One bit wrong with this story

OK, internal migration in Bangladesh. Poor rurals moving into urban slums. ETc, etc.

The thing wrong?

…climate change is fuelling a migration crisis …the effects of climate change. ….Each year, millions of Bangladeshis are being forced to migrate from their rural homelands to cities because of climate change related issues

Well, no, not really. Cyclones displace people, storm surges salinate land, sure. But cyclones are hardly new in Bengal, nor storm surges. There is vast population pressure on the land – can you imagine how crowded a Malthusian economy will get when you can crop rice 3 and sometimes even 4 times a year? One slight falter, let alone a misstep, and yes, internal migration as opposed to starvation.

But climate change? Jeebus, the place is one vast river delta. Land loss etc is just part and parcel of the basic geography. As is a few more billion tonnes of soil coming downstream every year.

I’m even willing to agree that the place will do badly out of climate change. But I would insist that to measure the cc effect you’ve got to subtract what would be happening anyway. Which no one ever does….

14 comments on “One bit wrong with this story

  1. In the nearly 50 years since the Bangladesh crisis of the early 70s what have the useless lazy corrupt bastards done to master the sea Dutch style?

    Answer: Fuckall–God knows how many are killed by storms etc every year.

    Using the methods of the ancient Egyptians –the power of their backs and picks/shovels /baskets of Earth they could have constructed a massive set of sea defences and land reclaimations by now. The land is rich delta soil washed down to the lazy useless bastards. The Dutch had only windmills to help and those hand-made . With no other technology than say metal flatpack windmills the Banger crew could have bettered Dutch results. Of course the entire gambit of modern tools is there to help them plus aid—which their boss class has stolen and spent–all things Holland had none of.

    In short the last 50 years in Bangla have been spent with the lower class sticking it in and wiggling it about to bring on ever greater numbers they can barely feed while the boss class whine and steal what help is sent as a result of the whining. They even have foreign whining sections at work on their behalf as the shite Tele article shows.

    Fuck the lot of them.

  2. Obviously there is climate change and there is Climate Change.

    I often spot examples like this and I always wonder if the journalist understand this and is being propagandistic, or if they don’t and are just ignorant.

    And I say that as someone who thinks that there is man-made Climate Change, although I question how much we really understand about it.

  3. Actually, Bangladesh has done bloody well. Cyclones used to kill hundreds of thousands. Today, the same intensity kills hundreds. Three orders of magnitude reduction is pretty damn good.

  4. Hundreds die in floods every year Tim. The hundreds of thousands had their numbers boosted by big individual events such as the early 70s disaster. I don’t think vast numbers happen every year as they seem to still have enough sense to move higher if warned. Their early warning may have improved. Mega mass deaths arise when snap events overtake warnings. One of the reasons they are trying to steal the –dry–Arrakan province of Burma. .

    So what? Where would the Dutch be if their centuries of patient work had been replaced by better early warnings?

  5. On reading I initially thought you were going to point out the causation fallacy. It’s actually that urban migration causes climate change, not the other way around. More people living in urban areas with an urban lifestyle is more carbon-intense than living on the land, and even if you ignore carbon’s effect on the climate, urban climate islands are a known and provable fact.

  6. I often spot examples like this and I always wonder if the journalist understand this and is being propagandistic, or if they don’t and are just ignorant.

    Most of the time it is both.

    Most journalists have little to no grasp of the subject at hand (after, what they studied was journalism… not economics or biology or finance or physics or engineering, etc.) and of them, nearly all biased to a fault. Because they were trained to be biased to a fault. The Big Three journalism schools in the States are Columbia, Syracuse and Northwestern. You can bet they are NOT graduating hordes of Republicans. If “Climate Change” had emerged as a Republican concern rather than a Democratic one, no one in the mainstream media would give a flying handshake about it.

    And their knowledge of science? Mostly limited to “Hey, this sciencey guy from such and such university developed a computer model that shows we’re all gonna die from it getting hot!”

  7. “Obviously there is climate change and there is Climate Change.”

    “first define your terms”

    Define ‘climate change.’ Or ‘Climate Change.’

    Simple. But impossible.

  8. “JuliaM
    May 17, 2019 at 3:05 pm
    ….
    HERETIC!

    Use the new terminology! It’s a ‘Climate Emergency’! ”

    Oh, do keep up. It’s Climate Breakdown this week.

  9. Ecks: “Where would the Dutch be if their centuries of patient work had been replaced by better early warnings?”

    About the same, given that most of our flooding danger actually doesn’t come from the sea, but from Germany and Austria.
    Dutch water management is a wee bit more compicated than “the sea is rising”

    Which it would do locally anyway, given that we’re still in the downslope of a lovely little tectonic wave that is a result of the aftermath of several gazillion tons of ice resting on Scandinavia during the last cold snap, and “suddenly” disappearing. All without any help from any Anthropic Influence.

  10. “Jeebus, the place is one vast river delta. Land loss etc is just part and parcel of the basic geography. As is a few more billion tonnes of soil coming downstream every year.”

    I’m impressed! It’s amazing the number of environment correspondents who are seemingly unaware of how river deltas work. I thought it was first-year geography and obvious, but given the number of even supposed ‘experts’ who witter on about sea level rise and low-lying cities, it seems it’s a far more obscure bit of science nowadays than one would expect.

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/7532949.stm

    The Dutch problem is that they *stopped* their cities from constantly flooding, with flood protection, and so had to find engineering solutions to substitute for the river deposition.

  11. When Bangladesh seceded fropm Pakistan the two had 70 mllion inhabitants between then. Bangladesh has more than doubled its population in less than 50 years: it now has 168 million (and Pakistan has 204 million).
    So the floods have not done much to wipe out the population – in fact the rural population has *increased*. Kolkata has increaed its population but not by 120 million people
    Some twits do not actually look at the facts!

  12. @ john 77
    Dhaka instead of Kolkata – so what
    According to Wikipedia Bangladesh is only 37% urbanised, less than half as much as the UK, so the rural population has doubled since it broke with Pakistan – anyone who says that climate changhe is the reason why people are moving out of the countryside into the cities is a liar.

  13. @ NiV
    So turning the Zuider Zee into the Ijsel Meer was due to flood protection in Rotterdam?
    That’s a new theory – will you publish a thesis on it?.

Leave a Reply

Name and email are required. Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.