Economy and Climate Change
- Thread starter hpjet
- Start date
Liar Loan
Well-known member
More genius level decision-making by authorities in Maui:
www.latimes.com
thehill.com
Fateful decision in Maui: Firefighters left the scene, blaze began its deadly march unchallenged
Fateful decision in Maui: Firefighters left the scene, blaze began its deadly march unchallenged
They thought the grass fire was contained, but wind conditions were still extreme. Now the decision to pull firefighters away shortly before the Maui fire reignited has become a flashpoint, as questions mount over whether more could have been done to stave off the destruction.
www.latimes.com
Maui residents who disobeyed barricade survived fires: AP
Maui residents who disobeyed barricade survived fires: AP
Those who disobeyed the barricaded road closures during the Maui fires survived the disaster, while many of those who heeded orders to turn around perished in their cars and homes with no way out, …
thehill.com
morekaos
Well-known member
The sand bag crisis descends…will the Hurricane Hillary’s profound damage ever end?! …Is this our “New Normal”?!!!“perception” of doing something? What a crock. How about doing something that is needed like appropriately warning. In the end, you have to admit all the panic porn was pointless. It accomplished nothing but creating a massive surplus of sandbags that now are going to become a crisis to get rid of.
Hilary’s Aftermath: What to Do with 100,000 Sandbags Distributed Before the Storm
More than 100,000 sandbags were distributed and used across the county during Tropical Storm Hilary, but now that San Diego is once again experiencing sunny skies, county officials are offering advice on how to dispose of the bags.
Experts at the county’s Department of Public Works suggested residents keep the bags to help with the upcoming rainy season.
Here is what you should do with the sandbags you used to prepare for Tropical Cyclone #Hilaryhttps://t.co/Zk2OHrGny4
— SanDiegoCounty (@SanDiegoCounty) August 23, 2023
“You could store them filled, or empty out the clean sand and store the bags away from sunlight in a covered, above-ground location,” they wrote in a county news release.
https://timesofsandiego.com/life/20...lains-how-to-get-rid-of-sandbags-after-storm/
zubs
Well-known member
More genius level decision-making by authorities in Maui:
Maui residents who disobeyed barricade survived fires: AP
Maui residents who disobeyed barricade survived fires: AP
Those who disobeyed the barricaded road closures during the Maui fires survived the disaster, while many of those who heeded orders to turn around perished in their cars and homes with no way out, …
Speaking of disobeying orders....The students who left their rooms had a better chance of survival than the ones who listened to the announcement and stayed in their rooms. Sometimes you gotta break the rules.
Sinking of MV Sewol - Wikipedia
Liar Loan
Well-known member
California nearly drought free in wake of Hilary’s historic rains
It’s a remarkable turnaround compared with a year ago, when varying levels of drought plagued 99.76% of California. Now only 1.38% of California is experiencing moderate or worse drought, the least since February 2020.
California drought: How Hilary’s historic rains impacted most parched cities
Rains from Tropical Storm Hilary helped improve drought conditions across Southern...
morekaos
Well-known member
Remember all the panic porn?
Liar Loan
Well-known member
Another correct call from you that I'm sure will go unrecognized!Remember all the panic porn?
irvinehomeowner
Well-known member
So easy to predict that summer is going to be hot. That’s like saying house prices will drop seasonally.
Did you predict a tropical storm in August?
Did you predict a tropical storm in August?
morekaos
Well-known member
Follow the Science…right?....
More than 1,600 scientists, including two Nobel laureates, declare climate 'emergency' a myth
The global coalition of scientists say that politics and a journalistic frenzy has propelled a doomsday climate change hysteria. The signatories also ask other scientists to "address uncertainties and exaggerations in their predictions of global warming."
Climate science should be less political, while climate policies should be more scientific. In particular, scientists should emphasize that their modeling output is not the result of magic: computer models are human-made. What comes out is fully dependent on what theoreticians and programmers have put in: hypotheses, assumptions, relationships, parameterizations, stability constraints, etc. Unfortunately, in mainstream climate science most of this input is undeclared.
