countries only. I suspect we will find that in 2024 the reporting will include many more of the countries shown in the graph that is included in that PDF, figure 5

You have to look at figure 4 and figure 5. Clearly, many countries were not fully participating in providing data, and likely started doing so later, getting it included in 2023 and 2024 . Even Brazil, reporting a lot of cases, is clearly not fully participating in providing "severe case" data. Figure 4 shows that the report only has good enough data from 10 to be included in a graph, yet that includes Brazil etc... many others have to be worse. We shall see.

The thing is , when you see something that is just crazy, don't accept what some journalist fresh out of school concludes.

You see this kind of stuff a lot with health organizations, I'm reminded of the STD reporting we saw a lot of decades ago. It would be something like "syphilis is increasing in the US at a rate of 20% per year!" ... Of course at that rate we were all doomed in just a few years, even abstinence would not save you, it must have been in the water. True, that data didn't come out of nowhere, but conclusions did.

https://ais.paho.org/ha_viz/arbo/pdf/PAHO%20Arbo%20Bulletin%202022.pdf

Quote: odiousgambit

The thing is , when you see something that is just crazy, don't accept what SOME JOURNALIST FRESH OUT OF SCHOOL concludes.

primary reporter in the Washington Post Story I linked:

Lena Sun____________________BS from Cornell in Communication__________________MA from Columbia in Journalism

a longtime reporter at the Washington Post

Pulitzer Prize Award for coverage of the war on terrorism 2002
Robert F. Kennedy journalism award international print 1994

secondary reporter:

Sarah Kaplan:

2019 Walter Sullivan award for Excellence in Science Journalism
2020 AAAS Kavli Science Journalism Award
2023 Evert Clark/Seth Payne Award


nice try with your spin - but it won't fly


https://www.washingtonpost.com/people/lena-h-sun/


https://www.washingtonpost.com/people/sarah-kaplan/


here's some more data on dengue fever from The European Center for Disease Prevention and Control


from the article:


"since the beginning of 2024, over 10 million dengue cases have been reported from 80 countries

THE AMERICAS IS CURRENTLY FACING IT'S LARGEST OUTBREAK OF DENGUE EVER

the current likelihood of the occurrence of local transmission events of chikungunya and dengue viruses where the vectors are present in mainland EU/EEA is high"


https://www.ecdc.europa.eu/en/dengue-monthly#:~:text=Dengue-,Since%20the%20beginning%20of%202024%2C%20over%2010%20million%20dengue%20cases,of%20cases%20reported%20throughout%202023.



and here's yet some more data from the Pan American Health Organization and the World Health Organizatiion

in it's graph it shows exactly the same data as what was in my link in my OP from the Washington Post



https://www3.paho.org/data/index.php/en/mnu-topics/indicadores-dengue-en.html


.


.

I was going to say "she's probably headed for a Pulitzer" in spite of this woeful example... if she's experienced, and truly legitimate, this one will have her chagrined in the end, I think. Or maybe the two of them are just typical journalists after all. I suspect so.

No spin here sir, with what I wrote. Everything I said was a fact, is a fact. There is plenty of conjecture, yes, which I acknowledged. I also do not claim that any of the data or the charts are wrong, but, alas, you do have to be a thinking man to get my point ... to wonder why the WHO puts in that disclaimer. Now I do think the WHO doesn't mind the public getting concerned over Dengue fever, they'd like more funding. But the hyperbolic hand-wringing is not being done by the WHO.

One thing is my fault, I posted the wrong link. The one below, the one for the Americas, is the one that I was viewing, and has figure 3 and figure 4 [charts] that show that the data for 2022 is only 10 countries, those giving enough data at that time to make figure 4 chart. Figure 5 chart shows 28 additional countries that are giving evidently 'some' data. I'd show them here if I could just link the images. It's important to note that the 2022 PDF is the latest official report, called an epidemiological bulletin, and the only one that contains analysis.

When the 2023 report comes out, we can look at the difference. When the 2024 report comes out, at least by then we should know if the huge increase is or is not largely due to increased reporting. If it isn't you can call me out. That's why I said "we'll see"

A good journalist would have gotten in touch with the WHO and asked why there was that disclaimer. Getting nowhere, she should at least be able to look at the official reports.

A bad journalist would look at that chart and said " Oh, boy, I can write an article about how we should panic over climate change!" and leave it at that.

https://ais.paho.org/ha_viz/arbo/pdf/PAHO%20Arbo%20Bulletin%202022.pdf

Quote: odiousgambit

sir, Everything I said was a fact, is a fact.

no Sir, it wasn't

you referred to her and I quote as "some journalist fresh out of school"

and obviously she's not - she's even won a Pulitzer Prize which is regarded as the highest national honor in print journalism

and she's been reporting since at least 1994 -

that's 30 years ago

you don't like her reporting - fair enough - but your reporting was not factual


.

I didn't know squat about her, and didn't say my thoughts about her were factual

I know the type though, and yes they do get Pulitzers.

NYT has a bunch of stinkers. Doesn't bother them a bit it seems. Doubt if Wapo is much better

https://unherd.com/newsroom/the-new-york-timess-worst-pulitzer-prize-winners/ ... inculdes recently Nikole Hannah-Jones – the 1619 Project, 2020

more importantly, you are ready to just accept that hockey stick graph? Disclaimers don't bother you?

Quote: odiousgambit

I didn't know squat about her, and didn't say my thoughts about her were factual

how ridiculous
you post wrong info about her
and then you let yourself off the hook by saying you didn't say your thoughts were factual

so I guess we should assume everything you post might not be factual - unless you double back and say it's factual_______________(-:/

easy for a person to sit back and take shots at Pulitzer Prize winners - especially easy if they've never been honored in any way that is even remotely as prestigious

I'm done here - go ahead and get the last word - I don't care

.

last word then,

if you want me to say I should have researched the reporter before speculating she was fresh out of school, I suppose you're right. Though the context was: "when you see something that is just crazy, don't accept what some journalist fresh out of school concludes" ... it should have included "who seems to be" or something. If I was her, I'd be embarrassed I was coming across as such

I really just consider all this a deflection