Natural Disasters: Increasing or Decreasing?

[TinfoilCat]

Last Sunday I had a little chat with my Bible teacher about the End Times prophecy. She claimed that MANY of the so called biblical scholars agree that our generation shall see the biblical apocalypse. I disagreed with her. She said that the prophecies of Daniel and Revelations were coming true at rapid rates. I disagreed with her. I'm not a futurist fear-monger, and believe that the book of Revelation is mostly symbolical. She said that natural disasters are increasing at rapid rates, but I questioned that statement when I remembered a scientist saying that natural disasters were in fact, decreasing. Is their any evidence to support either of our claims? It seems as if natural disasters are increasing, but that maybe the cause of larger populations living in natural disaster prone areas or the spread of the word by media.

Thanks,
TinfoilCat

[Soapy Sam]

You have it in one.
More people, more reporters, fewer areas where anything can happen that doesn't kill somebody.
Sure the biblical prophecies are coming true. They are always coming true.

But the world hasn't ended yet.

Even if it does- or at least the human world does- let's say 99% of all known people die tomorrow- how would this in any way actually matter? (Apart from being a bloody nuisance).

[alfaniner]

I recall a headline I saw on one of those tabloid newspapers while waiting in the grocery line to check out:

WHY THE WEATHER'S GONE CRAZY!!

This was at least 20 years ago. Every so often since then I have been reminded that that headline could be printed nearly every single day and still be true.

[Safe-Keeper]

Global Warming ≠ Doomsday

[Jon.]

I was sure I'd seen a thread discussing this recently, either here or at the snopes.com message board, but now I can't find it. IIRC, the crux of it was that weather-related disasters seem to have increased in the last 20 years, both in number and in severity, while other kinds of natural disasters (earthquakes, volcanoes, etc.) had not increased in either number or (population-adjusted) severity. This info came from a reputable source, but now I can't find it and my google-fu isn't good enough to help.

[Kthulhut Fhtagn]

I remember reading an article the other day that said that natural disasters only appears as if its increasing because we only consider violent weather a natural disaster if it affects people and therefore there are more people so it seems as if there are more natural disasters. But infact there are fewer and are also less violent when compared to the flooding in China that may have killed millions in the early 1900's.

[Maus]

I think a lot depends on what you consider a natural disaster. Planet formation? Continental drift? The Ice Age? The dinosaur wipeout? The Biblical great flood? Pompii? A tornado that tears up a storage shed?

I don't think on a historically global scale that there would be a less tumultuous time than now.

-Maus

[TinfoilCat]

Quote:

...snip...
The average annual percentage of the global population killed by natural disasters decreased 10-fold from the period 1964 to 1968 compared with the period 2000 through 2004, from 0.01 percent (roughly one killed for every 10,000 people) to 0.001 percent (one in 100,000) respectively. At the same time, the average annual number of recorded disasters increased five-fold between 1964 through 1968 (64 per year) and 2000 through 2004 (332 per year). The events that continue to result in the major number of fatalities are the relatively small percentage of events that occur with large recurrence intervals, such as massive floods, strong earthquakes and direct strikes from intense hurricanes, or events that are unusual in the area in which they occur.
...snip...

I found this article at http://www.geotimes.org/oct07/articl...democracy.html

It states "recorded disasters", does this mean that natural disasters actually increased that much, or that our technology became more advanced so we could track down more disasters?

Quote:

I think a lot depends on what you consider a natural disaster. Planet formation? Continental drift? The Ice Age? The dinosaur wipeout? The Biblical great flood? Pompii? A tornado that tears up a storage shed?

I don't think on a historically global scale that there would be a less tumultuous time than now.

-Maus

Any natural disaster that does not include any man made catastrophe.

[Nogbad]

As a kid I recall my Gran blaming bad weather on Sputnik.