To believe the outcome of a climate model is to believe what the model makers have put in. This is precisely the problem of today’s climate discussion to which climate models are central. Climate science has degenerated into a discussion based on beliefs, not on sound self-critical science. We should free ourselves from the naïve belief in immature climate models. In future, climate research must give significantly more emphasis to empirical science.
There is no climate emergency
A global network of over 1609 scientists and professionals has prepared this urgent message. Climate science should be less political, while climate policies should be more scientific. Scientists should openly address uncertainties and exaggerations in their predictions of global warming, while politicians should dispassionately count the real costs as well as the imagined benefits of their policy measures.
https://clintel.org/world-climate-declaration/
More than 1,600 scientists, including two Nobel laureates, declare climate 'emergency' a myth
The global coalition of scientists say that politics and a journalistic frenzy has propelled a doomsday climate change hysteria. The signatories also ask other scientists to "address uncertainties and exaggerations in their predictions of global warming."
Climate science should be less political, while climate policies should be more scientific. In particular, scientists should emphasize that their modeling output is not the result of magic: computer models are human-made. What comes out is fully dependent on what theoreticians and programmers have put in: hypotheses, assumptions, relationships, parameterizations, stability constraints, etc. Unfortunately, in mainstream climate science most of this input is undeclared.
To believe the outcome of a climate model is to believe what the model makers have put in. This is precisely the problem of today’s climate discussion to which climate models are central. Climate science has degenerated into a discussion based on beliefs, not on sound self-critical science. We should free ourselves from the naïve belief in immature climate models. In future, climate research must give significantly more emphasis to empirical science.
There is no climate emergency
A global network of over 1609 scientists and professionals has prepared this urgent message. Climate science should be less political, while climate policies should be more scientific. Scientists should openly address uncertainties and exaggerations in their predictions of global warming, while politicians should dispassionately count the real costs as well as the imagined benefits of their policy measures.
https://clintel.org/world-climate-declaration/
someguy
Active member
It IS an emergency and you HAVE to obey *THROWS TANTRUM*
The only way to fix it is to be afraid, hand your rights and check books over to the government. They're the experts, they know better than us, and they truly care about each and every one of us.
Let me break it down for everyone in this easy step by step guide
1) Declare emergency
2) Point to events as evidence for the emergency, exaggerate events whenever possible (let the media do it. Eyeballs, clicks and shares are the product they sell to advertisers), suppress and discredit any alterative points of view
3) Consolidate power and write government checks in the name of your noble cause, especially in ways that benefit your most powerful donors. Don't be afraid to get your beak wet too.
4)Order your subjects incentivize your voters with unsustainable government debt via subsidies to buy batteries and solar panels from China
5) Allow Chinesespeculators money launderers investors to use the money you sent them to buy property in the US (don't talk about the lack of reciprocity with regard to real estate ownership in China)
6) Claim responsibility for any positive consequences, blame opponents for negative consequences and/or double down by claiming we need to do more
7) Repeat steps 1-3
The only way to fix it is to be afraid, hand your rights and check books over to the government. They're the experts, they know better than us, and they truly care about each and every one of us.
Let me break it down for everyone in this easy step by step guide
1) Declare emergency
2) Point to events as evidence for the emergency, exaggerate events whenever possible (let the media do it. Eyeballs, clicks and shares are the product they sell to advertisers), suppress and discredit any alterative points of view
3) Consolidate power and write government checks in the name of your noble cause, especially in ways that benefit your most powerful donors. Don't be afraid to get your beak wet too.
4)
5) Allow Chinese
6) Claim responsibility for any positive consequences, blame opponents for negative consequences and/or double down by claiming we need to do more
7) Repeat steps 1-3
Last edited:
nosuchreality
Well-known member
Actuarial math combined with buildout. Their exposure to massive losses to a hurricane hit or wildfire used to be fairly limited. They figured out the math on earthquakes decades ago. Northridge pretty much pounded home the underpricing of risk.
With buildout, a hurricane brushing Florida anywhere is plowing through suburban homes. More locally, wildfires that used to burn in the canyons would burn, now many of those canyons are filled with townhome complexes.
It's no longer an expected value where there's a small chance of having a couple hundred-million-dollar loss, it's a virtual certainty that fires will happen and they will destroy handfuls, dozens or hundreds of homes at a half million to few million each. Combine that with the older/more expensive properties are also more prone to catastrophic loss.
