Six Charts Put Climate Alarmism into Perspective

For more than two decades the public has been told that "the science is settled." Yet public scepticism has not disappeared. If anything, it has grown as predictions, policies and real-world experience have often failed to align.

A recent article on Watts Up With That? authored by Ramesh Thakur (Emeritus Professor, Australian National University, and former UN Assistant Secretary-General) attempts to explain why many people remain unconvinced by the dominant climate narrative. Rather than focusing on complex climate models, it presents six simple charts that illustrate why many ordinary people question claims of an unfolding climate catastrophe.

Figure 1: Dengue fever infections – global vs. regional

The BBC linked a dengue outbreak in Sri Lanka to rising global temperatures and mosquito range expansion, citing a surge from ~500,000 cases in 2000 to 14.4 million in 2024. Thakur notes that global *infections* (not just reported cases) rose from low levels around 2000 to ~37.5 million by 2023, but the sharp upward slope closely tracks the rise in Latin America and the Caribbean (from ~2 million to ~27.5 million). Asia’s increase has been far less dramatic.

Commentary

A global temperature rise does not automatically explain a regionally concentrated infection surge. Local factors (urbanisation, water storage, control measures, reporting changes) matter more than a uniform “climate change” driver.

Figure 2: Pakistan flood deaths – raw numbers vs. share of population

Media reports on Pakistan’s floods often emphasise climate worsening without long-term context or population growth. Raw flood-related deaths have risen since the 1950s, but when expressed as a share of total population the trend reverses (declining risk per person).

Commentary 

Growing populations and settlement in flood plains increase absolute exposure. Better infrastructure and economic development (which still relies heavily on affordable energy) reduce vulnerability more effectively than focusing solely on emissions.

Figure 3: Australia flood deaths relative to population

In Australia’s flood-prone regions, media coverage routinely frames events as evidence of a climate emergency. Proportionate deaths (relative to total population) have been lower in the four decades since the 1980s than in the preceding four decades.

Commentary 

Improved warning systems, building standards, and emergency management have reduced the human toll even as absolute events continue. Perspective is lost when every flood is treated as unprecedented.

Figures 4 & 5: Wildfire deaths/damage and area burnt (Australia & Canada)

Bushfires are common in Australia and Canada; recent European and North American fires are also framed as climate-driven. Historical context includes massive pre-industrial fires (e.g., the 1871 Peshtigo fire and others that killed thousands and burned millions of acres). Decadal averages of annual death rates and economic damage since the 19th century, plus area burnt so far this century, show trends that are “more reassuring than alarming.”

Commentary 

Fire weather, fuel loads, land management, and ignition sources all matter. Long records and pre-industrial extremes undercut claims that current fires are uniquely climate-driven or existential.

Figure 6: Extreme-weather mortality – cold vs. heat

Alarmist focus centres on heat-related risks while downplaying the much larger historical burden of cold-related deaths. Global data show a substantially greater reduction in extreme-weather mortality from very cold temperatures than from heat, alongside broader gains in food security (partly from CO₂ fertilisation/greening) and reduced vulnerability through development.

Commentary 

Cold has historically killed far more people than heat. Rising adaptive capacity and energy access have driven large net reductions in weather-related deaths overall.

Broader conclusion

Thakur argues that Net Zero policies are environmentally marginal at global scale, physically unrealistic, economically costly, and largely performative. They allow politicians to shift blame for inadequate disaster preparedness onto an all-purpose “climate emergency.” The more practical path, in his view, is resilient infrastructure and economic growth that reduce vulnerability to the natural disasters that have always existed.

The charts collectively emphasise context—population growth, regional differences, long historical records, and adaptation—over decontextualised event reporting. Readers can consult the original article and its linked data sources (especially Our World in Data) for the precise figures and full visualisations.