Climate Change skeptics? [ot]


Discussion Topic

Return to Forum List
This thread has been locked
Messages 13981 - 14000 of total 21618 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>

Mountain climber
honeoye falls,ny.greeneck alleghenys
Feb 11, 2014 - 06:07pm PT

Gym climber
Feb 11, 2014 - 07:10pm PT

But taking the overview, I'd say that a 156 calculation of the climate is in amazingly good agreement with observations, and not just in the one variable "temperature anomaly" but in the myriad of other variables that the models calculate and can be compared with the data.
Yes Ed, we're all really impressed with you and your fellow "scientists" ability to come up with a "model" that gives "amazingly good" results in "predicting" things that have already happened. (I think "hindcasting" is the technical term.)
People were amazed at Bernie Madoff's investing skills too.

You've got to make some non-trival predictions of things that haven't actually happened yet before anyone who isn't a part of your insular little world will start clapping.

Mountain climber
honeoye falls,ny.greeneck alleghenys
Feb 11, 2014 - 07:14pm PT
"There is no such thing as bad snow,only bad skiers".....Paul Parker.

And one other thing,Fort and Cragar commented yesterday about the thin conditions I was skiing in.
I do not have any choice,we have less than 2 foot of snow ,pretty much statewide.
It all came in a dump this past week,the BC conditions before that ,were less than 6 inchs for most of the month of January.
There were two events early in the winter,2 thaws took that away.

We here used to talk about the BC conditions in feet,now we talk about inches.

Just letting you know.

Mountain climber
Anchorage AK, Reno NV
Feb 11, 2014 - 07:24pm PT
Hmm well the skiing here was a mixed bag. If you found the shaded spots you got several turns of very nice 8 inch heavy pow hero snow.

Where the sun was hitting you got a crappy sun crust workout.

All in all not a bad second day out for such a lousy season.

Gym climber
Feb 11, 2014 - 08:39pm PT
Bruce, hindcasting is (I imagine) a necessary but not sufficient part of the modelling process. That is, if you can't even hindcast, you know your model is fubar, but if it can, it still may be fubar. But all I really know about modelling is what I learned form Ed's YouTube reference of last week, which didn't really get into hindcasting, so I may be a little off on this.

More importantly, here is a question: imagine all humans (and their machines/devices) were instantly removed from the Earth, rapture style.
Do you think Ed and his cronies have any idea of what the climate would be like in 10 or 100 or 1000 years?
Do you think they understand the very significant climate changes that have occurred in the recent (say past 500 to 1000 years) past that predated significant human messing with the atmosphere?
If no (and I'm pretty sure that is correct, I imagine I'll be corrected if I'm wrong), why would you think they can predict the changes when you do add humans to the mix?

Ed's "amazingly good results" sounded a little like Bernie Madoff's similarly good investment results--that's all I was getting at there. I don't think Ed's a crook, but I think he's maybe drank his own Kool-Aid as the saying goes.

Sport climber
mammoth lakes ca
Feb 11, 2014 - 08:52pm PT
blah...Hold on...I'm imagining everybody and thing leaving earth.......
yosemite 5.9

santa cruz
Feb 11, 2014 - 09:49pm PT
I understand that global temperatures have fallen consistently since 1998.

Social climber
the Wastelands
Feb 11, 2014 - 09:56pm PT
it is going to dip down to 30 degrees here in the desert tonight

this proves all that Climate Change and Global Warming to be a LIE

and all those ElITIST supposed scientists to be paid off LIARS

edit: forgot to throw in a LOL, and a ROTFLMAO
Dingus Milktoast

Gym climber
U.N. Ambassador, Crackistan
Feb 11, 2014 - 11:26pm PT
Got it!



Ice climber
great white north
Feb 11, 2014 - 11:50pm PT
People with high amounts of abdominal fat in their middle age are 3.6 times as likely to develop memory loss and dementia later in their life.

This explains why The Chuff is so demented.
Wade Icey

Trad climber
Feb 12, 2014 - 01:06am PT
And this OBVIOUSLY explains why ... keep regurgitating the same meaningless bullshet over and over in their vein attempt to be someone they are not....

you mean like:



got it.

no fx whatsoever
no fx whatsoever
Credit: Dunning-Kruger

Social climber
Joshua Tree
Feb 12, 2014 - 11:35am PT
which half gave you your brains

Clearly the rear half, of the horse.

Trad climber
Lee, NH
Feb 12, 2014 - 11:54am PT
Seems as good a place as any to bring up winter storm Pax. Who's in its path? "Thunder ice" sounds like a bad thing heading for Atlanta and its trees.
Dingus Milktoast

Gym climber
U.N. Ambassador, Crackistan
Feb 12, 2014 - 01:23pm PT
I like the way the fence chaffs at the crack of my ass, the chief.

Plus I can see better from up here.

Jim E

Feb 12, 2014 - 01:50pm PT
EDH and LARRY, they have a monetary agenda. Career PhD's.

I would find this to be incredibly offensive if it weren't for the fact that it is so hilariously off the mark.

Anyone that would remotely entertain this idea really does not have a grasp of the scale of the economic forces at work on this topic.

Gym climber
Topic Author's Reply - Feb 12, 2014 - 06:59pm PT
EDH and LARRY, they have a monetary agenda.
    The Chief

The Chief, all this time you have shown us that your agenda is nothing but money based. You cry about having to pay more due to "carbon credits" and such.

Which makes you a....

(Hint: begins with an H).

Feb 12, 2014 - 09:25pm PT
The Chief, all this time you have shown us that your agenda is nothing but money based. You cry about having to pay more due to "carbon credits" and such.

Which makes you a....