Newer homes east of I-5 pushing into Santiago Canyon are built with more fire provisions in mind, the North Tustin hills filled with 3 million dollar homes are 3-5 decades old and sit on hillsides covered in kerosene and kindling.
morekaos
Well-known member
The reason they can’t make the numbers work out is not that weather related losses and events are more common. It is that we are allowing more building in areas that have always been prone to flood and fire events. Look at all the area in Portola or Trabuco that has been built out in the past decades with full knowledge of the fire hazards. Tons of other anreas just like that all over California. Insurance companies are bound to insure if they offer policies in this state so either jack up rates for all or refuse to insure in this state, they have no choice. Real estate in this state is extremely expensive to replace so Farmers made a business decision that it is not worth the risk and is gone…others will follow. I live on an island with full knowledge that it can flood…I have mandatory flood insurance but if I didn’t have to have it I wouldn’t.
lol, of course it's like a daily mail from mk, it figures....Follow the Science…right?....
More than 1,600 scientists, including two Nobel laureates, declare climate 'emergency' a myth
The global coalition of scientists say that politics and a journalistic frenzy has propelled a doomsday climate change hysteria. The signatories also ask other scientists to "address uncertainties and exaggerations in their predictions of global warming."
Climate science should be less political, while climate policies should be more scientific. In particular, scientists should emphasize that their modeling output is not the result of magic: computer models are human-made. What comes out is fully dependent on what theoreticians and programmers have put in: hypotheses, assumptions, relationships, parameterizations, stability constraints, etc. Unfortunately, in mainstream climate science most of this input is undeclared.
To believe the outcome of a climate model is to believe what the model makers have put in. This is precisely the problem of today’s climate discussion to which climate models are central. Climate science has degenerated into a discussion based on beliefs, not on sound self-critical science. We should free ourselves from the naïve belief in immature climate models. In future, climate research must give significantly more emphasis to empirical science.
There is no climate emergency
A global network of over 1609 scientists and professionals has prepared this urgent message. Climate science should be less political, while climate policies should be more scientific. Scientists should openly address uncertainties and exaggerations in their predictions of global warming, while politicians should dispassionately count the real costs as well as the imagined benefits of their policy measures.
https://clintel.org/world-climate-declaration/
*sigh*
i have no idea what this clintel org is, but google is your friend...
Qui hi ha darrere del document viral que assenyala que "no existeix l'emergència climàtica"? - Verificat
Està circulant per xarxes socials un document publicat a finals de juny i signat per 1.107 científics i experts membres de la Fundació d'Intel·ligència Climàtica (Clintel), que denuncien que "no hi ha una emergència climàtica". Per argumentar-ho, assenyalen que "l'escalfament és molt més lent...
www.verificat.cat
"most of scientists who appear in the document have not been formally educated in the field of climate or meteorology. Rather, according to the document by Clintel, there are numerous engineers, biologists, chemists or physicists – signatories also include a commercial fisherman, a cardiologist, an air conditioning engineer and numerous retired geologists. There is also a Nobel laureate in Physics, Ivar Giaever, who received the award in the 1970s for his contributions to knowledge on the superconductivity of materials, which is unrelated to climate studies"
clintel founded by:
Augustinus Johannes "Guus" Berkhout (born 1 April 1940) is a Dutch engineer who has worked for the oil and gas industry, and as a professor.
Berkhout started his career working for Shell. ...Berkhout co-founded the climate sceptic organization Climate Intelligence Foundation (CLINTEL).
A fact check performed by climate scientists for Climate Feedback gave the letter an overall scientific credibility of "very low", and tagged it as "Biased, Cherry-picking, Inaccurate, Misleading". The analysis also added that, out of the roughly 500 signatories, only 10 self-identified as climate scientists.
someguy
Active member
I can't speak for FL, but in CA the insurance companies aren't able to justify the risk of writing policies for the premium they're allowed to collect. They're squeezed on the revenue side by the CA insurance commissioner who is not allowing them to raise premiums enough. They're squeezed on the expense side by the rapid rise in the cost of housing related products & services and the location of new housing construction that tends to be in more risky fire prone areas.
