The Naked Scientists

The Naked Scientists Forum

Author Topic: Can we do more to avoid natural disasters?  (Read 5655 times)

Paul Anderson

  • Guest
Can we do more to avoid natural disasters?
« on: 09/06/2010 00:30:06 »
Paul Anderson  asked the Naked Scientists:
   
Hi Chris and team,

Every time there is a natural disaster around the world the affected folk have to turn to the rest of the world to help out. I am not opposed to that, but wouldn't it be better for the UN to do things to lessen these events?

In Padang it looks as if a lot of the deaths were caused by slips.
With the world's ability to search for oil, I would have thought it should be possible to produce world maps showing the environment (soil types, proximity of rivers, etc) with the human population superimposed upon it. Then an assessment made of the likelihood of future dangers and ways these dangers can be mitigated. Pressure should be put upon governments to undertake remedial action, supported by the rest of the world from the world's knowledge pool and mechanical resources.

I was told that kikuyu grass was imported into NZ from South Africa (even though it is called kikuyu grass which I thought might have implied that it came from further north)  to stabilise the sand dunes up north.

I have also seen rods which have been put into banks to help stabilise them.

I know that deforestation has been a problem upstream from Bangladesh. Mass tree, schrub and grass planting should be implemented using the unemployed. If the trees are also fruit trees, then that is an additional benefit.

Someone is now going to say, "but we cannot get governments to cooperate".

My argument is that we should be proactive rather than reactive to all the disasters that strike around the world.

Every time there is a disaster, go there and assess what has survived and why. Was it the building material, was it the building structure?

The American Republican attitude (and probably those of other right wing political parties) is probably that people should have the least government interference, but the profit motive of the rich only keeps the rich rich and does not benefit the rest of us.
 
Regards
Paul
NZ

What do you think?
« Last Edit: 09/06/2010 00:30:06 by _system »


 

Offline norcalclimber

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 255
    • View Profile
Can we do more to avoid natural disasters?
« Reply #1 on: 09/06/2010 16:50:50 »
When you say natural disasters, I think of hurricanes, earthquakes, flooding, etc.  I don't see how those things you suggest will in any way avoid any of those natural disasters.  Other than one thing, flooding...which could be avoided more if we just didn't build entire cities underwater.  I don't see any natural disasters which could be avoided by your suggestions which fall into the category of those which require massive amounts of money/aid from around the world.  Perhaps I am just not educated well enough on the subject, so if anyone can explain to me where I am wrong, please do.
 

Offline norcalclimber

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 255
    • View Profile
Can we do more to avoid natural disasters?
« Reply #2 on: 09/06/2010 16:57:40 »

The American Republican attitude (and probably those of other right wing political parties) is probably that people should have the least government interference, but the profit motive of the rich only keeps the rich rich and does not benefit the rest of us.
 
Regards
Paul
NZ

What do you think?

Also, American Republicans/conservatives give a far higher percentage of their income to charity than does the left wing.  So the argument that they are purely profit based in their attitudes is not supportable.
 

Offline samaste.march

  • First timers
  • *
  • Posts: 4
    • View Profile
Can we do more to avoid natural disasters?
« Reply #3 on: 18/06/2010 07:11:44 »
Natural disasters means it is a hurricanes, earthquakes, flooding. Any disasters is not depended to nature. Like earthquake is not depend to any nature it will attack when their is no balance between plats of earth, so can't easy to avoid disasters that is natural.
 

Offline peppercorn

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1466
    • View Profile
    • solar
Can we do more to avoid natural disasters?
« Reply #4 on: 18/06/2010 11:07:28 »
Also, American Republicans/conservatives give a far higher percentage of their income to charity than does the left wing.  So the argument that they are purely profit based in their attitudes is not supportable.
Have you got any statistical evidence of this?  Also, what 'charities' are they predominantly giving to?  For instance, raising money for continuing cancer research is admirable, but it's not going make a great deal of difference to the majority of the population of sub-Saharan Africa.
 

Offline norcalclimber

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 255
    • View Profile
Can we do more to avoid natural disasters?
« Reply #5 on: 18/06/2010 19:56:18 »
Also, American Republicans/conservatives give a far higher percentage of their income to charity than does the left wing.  So the argument that they are purely profit based in their attitudes is not supportable.
Have you got any statistical evidence of this?  Also, what 'charities' are they predominantly giving to?  For instance, raising money for continuing cancer research is admirable, but it's not going make a great deal of difference to the majority of the population of sub-Saharan Africa.

Here is one of many articles written on the subject which dispels many of the myths.
http://abcnews.go.com/2020/story?id=2682730&page=1
 

Offline peppercorn

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1466
    • View Profile
    • solar
Can we do more to avoid natural disasters?
« Reply #6 on: 18/06/2010 20:56:59 »
And here is one of the many rebuttals of the spurious author who's core to that particular article...

http://stevereuland.blogspot.com/2006/11/who-really-cares-about-arthur-brooks.html
 

Offline norcalclimber

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 255
    • View Profile
Can we do more to avoid natural disasters?
« Reply #7 on: 22/06/2010 16:54:13 »
And here is one of the many rebuttals of the spurious author who's core to that particular article...

http://stevereuland.blogspot.com/2006/11/who-really-cares-about-arthur-brooks.html

Not a very good rebuttal though, especially since he claims the numbers are wrong, but doesn't back it up.  But this is a science forum not a political one, so if you want to continue to believe that republicans are evil and only care about profit....your loss.
 

Offline peppercorn

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1466
    • View Profile
    • solar
Can we do more to avoid natural disasters?
« Reply #8 on: 22/06/2010 17:32:36 »
Not a very good rebuttal though, especially since he claims the numbers are wrong, but doesn't back it up.  But this is a science forum not a political one, so if you want to continue to believe that republicans are evil and only care about profit....your loss.
And where did I say anything of the sort (about the morality of Republican voters)?
Your the one that began by making comparisons between the Reps & Democrats, not I. The OP (Paul Anderson) was perhaps incorrect to make partisan statements about this, but even so I took his viewpoint to be related to government-level attributes, not necessarily every individual who voted that way.

I simply took exception to your weakly constructed argument to the contrary, especially once I discovered that it was based on data that appears to only take the sets that fit his argument.

I believe it is up to you to show how his conclusions fit the majority of the cases in the General Social Survey as the proposer of this argument, not the other way round.
« Last Edit: 22/06/2010 17:49:09 by peppercorn »
 

The Naked Scientists Forum

Can we do more to avoid natural disasters?
« Reply #8 on: 22/06/2010 17:32:36 »

 

SMF 2.0.10 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines
SMFAds for Free Forums