Professor Norman Myers, the original man behind the prediction that there would be 50 million climate refugees by 2010 takes a bit of a battering, (as he does here) including from a fellow academic at the University of Oxford.
One of the interesting responses to the interview comes from Hannah Smith, refugee project manager for the Climate Outreach and Information Network:
There is an urgent need to move beyond ‘numbers’ in this debate. Rather the debate needs to concentrate on how we protect vulnerable migrants. A person is vulnerable and has protection and assistance needs not because there are 10 million other people like them, but because of their individual situation.
Now in what other business, other than the climate change industry, would you not care about the number of people you need to service? I guess if your job depends on the existence of climate refugees, and you couldn’t actually find any, then there would be an urgent need to ignore that reality, but I digress…
The fair point is made that population increase is not really an indicator of numbers of climate refugees, but it strikes me that’s all we can go on while there is no other data. It also looks like at least some kind of indicator on small islands that were supposed to be most susceptible.
Since we know that there are 2000-2800 mature corroboree tree frogs in Kosciusko National Park and 40-80 adult Javan rhinoceroses left in the world, how is it that we don’t know the number of human climate refugees?
How hard would it be, for example, to check the records of refugees entering Australia or Canada to find out how many were fleeing because of crop failures or for other climate-related reasons?
Not that hard, I would wager, but can the climate change industry handle the truth?