More Climate BS...

#3,326
#3,326
LouderVol said:
shhh, we are seeing the new age creationists at work. the world is only a couple thousand years old, and it has been exactly as we see it today in the 21st century. any type of change must be because of the evils of man, and not part of some natural processes playing out that lead to world around us today.
Click to expand...
I wonder what the discussion was 20,000 years ago when the lush and green Sahara region of Africa started to desiccate and become a desert?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Wireless1 and Good Ol' Charlie Brown
#3,328
#3,328
Sea Ray said:
I see a lot of variance in the report. The most expensive year was 2017. The next most expensive year was 2005, followed by 2022.

Billion-Dollar Weather and Climate Disasters | National Centers for Environmental Information (NCEI)

Summary of U.S. billion-dollar weather and climate related disaster research, methodology, and data sources
www.ncei.noaa.gov www.ncei.noaa.gov

The most violent tornado outbreak in the USA ever was 1974 (I lived through this, I know it well). Over 2 days there were 149 tornados. Damage was only $4billion in today's dollars. Today repairs would cost far more I'm sure.

en.wikipedia.org

1974 Super Outbreak - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org
Click to expand...
Did you have a tornado where you lived at the time of the outbreak?
 
#3,329
#3,329
McDad said:
Denigration??? You were criticized or belittled in my post? I don't see it. My "well intentioned" is sincere.

Damage at 1B or more adjusted for inflation is not only related to weather events. The weather isn't the only variable. Other variables off the top of my head are:
- population. I think the population has doubled in the Metro Miami area. More people, more property, more businesses all contribute to increased cost of damage.
- property valuations. The cost of real estate being damaged is higher now than in 1980. I don't know if those values are adjusted for inflation like the 1B stat is. Essentially the 1B adjusted doesn't go as far as it used to.
- Codes and zoning are more stringent today than 1980. Not saying that is a bad thing especially for a city at sea level built on a 'sandbar'. But those regulations add considerably to the cost of damage repair compared to 1980.
Click to expand...
I stated the values were adjusted for inflation, as does the report.
 
#3,333
#3,333
#3,334
#3,334
OHvol40 said:
Oh, ok, then why are we talking about a hypothetical report?
Click to expand...
I thought it was clear.

Your referenced report was published by the Federal Government in 2023, and has been criticized for being policy driven.

How would you feel about a report published by the Federal Government in 2026, that critics claimed was policy driven?
 
#3,335
#3,335
GroverCleveland said:
Hasn't it been melting since the last glacial maximum? Speaking of, I've always thought it amusing if our civilization had risen just before the glaciers started retreating back from Minnesota, Canada, etc. Can anyone imagine the freakout by the Apocalypticism crowd? 'We're all going to die if Montana is uncovered!'
Click to expand...
The Laurentide Ice Sheet took several millennia to melt/retreat. Again, we are talking about decades of change vs millennia.
 
#3,338
#3,338
85SugarVol said:
I thought it was clear.

Your referenced report was published by the Federal Government in 2023, and has been criticized for being policy driven.

How would you feel about a report published by the Federal Government in 2026, that critics claimed was policy driven?
Click to expand...
I think it’s generalizing and non-specific to say that the “Federal Government” released the report. It was released in a collaboration between 14 agencies:
The 14 Member Agencies of USGCRP involved in NCA5:
  • Department of Agriculture (USDA)
  • Department of Commerce (DOC) (includes NOAA)
  • Department of Defense (DOD)
  • Department of Energy (DOE)
  • Department of Health and Human Services (HHS)
  • Department of Homeland Security (DHS)
  • Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD)
  • Department of the Interior (DOI)
  • Department of State (DOS)
  • Department of Transportation (DOT)
  • Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
  • National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA)
  • National Science Foundation (NSF)
  • Smithsonian Institution

If you want to call out every single one of them and their experts that contributed to it as “policy driven”, be my guest.

As far as a hypothetical report that would completely contradict the last 5 of their nature… I guess we’ll just cross that bridge when we get there.
 
#3,339
#3,339
McDad said:
Did you have a tornado where you lived at the time of the outbreak?
Click to expand...
Sure did. Softball size hail. The funnel cloud went over my house north of Cincinnati but it hit a lot of houses in my area. Fellow students in my school district were hit. The hardest hit in SW Ohio was north of here in Xenia, OH, east of Dayton
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols and McDad
#3,340
#3,340
Sea Ray said:
Sure did. Softball size hail. The funnel cloud went over my house north of Cincinnati but it hit a lot of houses in my area. Fellow students in my school district were hit. The hardest hit in SW Ohio was north of here in Xenia, OH, east of Dayton
Click to expand...
Went to school in Athens once upon a time, had lots of friends from Cincinnati/Dayton. Good peeps.
 
