Five years ago…

[brenthutch 384]

Governor Jerry Brown of California said “In Less than Five Years, Even the Worst Skeptics Will Be Believers”

My Failed Climate Prediction bin is starting to overflow 

[Stumpy 256]

Don't confuse skeptics and deniers. Deniers aren't that bright and are the ones still trying to make arguments of things they don't really understand, based largely on soundbites from articles they haven't read.

Skeptics are now by and large convinced.

[brenthutch 384]

48 minutes ago, Stumpy said:

Don't confuse skeptics and deniers. Deniers aren't that bright and are the ones still trying to make arguments of things they don't really understand, based largely on soundbites from articles they haven't read.

Skeptics are now by and large convinced.

According to the Pew Research Center 

40% of Americans think it is either not happening or is due to natural causes 

62% consider doing something about it to be a low or no priority

The number of skeptics will continue to rise as prediction after prediction fail to materialize. Just watch An Inconvenient Truth again and see how poorly that aged.

Edited November 19, 2023 by brenthutch

[wolfriverjoe 1,341]

https://www.npr.org/2023/09/13/1199273629/climate-change-exacerbates-deadly-floods-worldwide

 

Right. Lots of people who know a LOT more than I do say that we're seeing more and more severe flooding. 

Due to climate change.

 

Why does flood insurance cost so much more these days? 

 

Helpful hint: Look up how much the insurance industry paid out in claims last year. 

[brenthutch 384]

13 minutes ago, wolfriverjoe said:

15 minutes ago, wolfriverjoe said:

https://www.npr.org/2023/09/13/1199273629/climate-change-exacerbates-deadly-floods-worldwide

 

Right. Lots of people who know a LOT more than I do say that we're seeing more and more severe flooding. 

Due to climate change.

 

Why does flood insurance cost so much more these days? 

 

Helpful hint: Look up how much the insurance industry paid out in claims last year. 

First of all, NPR? Really? They have stated as a policy they will not deviate from the catastrophic man made climate change narrative.

Second the increase in claims is simply a function of development and inflation.  A category 5 hurricane 100 years ago in south Florida would have less monetary losses than a strong thunderstorm today. Even the IPCC doesn’t claim an increase in floods, droughts, hurricanes, and wildfires. They predict it may happen in the future but currently there is no trend.

[billvon 2,400]

4 hours ago, wolfriverjoe said:

Why does flood insurance cost so much more these days?

Yep.  Deniers can deny all they like - but actuarial tables don't lie.   

[brenthutch 384]

8 hours ago, billvon said:

Yep.  Deniers can deny all they like - but actuarial tables don't lie.   

Lots of folks are moving south to hurricane prone areas. Hurricanes aren’t getting stronger or more frequent, there is just much more infrastructure and housing to be damaged when they do.  But of course you know this, you are not a dummy.

From NOAA

• There is no strong evidence of century-scale increasing trends in U.S. landfalling hurricanes or major hurricanes.  Similarly for Atlantic basin-wide hurricane frequency (after adjusting for changing observing capabilities over time), there is not strong evidence for an increase since the late 1800s in hurricanes, major hurricanes, or the proportion of hurricanes that reach major hurricane intensity.

Edited November 20, 2023 by brenthutch

[wmw999 2,123]

I've been reading The Parrot and the Igloo, by David Lipsky. It's basically a history of climate science and its denial, going back to Arrhenius. I'm not done, but so far the picture isn't good. Basically a future problem always yields to today's political and convenience issues. With Americans (probably more than any other nationality) being sold on the idea that they all deserve everything, now, that they want, the thought of cutting back on anything is anathema -- it's a sign of having less than the Joneses.

It's utterly depressing. That doesn't mean I'm not going to finish it, but it's well worth a read. Much more about people and politics than science.

All I can say is Brent, you're wrong. We're all human, none of us want to change what we're doing (I still skydive and fly, no angel here). But it's real, it's serious, and our kids will be feeling the effects. They're real. While it's not an every.single.year kind of thing, trends don't lie -- you should know that from your MBA program. It's intellectual dishonesty of "meeting Wall Street projections" level to go looking for data to support your feelings, rather than including what the overwhelming preponderance of people with training say.

Wendy P.

[brenthutch 384]

16 minutes ago, wmw999 said:

All I can say is Brent, you're wrong. We're all human, none of us want to change what we're doing (I still skydive and fly, no angel here). But it's real, it's serious, and our kids will be feeling the effects. They're real.

Wendy P.

NOAA says I’m right.  The effects the kids are feeling is not physical endangerment it is psychological trauma from the never ending cavalcade of disaster porn they are subjected to. There is a real danger in declaring every misfortune a result of climate change, it obscures the true story of poor infrastructure, land management, planning and emergency response.

[wmw999 2,123]

No, the NOAA data you choose to show and interpret shows you're right. Because you know you're right, therefore you go looking for data to prove it.

Wendy P.

[lippy 773]

40 minutes ago, brenthutch said:

NOAA says I’m right.  The effects the kids are feeling is not physical endangerment it is psychological trauma from the never ending cavalcade of disaster porn they are subjected to. There is a real danger in declaring every misfortune a result of climate change, it obscures the true story of poor infrastructure, land management, planning and emergency response.