(Hint: begins with an H).

It makes him a lot of things.

Boulder climber
I'm James Brown, Bi-atch!
Feb 13, 2014 - 01:34am PT
anybody see A Fierce Green Fire?


Mountain climber
honeoye falls,ny.greeneck alleghenys
Feb 13, 2014 - 06:24am PT
Credit: wilbeer

Ice climber
great white north
Feb 13, 2014 - 09:36am PT
The Price of Paying: Carbon Deals and Consequences

Insurance: Paying For Carbon Emissions
by Ray Grigg - Shades of Green

The actuarial sciences of the insurance industry have identified an implacable reality and placed a tax on carbon emissions. For anyone who wants insurance, payment is unavoidable. Protesting or complaining won't change an insurance industry that functions with the cold logic of calculated risk — if risk increases, premiums increase. And this explains their carbon tax. The industry doesn't need measured rises in atmospheric levels of carbon dioxide or higher global average temperatures to understand what is happening to weather. All it needs is the cost of claims.

In the relative microcosm of Vancouver Island, for example, claims related to fire and lightning caused by weather jumped from levels of about $1.2 million per year in 2010 and 2011 to $6.5 million in 2012. Corresponding claims for wind damage rose from about $250,000 per year to $2.9 million. Total claims for 2012 were $15 million, equal to the sum of the previous two years — with almost all the increases related to weather. Consequently, the annual premiums for the usual package of house insurance commonly rose by a hundred dollars or more.

Across Canada, the situation is similar

“There are more and more storms happening,” said Pete Karageorgos of the Insurance Bureau of Canada, “and we're seeing extreme weather events that happened once every 40 years... that can now be expected to happen once every six years” (The Vancouver Sun, Jan. 9/14).

Consequently, “the amount of claims that have been presented has been averaging about a billion dollars [more] a year over the last three years or so” (Ibid.).

Extreme weather events that cost Canada less than $200 million in 2006, reached $1.2 billion in 2012. Domestic fires, which were once the principal cause of insurance payouts, have been replaced by flooding, the result of engineered drainage systems being overcome by torrential rainfall. Wind damage from powerful storms has move up to the second highest cause of claims.

“It's just been five horrendous years in a row,” confessed Glenn McGillivray, managing director of the Institute for Catastrophic Loss Reduction. Just two events in the last year — June's flooding in Alberta and July's torrential rainfall in Toronto — brought the insured property damage to $3 billion. The costs to insurance companies of the devastating ice storm that hit Toronto and parts of Ontario, Quebec and the Atlantic Provinces during the last days of 2013, have yet to be calculated — the uninsured costs may never be known. One of the largest insurers of property in Canada, Intact Financial Corporation, raised premiums by 15 to 20 percent as a result of heavy losses from climate-related claims. Some home owners are simply denied coverage if they live in areas newly identified as prone to flooding.

In the United States in 2012, the arrival of Hurricane Sandy caused $65 billion in destruction to the US Atlantic coast — happily for the insurance companies, less than half was insured. The storm, however, has forced some property owners in New York and New Jersey to confront the options of moving away from shorelines, elevating their homes, or paying flood insurance premiums of as much as $31,000 a year (Associated Press, January 29/13). The same year's drought in the US Midwest did $20 billion in crop damage, of which $17 billion was insured.

Outside Canada and the United States, the indications of extreme weather are repeated — except the numbers are correspondingly larger. Munich Re, one of the world's largest re-insurance companies, has been using the best meteorologists, hydrologists, geologists and geophysicists available to understand and predict the increasing number of extreme weather events it has been noting since the 1970s, well before climate change became a term of common usage. Their insurance rates are rising as their actuarial studies reveal a clear indication of increasing risk from extreme weather.

Material damage, however, is just the surface of the problem for the insurance industry. Because it will insure everything from homes and crops to product delivery and sporting events, anything that creates uncertainty adds to risk and affects insurance rates. So heat waves that are now predicted to occur every two or three years in the US Midwest and central Europe, according to Munich Re's research, mean that premiums for insuring anything remotely related — from soybean crops to shipping schedules — will have to rise accordingly. Because Southeast Asia is expected to experience the same heat events, except every one or two years, the complicating effects must be anticipated as more expensive insurance.

Droughts are particularly insidious — such as the 2011 one in Somalia — because they are usually persistent, with consequences that can be both devastating and widespread. As Josette Sheeran of the World Food Program noted, victims have three options: they can riot, migrate, or die. Regardless, they throw social, political and economic stability of local, adjoining and distant countries into turmoil — climate refugees, for example, send waves of disturbances around the world. The successive droughts in Russia in 2010 and 2011 caused a global grain shortage that threw international food prices into pandemonium, and have been connected to the Arab uprisings that are still echoing throughout the Middle East. These unanticipated conditions are precisely the unknowns that insurers can only address by increasing the price of premiums.

As weather becomes more extreme and unpredictable, the whole system of payment for risk becomes more expensive. Every claim that is paid by the insurance industry is recorded somewhere in a Great Actuarial Ledger to become additional costs forwarded to future policy holders — most of whom do not realize that these increased premiums are actually carbon taxes.

The deniers can whine all they want, but their insurance will cost more.
Their obstructionist tactics will cost them more in the long run.

A stupid person is a person who causes losses to another person or to a group of persons while himself deriving no gain and even possibly incurring losses.
by Carlo M. Cipolla
Messages 13981 - 14000 of total 21618 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
Return to Forum List
Our Guidebooks
Check 'em out!
SuperTopo Guidebooks

Try a free sample topo!

SuperTopo on the Web

Review Categories
Recent Route Beta
Recent Gear Reviews