I have read it, Bill. Your continued assumption that i have not is unwarranted and insulting. Of course, that may be your intent.
The author and i do not agree that disasters are getting worse. The author thinks so, and adduces the evidence of an epidemiological center. I disagree, for the reasons i have stated.
Given events of the scale of the explosion of Thera, or of Tambora, talk of populations "migrating" to dangerous areas is really irrelevant. If there is reason to be concerned, it will because of massive vulcanism--either many events as was the case in 1812-17, or huge individual events like Thera or Tambora. If any thought should be given to measures, it should be given to events which can alter the environment drastically. It is good to have a sufficient supply of emergency goods for a disaster such as Katrina or the Boxing Day tsnami, but it will be more important to have stockpiled food stuffs in massive quantities such as no one is currently looking at.
I consider the article to be falsely alleging that disasters are getting worse (i see no evidence of that, and none that the author has provided), and i see it as an irrelevance in the face of the kind of disaster which may overtake us. Last year, when it was feared that there were insufficient grain and rice to feed the world, an event like Tambora could have killed millions, tens of millions, in the years immediately succeeding, and seriously destabilized the world. And this joker is writing an article to the effect that disasters are getting worse.
He ain't seen nothing yet.