So it's the official position of NOAA that man-made climate change doesn't exist and isn't a danger?  

[brenthutch 384]

45 minutes ago, wmw999 said:

No, the NOAA data you choose to show and interpret shows you're right. Because you know you're right, therefore you go looking for data to prove it.

Wendy P.

If you have data from NOAA showing otherwise, I would be interested in seeing it.  In the mean time take a look at this 

Edited November 20, 2023 by brenthutch

[wmw999 2,123]

As I said, the data (and goalposts) you choose. But you missed this one (ice cream consumption):

 

[brenthutch 384]

6 minutes ago, wmw999 said:

As I said, the data (and goalposts) you choose. But you missed this one (ice cream consumption):

 

So it looks like you have nothing.  No surprise there.

[brenthutch 384]

19 hours ago, Stumpy said:

Don't confuse skeptics and deniers. Deniers aren't that bright and are the ones still trying to make arguments of things they don't really understand, based largely on soundbites from articles they haven't read.

Skeptics are now by and large convinced.

https://www.azernews.az/region/217682.html

“The Nobel Prize-winning scientist has joined hundreds of other leading scientists who have signed the World Climate Declaration (WCD) and said that so-called anthropogenic climate change is a hoax”

Yep those stupid Nobel Prize-winning climate deniers 

[billvon 2,400]

1 hour ago, wmw999 said:

As I said, the data (and goalposts) you choose. But you missed this one (ice cream consumption):

And since cows make ice cream, if we have enough cows, we can stop climate change!  That's the only possible conclusion.

 

[brenthutch 384]

17 minutes ago, billvon said:

And since cows make ice cream, if we have enough cows, we can stop climate change!  That's the only possible conclusion.

 

Ah yes, more obfuscation 

[lippy 773]

34 minutes ago, brenthutch said:

Ah yes, more obfuscation 

Or just matching the levels of critical thinking you bring to the discussion.

[kallend 1,625]

According to the European agency (ECMWF) that tracks such things,  globally we just exceeded 2 degrees C above pre-industrial levels on November 17.

[billvon 2,400]

27 minutes ago, lippy said:

Or just matching the levels of critical thinking you bring to the discussion.

The BH version of Skitt's Law.

[brenthutch 384]

33 minutes ago, kallend said:

According to the European agency (ECMWF) that tracks such things,  globally we just exceeded 2 degrees C above pre-industrial levels on November 17.

And 10 degrees warmer than 20,000 years ago.

[wmw999 2,123]

1 hour ago, brenthutch said:

And 10 degrees warmer than 20,000 years ago.

And when did people start to really organize, socialize, and begin really communicating and innovating (i.e. turning into a civilization)? Why, after the Ice Age! What a surprise.

Wendy P.

[JerryBaumchen 1,048]

7 hours ago, wmw999 said:

I've been reading The Parrot and the Igloo, by David Lipsky. It's basically a history of climate science and its denial, going back to Arrhenius. I'm not done, but so far the picture isn't good. Basically a future problem always yields to today's political and convenience issues. With Americans (probably more than any other nationality) being sold on the idea that they all deserve everything, now, that they want, the thought of cutting back on anything is anathema -- it's a sign of having less than the Joneses.

It's utterly depressing. That doesn't mean I'm not going to finish it, but it's well worth a read. Much more about people and politics than science.

All I can say is Brent, you're wrong. We're all human, none of us want to change what we're doing (I still skydive and fly, no angel here). But it's real, it's serious, and our kids will be feeling the effects. They're real. While it's not an every.single.year kind of thing, trends don't lie -- you should know that from your MBA program. It's intellectual dishonesty of "meeting Wall Street projections" level to go looking for data to support your feelings, rather than including what the overwhelming preponderance of people with training say.

Wendy P.

Hi Wendy,

I recently watched this on Netrflix:  Life on Our Planet - Wikipedia

Many yrs ago, I read this:  The Life and Death of Planet Earth - Wikipedia

In Life on Our Planet, it tells us about the five great mass extinctions that Earth has experienced.  After I watched that 8-part series, I was reading some reviews of it.  One said that we are now in the middle of the 6th Great Mass Extinction.

Everything is in a state of change. *

Jerry Baumchen

*  At 83,  I do not buy Lifetime Warranties.

PS)  I rarely recommend things to other people; but, I do recommend those two links shown, if one is interested in that sort of stuff.  As I am.

 

 

Edited November 20, 2023 by JerryBaumchen

[brenthutch 384]

38 minutes ago, wmw999 said:

And when did people start to really organize, socialize, and begin really communicating and innovating (i.e. turning into a civilization)? Why, after the Ice Age! What a surprise.

Wendy P.

Agreed, warmer = better.  That is why the warm period around 8000 years ago (3-9 degrees C warmer than today) was called the Holocene climate optimum and not the Holocene climate cataclysm.

[wmw999 2,123]

More comfortable = better. It can be too hot, where all energy is spent fighting the heat and there isn't much left.

Wendy P.