The fact is the World population has increased considerably over the last 100 years. We have built on flood plains and population density in cities has risen dramatically. There are simply more people to suffer during a drought, earthquake, hurricane etc., In the past if such a thing hit a sparsely populated area it barely got reported. Now we have minute by minute TV reporting of a storm's every gust.

[six7s]

Christ said that some of his contemporaries would see teh end of teh whirled

Instead of trusting your bible teacher, find a >1900-year-old and ask them

[TinfoilCat]

Quote:

Christ said that some of his contemporaries would see teh end of teh whirled

Many Christians believe he was referring to his spirit, not his actual physical return, but I rather prefer to stick to the topic.

[six7s]

Originally Posted by TinfoilCat

...I rather prefer to stick to the topic.

What facets of the topic have yet to be addressed?

[RobRoy]

If it helps your teacher, this site offers a Rapture INdex and an Armageddon Clock.

I dated an evangelical girl back in the mid-90s. Her entire church was convinced that the End Times would occur before the year 2000. We broke up before 1995, so I have no idea if she and her church are still on the planet or have been lifted bodily to heaven. <shrug>

ETA: Crime indexes have also shown a general downtrend overall, which the expected ebbs and flows. This is the FBI Violent Crime Report.

[Hokulele]

Well, you can see how well apocalyptic predictions have done in the past...

http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Oracle/9941/index.html

[six7s]

Originally Posted by Hokulele

Well, you can see how well apocalyptic predictions have done in the past...

http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Oracle/9941/index.html

Thanks for the link... Bookmarked!

I'll read it later... assuming there is a later

[TinfoilCat]

Quote:

What facets of the topic have yet to be addressed?

I admit, all of them have been addressed, but there are so many different answers.

Quote:

If it helps your teacher, this site offers a Rapture INdex and an Armageddon Clock.

No can do. She believes that no one can predict the actual time or date, but we can know when its approaching... but the thing is, I doubt its approaching.

Quote:

Well, you can see how well apocalyptic predictions have done in the past...

http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Oracle/9941/index.html

Are we dead yet?

[Hokulele]

My favorite bit from that site is the section concerning the Black Plague as an End Time herald.

Originally Posted by Exorcising Poor Last Judgement

1346 CE - The Black Death was spreading across Europe, decimating the population by a daunting 1/3rd. In keeping with the spirit of the times, a new religious movement appeared on the scene: The Flagellants. Today they might be labeled as S&M street theatre, but back then they were seen as your friendly neighborhood soul cleaners, who'd whack themselves up a storm with iron-spiked whips to absolve people - even whole communities - of their sins. Certain that the End Times were upon them, the Flagellants not only happily beat themselves to bloody pulps, but also called for such charming group activities as killing all the Jews in Europe in the name of the Merciful, Just and All-Loving God. (already a major team sport in many places, thanks to the Church) After a few really good massacres, though, they started getting full of themselves and began calling for similar acts of violence against priests and the rich. No longer amused, (and noticing that the End just wasn't a happenin' thing) the Church quickly put the kibosh on the movement and dubbed them all a bunch of weenie little heretic nasties.

1347 CE - The Black Plague continued to roar through Europe like a freight train, mowing down millions and causing apocalyptic prophesies to fly thick and fast. As the Bubonic virus infected people's bodies, so the End Times virus infected their minds. 1347 they believed, would surely be the end of everything.

1348 CE - Unless, of course, this year was to be the end of everything.

1360 CE - No, wait! Make that this year.

1365 CE - Pardon me, my mistake, I meant this year...

1370 CE - No, sorry, sorry, this year...

1375 CE - Oops! My bad. It's this year...

1387 CE - Wait, wait! This year, definitely...

1396 CE - Or possibly, this year...

1400 CE - Or this...

1417 CE - Or this...

1418 CE - Or even, um... never mind...

[six7s]

Originally Posted by TinfoilCat

She believes that no one can predict the actual time or date

Please ask her why she believes this

Originally Posted by TinfoilCat

but we can know when its approaching...

