Letters to a Heretic

[pjclarke]

The usual "codswallop" Global warming caused the Queensland floods

Pay attention. I never made any such attribution. It is not possible to prove that GW caused any individual extreme event (nor to prove it did not). But like a loaded dice rolls more sixes, a warmer world is predicted to have more and more extreme weather events. Ask the insurance industry

The number of major weather-related natural
catastrophes has tripled since 1980, as has the
number of floods; windstorms have more than doubled
in number. The first nine months of 2010 saw the
second highest number of natural hazard events
relevant in claims terms since 1980.

[shaunbhoy]

Ask the insurance industry

Consistent arbiters of even-handed information dissemination.

[pjclarke]

Munich Re’s natural catastrophe database, the most comprehensive of its kind in the world, shows a marked increase in the number of weather-related events. For instance, globally there has been a more than threefold increase in loss-related floods since 1980 and more than double the number of windstorm natural catastrophes, with particularly heavy losses as a result of Atlantic hurricanes

These guys make their money out of correctly predicting risk, a powerful incentive to accumulate and analyse accurate data....

[EternalOptimist]

These guys make their money out of correctly predicting risk, a powerful incentive to accumulate and analyse accurate data....

you fool.

that link is talking about weather events that result in insurance claims. Just because the number of weather related losses goes up, it doesnt mean the weather was any worse than normal.
There is one paragraph that expicitly states this.

If more people start to live in flood plains, more people will be flooded and make insurance claims. It says nothing at all about cagw, or more extreme weather.

in fact, using your logic, all extreme weather would be abolished if the insurance company went bust



do you ever read the plethora of links that you subject us to ? do you understand them ?

[pjclarke]

That would be this paragraph...?

The rise in natural catastrophe losses is primarily due to socio-economic factors. In many countries, populations are rising, and more and more people moving into exposed areas. At the same time, greater prosperity is leading to higher property values. Nevertheless, it would seem that the only plausible explanation for the rise in weather-related catastrophes is climate change. The view that weather extremes are more frequent and intense due to global warming coincides with the current state of scientific knowledge as set out in the Fourth IPCC Assessment Report.

Or here's a whole press release on the topic from the same company

These facts show that global warming is playing a significant role in the rising number of extreme events. Analyses performed by Munich Re’s natural catastrophe database, the most comprehensive in the world, substantiate this increase: the number of extreme weather events like windstorm and floods has tripled since 1980, and the trend is expected to persist.

You fool. If the increased losses were solely due to changes in prosperity and populations shifts then there should not be a bias towards increased weather related disasters, as opposed to earthquakes, volcanoes etc, but there is. Dr. Peter Hoeppe, Head of the Geo Risks Research Department at Munich Re, writes

For me the most convincing piece of evidence that global warming has been contributing already to more and more intense weather related natural catastrophes is the fact that while we find a steep increase in the number of loss relevant weather events (about tripling in the last 30 years) we only find a slight increase in geophysical (earthquake, volcano, tsunami) events, which should not be affected by global warming. If the whole trend we find in weather related disaster should be caused by reporting bias, or socio-demographic or economic developments we would expect to find it similarly for the geophysical events.

[EternalOptimist]

In other news, other people and organisations that stand to profit by it, support CAGW, and people who stand to lose money, deny it.

anyone who thinks people with a vested interest are impartial, are deluded fools. sorry about that

[sasguru]

In other news, other people and organisations that stand to profit by it, support CAGW, and people who stand to lose money, deny it.

anyone who thinks people with a vested interest are impartial, are deluded fools. sorry about that

You really are very stupid indeed. Seriously.
The insurance industry is a cold hard business,They are not likely to be taken in by any false claims on either side or they won't have a business.
That's why they hire actuaries to analyse the data.
So if you want to trust anyone in this debate, trust the money men - because where dosh is involved suddenly people start thinking very clearly.
Unlike some third rate unemployed IT jobber.

HTH

[landl]

The insurance industry is a cold hard business...

You really are very stupid indeed. Seriously.
The insurance industry is a cold hard business,They are not likely to be taken in by any false claims on either side or they won't have a business.
HTH

...which is also the reason that they are likely to exploit any excuse available to justify increases to the premiums that they charge their customers. The actuaries do a great job of informing them of the real perceived risks. The "money men" then decide what they can get away with to make as big a profit as possible.

I don't think the insurance companies are to be blindly and somewhat naively trusted on this one. Just my opinion.

PS - I'm not an idiot, but feel free to dismiss me anyway in the same manner that you have done with just about every person who has ever had a contrary opinion. A great attitude for personal growth I'm sure.

[BlasterBates]

Temperature record of Arizona



Can anyone see a natural 60 year cycle here?

[EternalOptimist]

You really are very stupid indeed. Seriously.
The insurance industry is a cold hard business,They are not likely to be taken in by any false claims on either side or they won't have a business.
That's why they hire actuaries to analyse the data.
So if you want to trust anyone in this debate, trust the money men - because where dosh is involved suddenly people start thinking very clearly.
Unlike some third rate unemployed IT jobber.

HTH

History is made !! do you remember where you were when JFK was shot ? when a man stepped onto the moon or the wall came down ?
too young maybe ?

fear not. you were here when a new milestone was laid down in human history.

Ladies and Gentlemen, I give you SasGoru. <rounds of applause, standing ovations and nobel prizes>


We dont need measurements to prove CAGW
we dont even need models to prove CAGW
We dont need learned professors and scolars

all we need is an insurance salesman


- hey presto. I've seen the light

I'm saved. the planet is saved. long live Gaia