Thread: Real bushfire death toll was 445

Originally Posted by DiscoMick

Actually it was on every news site and TV broadcast I checked. Why don't you just face reality?
Excess deaths above normal is a very common method of identifying the impact of an unusual event. Its the way the real impact of C-19 is being assessed.

I reject your reality and substitute my own

edit, after doing a search on the ABC news site I did find it, but it certainly wasn't prominent.

Regards,
Tote

Originally Posted by Tote

Nope, not a left wing conspiracy, but I do note that the Guardian is the only outlet I've seen publicizing the theoretical death number. The bushfire enquiry is absolutely necessary but will achieve little if the only outcome from it is that "global warming caused the bushfires and we're all doomed". I'm sure, however that it will deliver sensible recommendations that can be acted on but the point that I was making is that the professor in question was getting publicity to push her particular viewpoint that the bushfire smoke is highly toxic and will be the end of us all. If this viewpoint was adopted I can see the day that there would be a law prohibiting sitting around campfires as this is clearly exposing oneself to a highly toxic carcinogen and the public "must be protected"

Similar statements are trotted out in the media on a daily basis with regard to corona virus, mostly due to the expert's depth of involvement with the subject matter at hand making them unable to make a risk based assessment of the likelihood of harm actually occurring. A similar theme is expressed by DR John Crozier on road death and injury every time he is put in front of a camera, but that's another thread

Regards,
Tote

I saw that information in several news sources.

On some of them, there was an explanation about how they arrived at the figure they did. They didn't just pluck numbers out of the air.

They have evidence from the past that when pollution levels reach a certain figure, there are so many deaths.

While they haven't yet collected the data to identify individuals who died from the bushfire related pollution this year, they do have data for the level of pollution.

They know the number of deaths caused by specific levels of pollution from historical data. So it seems reasonable that the same level of pollution during the fires would cause a similar number of deaths.

Do you have a problem with experts estimating the number of deaths based on data from previous instances of high levels of pollution?

EDIT I think their numbers might also be supported by the excess deaths during that period.