In the unlikely event of her providing a concise and coherent answer (ie not simply some woo-affirming woo) to the first bit, please ask her how we can recognise/identify the signs of impending doom

Originally Posted by TinfoilCat

but the thing is, I doubt its approaching.

The sun is dying, as we live and breathe

Originally Posted by TinfoilCat

Are we dead yet?

Some of us are...

Many of us hardly qualify as ever being alive...

Me... I aim to be immortal. So far, so good

[Hokulele]

Here is another good bit on prophecy (specifically Revelation) in general.

Source: http://www.theotokos.org.uk/pages/appdisce/poulain.html

Originally Posted by article

At the beginning of the sixteenth century Italy experienced a regular epidemic of politico-religious prophecies. This effervescence began with those made by Savonarola in Florence. Religious and hermits swarmed over the country, and while commenting upon the Book of Revelation, they announced from the pulpit or in public places revolutions in the temporal and spiritual governments, to be followed by the end of the world. Peasants and young girls alike fell to prophesying. In the fifth Lateran Council, in 1516, Leo X was obliged to publish a Bull by which public prophecies by preachers were prohibited (Pastor, History of the Popes, edited by Fr. Antrobus, Vol. V, end of Introduction; also Mansi, Collection of Councils).

[six7s]

Originally Posted by H

Originally Posted by Exorcising Poor Last Judgement

1346 CE - The Black Death was spreading across Europe, decimating the population by a daunting 1/3rd

<pedant>

Quote:

decimation
1549, from L.L. decimationem, from L. decimare "the removal or destruction of one-tenth," from decem "ten." Killing one in ten, chosen by lots, from a rebellious city or a mutinous army was a common punishment in classical times. Earliest sense in Eng. was of a tithe; decimate has been used (incorrectly, to the irritation of pedants) since 1663 for "destroy a large portion of."

</pedant>

[Hokulele]

Pff. If you keep decimating every few days, you will eventually cut the population down to something close to 2/3.

[Wowbagger]

The climate is changing, perhaps in patterns different from the past, thanks to the influence of human activities. So, areas adapted to one set of climate parameters are facing a different set they are not used to, and unprepared for. That could lead to the appearance of "worsening weather".

But, you'll always have a hard time convincing religious folks that things change over time: climate, life forms, morality, etc. They like things to be definitive.

[TinfoilCat]

Quote:

Originally Posted by TinfoilCat View Post
She believes that no one can predict the actual time or date
Please ask her why she believes this

Originally Posted by TinfoilCat View Post
but we can know when its approaching...
In the unlikely event of her providing a concise and coherent answer (ie not simply some woo-affirming woo) to the first bit, please ask her how we can recognise/identify the signs of impending doom

There is a bible verse which states that no one but the Father shall no when the end is here.

Quote:

The sun is dying, as we live and breathe

I should have clarified what i meant . I meant that it isn't approaching any time soon for us. Even though I am a Christian, I do not believe its coming soon like many apocalyptic fear-mongers do.

[ksbluesfan]

Ask her to leave all of her worldly possessions to you. Better yet, leave them to me. If the end times are near, why bother leaving them to her family members?

[Kthulhut Fhtagn]

Originally Posted by TinfoilCat

I found this article at http://www.geotimes.org/oct07/articl...democracy.html

It states "recorded disasters", does this mean that natural disasters actually increased that much, or that our technology became more advanced so we could track down more disasters?

I suspect so. But don't take my opinion as gospel, ask someone who is an expert in the field.

[six7s]

Originally Posted by TinfoilCat

There is a bible verse which states that no one but the Father shall no when the end is here

So... I assume that anyone who has faith in the bible AND the skills to operate a decent telescope is convinced that our demise will not be a result of the sun going super-nova...