#3,341
#3,341
OHvol40 said:
Why is the permafrost melting dude? Lol
Click to expand...

Planet is getting warmer?

Something else I didn't see in any of the information provided, solar activity. We are just now going into a grand minimum period so for the last few decades we have been in an enhance solar activity cycle. And then they should also take into account the changes (yes they are slight) in our orbit around the sun.
 
#3,342
#3,342
The climate is definitely warming. It might be due to man made CO-2. It might be the cause of severe weather to a certain extent but we're stuck with it until we get better technology. Even as we evolve to more efficiency and cleaner energy, poorer countries will be burning more fossil fuels so as a planet, we're stuck with these levels of CO-2. We'll have to adjust
 
#3,343
#3,343
I do think the planet is getting warmer and I do think man has contributed to it, I just don't believe that human activity is the primary driver. That being said, my problem with the climate change movement (for lack of a better term) is that instead of pushing for research into how humanity can live and thrive with a changing (warming) climate they have continually pushed for ways to stop/reverse the changes. Stopping or reversing changes in earths climate is an effort in futility and waste of resources.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MemphisVol77, marcusluvsvols and Vol since 77
#3,344
#3,344
Sea Ray said:
The climate is definitely warming. It might be due to man made CO-2. It might be the cause of severe weather to a certain extent but we're stuck with it until we get better technology. Even as we evolve to more efficiency and cleaner energy, poorer countries will be burning more fossil fuels so as a planet, we're stuck with these levels of CO-2. We'll have to adjust
Click to expand...
the law of unintended consquences scares me more in any effort to "freeze" the climate into a more or less steady/controlled change, than just riding things thru.

I want to see changes made because I don't believe we are on a sustainable path; but the hubris of assuming we can or should make some of the changes proposed is astounding to me.

they are talking about literally world changing science on a scale that is impossible to simulate.
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols
#3,345
#3,345
hog88 said:
Planet is getting warmer?

Something else I didn't see in any of the information provided, solar activity. We are just now going into a grand minimum period so for the last few decades we have been in an enhance solar activity cycle. And then they should also take into account the changes (yes they are slight) in our orbit around the sun.
Click to expand...
I think we can all agree there are many variables in climate science, almost an endless amount anyone could point to in order to obviate man made contributions.
 
#3,346
#3,346
OHvol40 said:
I think it’s generalizing and non-specific to say that the “Federal Government” released the report. It was released in a collaboration between 14 agencies:
The 14 Member Agencies of USGCRP involved in NCA5:
  • Department of Agriculture (USDA)
  • Department of Commerce (DOC) (includes NOAA)
  • Department of Defense (DOD)
  • Department of Energy (DOE)
  • Department of Health and Human Services (HHS)
  • Department of Homeland Security (DHS)
  • Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD)
  • Department of the Interior (DOI)
  • Department of State (DOS)
  • Department of Transportation (DOT)
  • Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
  • National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA)
  • National Science Foundation (NSF)
  • Smithsonian Institution

If you want to call out every single one of them and their experts that contributed to it as “policy driven”, be my guest.

As far as a hypothetical report that would completely contradict the last 5 of their nature… I guess we’ll just cross that bridge when we get there.
Click to expand...
Maybe we are better today at identifying and categorizing storms than we were able to tens/hundreds of years ago. Kinda like autism, it has always been there we are just better at diagnosing it.
 
#3,349
#3,349
hog88 said:
Agreed and the alarmists refuse to look at anything other than human contributions.
Click to expand...
I wouldn’t call nearly every single person who has dedicated their careers to studying this branch of science “alarmist” when there is a consensus amongst them.

It’s like watching Pretti get shot in the back 10 times by the government and saying “well, have you considered that it could have been 10 meteors that hit him?”

Sure, that’s “possible” but unnecessary because we know what happened.
 
#3,350
#3,350
OHvol40 said:
I wouldn’t call nearly every single person who has dedicated their careers to studying this branch of science “alarmist” when there is a consensus amongst them.

It’s like watching Pretti get shot in the back 10 times by the government and saying “well, have you considered that it could have been 10 meteors that hit him?”

Sure, that’s “possible” but unnecessary because we know what happened.
Click to expand...

What happens to the ones who dissent with the consensus? They get labeled kooks and corporate shills, the scientists that disagree get shut out.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Vol since 77 and Vol423
New Posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

Advertisement



Back
Top