• Hi Guest - Come check out all of the new CP Merch Shop! Now you can support CigarPass buy purchasing hats, apparel, and more...
    Click here to visit! here...

Spatial patterns of natural hazards mortality in the United States

DesertRat

Perpetual Newbie
Joined
Jun 19, 2008
Messages
959
For those of you who like statistics.

'Death Map' Geographers Compare Natural Event Fatalities by County
December 22, 2008

University of South Carolina geographers have produced a map of natural-hazard mortality in the United States.

The map, featured in the Dec. 17 issue of the International Journal of Health Geographics, gives a county-level representation of the likelihood of dying as the result of natural events such as floods, earthquakes or extreme weather.

Dr. Susan Cutter, a Carolina Distinguished Professor of Geography, and Kevin Borden, a doctoral candidate in geography, used nationwide data dating back to 1970 to create the map.

Cutter said the map will be a valuable planning and policy tool.

"This work will enable research and emergency-management practitioners to examine hazard deaths through a geographic lens," said Cutter, one of the nation's leading authorities in the field of hazards and vulnerability research. "Using this as a tool to identify areas with higher-than-average deaths can justify allocation of resources to these areas with the goal of reducing loss of life."

Hazard mortality is most prominent in the South, where most people are killed by severe weather, such as tornadoes. Other areas identified as having elevated risks include the northern Great Plains Region, where heat and drought are the biggest killers, and in the mountainous areas of the West, where deaths are attributed to winter weather and flooding. The greatest threats to the south central United States are floods and tornadoes.

Heat/drought ranked highest among the hazard categories, causing 19.6 percent of total deaths, closely followed by severe summer weather (18.8 percent) and winter weather (18.1 percent). Geophysical events such as earthquakes, wildfires and hurricanes were responsible for less than 5 percent of total hazard deaths combined.

"What is noteworthy is that over time, highly destructive, highly publicized, often catastrophic singular events such as hurricanes and earthquakes are responsible for relatively few deaths when compared to the more frequent, less catastrophic events such as heat waves and severe weather (summer and winter)," Cutter said.

While the researchers said these findings may not be entirely surprising, they provide a valuable blueprint for identifying hazard mortality "hot spots" that merit in-depth study so that emergency-management officials can make plans to reduce the number of future deaths.

Cutter and Borden's article and map can be accessed at: Clicking here will open a PDF file

Source:
University of South Carolina Department of Geography
and Newswise
 
I guess nobody here is into statistics :laugh:
I am, but you don't want my opinion of that article, or the source article. But ... in a nutshell:

<snip>While the researchers said these findings may not be entirely surprising,
No kidding!
they provide a valuable blueprint for identifying hazard mortality "hot spots" that merit in-depth study so that emergency-management officials can make plans to reduce the number of future deaths.
Except they don't have the mortality data to do that. To get the map they faked the data. It is okay, though - they say so in their journal article. That's why it is a "blueprint."

However, it doesn't matter that their data is BS, they also fail at stats. Somebody needs to send them this paper: Robinson, W.S. (1950). "Ecological Correlations and the Behavior of Individuals". American Sociological Review 15: 351–357 (That's right, 1950, and published in a pseudo-science journal). I'd have to devote myself to reading their article again, but I think they not only commit an ecological fallacy, they commit the reverse fallacy as well. (Quick explanation: ecological fallacy is trying to determine the batting average of an individual by looking at only the team's batting average. The reverse fallacy - hasty generalization - is looking at an individual's batting average and saying that average is the team's batting average. ... and I'm not that good - I saw the analogy on Wikipedia.)

The map sure looks pretty and gets a catchy title, though!
 
If I'm reading the map correctly.......












OMG I'm Gonna DIE!!!!!!



I never was very good at sadistics
 
If I'm reading the map correctly.......












OMG I'm Gonna DIE!!!!!!



I never was very good at sadistics


What it all boils down to is: We're all going to die, it's just a matter of when and how.

Didn't even need to study for that one! :)
 
sTestically speaking........Nuts!!

Tim

I like the pretty colors
 
What I've learned about statistic in science is you can make them say whatever you want them to.
 
20+ years since my stats class. I sat behind a hot chick, that's about as far as my memory takes me on statistics.
 
Top