Of course, this assumes that there is someone who has faith in the bible AND the skills to operate a decent telescope

Originally Posted by TinfoilCat

Even though I am a Christian, I do not believe its coming soon

Why not? (Serious question)

[TinfoilCat]

Quote:

Why not? (Serious question)

Christianity has many different views of the apocalypse. It is NOT just a futurist view which means that the books of the bible are prophetic and are meant for the future (Usually applied to our/the current generation). I believe that the book of Revelation is symbolic which is meant to give hope for Christians under persecution. Many other believe that it is John of Patmos attempt to steer Christians away from worshiping the likes of Emperor Domitarian or Nero (according to either date) and to worship God. It is basically the New Testament version of Ezekiel. The symbols are derived from the Old Testament such as the mark of the beast, which is entirely symbolical. The mark of the forehead is symbolic to a close relationship with God, and the mark of the beast is symbolic to the succumb of man to Satan. I can ramble on and on of my belief of the prophecies of the bible and explain why I do not believe the end of the world is nigh, but i don't wish to bore you.

[six7s]

Originally Posted by TinfoilCat

I can ramble on and on of my belief of the prophecies of the bible and explain why I do not believe the end of the world is nigh, but i don't wish to bore you.

Not boring at all... instead, given your honest and open style, I find your posts fascinating

One tip/request:
Hit the ENTER key twice every three or four (or maybe five) lines... old rules re paragraphs come a distant second to visual comprehension

[joobz]

Increasing or Decreasing?

False dichotomy.
I think they are merely creasing.

[TinfoilCat]

Quote:

Not boring at all... instead, given your honest and open style, I find your posts fascinating

One tip/request:
Hit the ENTER key twice every three or four (or maybe five) lines... old rules re paragraphs come a distant second to visual comprehension

Sorry I didn't even notice how much I was actually writing. I was in a slight rush.

[leonAzul]

Originally Posted by TinfoilCat

Christianity has many different views of the apocalypse. It is NOT just a futurist view which means that the books of the bible are prophetic and are meant for the future (Usually applied to our/the current generation).

In a similar way, there is the view that prophecy is not so much divination of the future, but rather a dramatization of the consequences of current behavior.

As a literary form, an apocalypse is the symbolical, and often allegorical, representation of the end of one era and the beginning of the next. As such, it can serve as a template for the dynamics of any cataclysmic transformation. Over time, languages have changed and much of the meaning of the original symbolism has been lost, opening the door for more rigid and speculative interpretations.

As others have pointed out, it is only recently that we have been able to collect detailed information on a global scale to detect catastrophic events and determine just exactly what "normal" is.

[RobRoy]

Originally Posted by TinfoilCat

There is a bible verse which states that no one but the Father shall no when the end is here.

Common misconception. The quote you're looking for comes from Matthew 24:36 and Mark 13:32: "No one knows about that day or hour, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father." This is in regards to the time of the coming of the Lord.

For Armageddon and Rapture, immediately prior to this, in both Matt (24:32-33) and Mark (13:28-29), Jesus states, "Now learn this lesson from the fig tree: As soon as its twigs get tender and its leaves come out, you know that summer is near. Even so, when you see all these things, you know that it is near, right at the door." Which is why all the signs and portents are given, so that the Christians will know when their Lord is coming. They may not know the exact time, but like the coming of summer, they can guess when it's imminent.

So, the Rapture Index and the Armageddon Clock are not out of synch with the Bible and Jesus' teachings on the subjet.

Of course, Jesus also states that, "this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened." (Matt 32:34, Mark 13:30) The problems this causes, even though we can ret-con it to say that Jesus is speaking metaphorically, is that immediately prior, he was speaking literally. Including his little fig tree parallel, he meant that all the signs and whatnot are literal, and are meant to be taken that way.

Jesus' switching to a metaphorical "not pass away" is somewhat silly. But that's just my opinion. It's not a topic I want to debate. Just giving full disclosure on for the context of things.

[Beerina]

Originally Posted by TinfoilCat

I found this article at http://www.geotimes.org/oct07/articl...democracy.html

It states "recorded disasters", does this mean that natural disasters actually increased that much, or that our technology became more advanced so we could track down more disasters?

Modern communication and travel have made the Earth one tiny community. We see horrible things that happen around the world, and, the bigger the exposure (land area, population) the more things that go wrong on a regular, statistical basis will be brought to our attention in the news.

That things could seem worse because of this is hardly something new. This is why you need some kind of accurate recording for decades, if not centuries, to even dream of making some kind of statistically valid observation as to rates of change. That's also required to get around cherry-picking start and endpoints in a much longer graph.

There was a ludicrous exchange in another thread that pointed out how the stock market was down since the Republicans took charge of office. Shift the endpoints a few years, and they look like they're doing well. (Specifically, I believe the poster goofed and started at Jan. 1996, which was an election year, and not Jan. 1997, when the Republicans actually went into office. Or something along those lines.)

A 1 year shift, bam, completely different picture. So much for this kind of stat being a reliable buttress to the emotion of certitude.

[MG1962]

Originally Posted by six7s

So... I assume that anyone who has faith in the bible AND the skills to operate a decent telescope is convinced that our demise will not be a result of the sun going super-nova...

Of course, this assumes that there is someone who has faith in the bible AND the skills to operate a decent telescope

Why not? (Serious question)

Open mouth - insert foot

http://clavius.as.arizona.edu/vo/R1024/VO.html

[TinfoilCat]

Quote:

Of course, Jesus also states that, "this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened." (Matt 32:34, Mark 13:30) The problems this causes, even though we can ret-con it to say that Jesus is speaking metaphorically, is that immediately prior, he was speaking literally. Including his little fig tree parallel, he meant that all the signs and whatnot are literal, and are meant to be taken that way.

Jesus' switching to a metaphorical "not pass away" is somewhat silly. But that's just my opinion. It's not a topic I want to debate. Just giving full disclosure on for the context of things.

So what exactly is your opinion on this matter? Do you think Jesus was lieing or wrong? (Just honestly curious because I have never heard of this opinion before)


Does anyone actually have any link to any charts or graphs showing the amount of natural disasters (earthquakes, hurricanes, etc.) in the past years?

I have managed to find a earthquake data graph, but it is severely outdated on badastronomy.

[Hokulele]

Originally Posted by TinfoilCat

Does anyone actually have any link to any charts or graphs showing the amount of natural disasters (earthquakes, hurricanes, etc.) in the past years?

I have managed to find a earthquake data graph, but it is severely outdated on badastronomy.

How far back? Once you start trying to find data more than a century old, you have the reporting problems that have been mentioned in this thread. A decent source for global earthquake data can be found here.

When sorting through this data, make sure you are using some kind of apples to apples comparison method (such as magnitude). So for example, you could search for earthquakes exceeding magnitude 7, rather than searching for a list of all earthquakes.

ETA: This list is interesting.

Since the earth hasn't sprouted any new rift zones recently, I would be surprised if the average per century is changing for the worse.

[six7s]

Originally Posted by MG1962

Open mouth - insert foot

http://clavius.as.arizona.edu/vo/R1024/VO.html

It seems that you are assuming that the Vatican astronomers have faith in the bible. If so, why?

[six7s]

Originally Posted by TinfoilCat

Do you think Jesus was lieing or wrong? (Just honestly curious because I have never heard of this opinion before)

I know you weren't asking me... but what the hey?

I can't accuse him of lying, simply because I see no reason to accept that the gospels represent an accurate record of what (if anything) was said by/happened to him

[six7s]

Originally Posted by Hokulele

Since the earth hasn't sprouted any new rift zones recently, I would be surprised if the average per century is changing for the worse.

Worse? From an anthropocentric perspective?

[Hokulele]

Originally Posted by six7s

Worse? From an anthropocentric perspective?

True, I should have said that the average per century of numbers of earthquakes with a large magnitude increasing is unlikely. That comment was meant to be a follow on from the previous paragraphs, not a comment on the second link.

Must drink more tea.