Re-insurance is also drying up as those institutions and investors are demanding a higher premium, which further pressures the retail insurance companies' cost structure and risk mitigation efforts.
It's not just real estate policies, it's auto policies as well for the same reasons outlined above.
morekaos
Well-known member
… and you believe these clowns?lol, of course it's like a daily mail from mk, it figures....
*sigh*
i have no idea what this clintel org is, but google is your friend...
Qui hi ha darrere del document viral que assenyala que "no existeix l'emergència climàtica"? - Verificat
Està circulant per xarxes socials un document publicat a finals de juny i signat per 1.107 científics i experts membres de la Fundació d'Intel·ligència Climàtica (Clintel), que denuncien que "no hi ha una emergència climàtica". Per argumentar-ho, assenyalen que "l'escalfament és molt més lent...
"most of scientists who appear in the document have not been formally educated in the field of climate or meteorology. Rather, according to the document by Clintel, there are numerous engineers, biologists, chemists or physicists – signatories also include a commercial fisherman, a cardiologist, an air conditioning engineer and numerous retired geologists. There is also a Nobel laureate in Physics, Ivar Giaever, who received the award in the 1970s for his contributions to knowledge on the superconductivity of materials, which is unrelated to climate studies"
clintel founded by:
Augustinus Johannes "Guus" Berkhout (born 1 April 1940) is a Dutch engineer who has worked for the oil and gas industry, and as a professor.
Berkhout started his career working for Shell. ...Berkhout co-founded the climate sceptic organization Climate Intelligence Foundation (CLINTEL).
A fact check performed by climate scientists for Climate Feedback gave the letter an overall scientific credibility of "very low", and tagged it as "Biased, Cherry-picking, Inaccurate, Misleading". The analysis also added that, out of the roughly 500 signatories, only 10 self-identified as climate scientists.
*sigh*
Quiénes somos - Verificat
¿Què és Verificat? L'equip, el finançament, els valors i la feina de l'Associació Verificat, plataforma de fact-checking independent de Catalunya
www.verificat.cat
someguy
Active member
Someone fact check the fact checkers. What makes them the arbiters of truth? Just because they can do ad hominem attacks we're supposed discredit anyone they suggest?lol, of course it's like a daily mail from mk, it figures....
*sigh*
i have no idea what this clintel org is, but google is your friend...
Qui hi ha darrere del document viral que assenyala que "no existeix l'emergència climàtica"? - Verificat
Està circulant per xarxes socials un document publicat a finals de juny i signat per 1.107 científics i experts membres de la Fundació d'Intel·ligència Climàtica (Clintel), que denuncien que "no hi ha una emergència climàtica". Per argumentar-ho, assenyalen que "l'escalfament és molt més lent...
"most of scientists who appear in the document have not been formally educated in the field of climate or meteorology. Rather, according to the document by Clintel, there are numerous engineers, biologists, chemists or physicists – signatories also include a commercial fisherman, a cardiologist, an air conditioning engineer and numerous retired geologists. There is also a Nobel laureate in Physics, Ivar Giaever, who received the award in the 1970s for his contributions to knowledge on the superconductivity of materials, which is unrelated to climate studies"
clintel founded by:
Augustinus Johannes "Guus" Berkhout (born 1 April 1940) is a Dutch engineer who has worked for the oil and gas industry, and as a professor.
Berkhout started his career working for Shell. ...Berkhout co-founded the climate sceptic organization Climate Intelligence Foundation (CLINTEL).
A fact check performed by climate scientists for Climate Feedback gave the letter an overall scientific credibility of "very low", and tagged it as "Biased, Cherry-picking, Inaccurate, Misleading". The analysis also added that, out of the roughly 500 signatories, only 10 self-identified as climate scientists.
Does working in the oil and gas industry mean everything that person says is untrustworthy? Does the lack of a degree in climate or meteorology mean you're not allowed to be taken seriously when using the scientific process to form a hypothesis in the field of climate or meteorology? And does having a degree in climate or meteorology make someone infallible in their opinions about those topics?
so what you're saying is that what mk post regarding these topics are not biased?
i think they are, very much so
it's like saying someone who worked for the tobacco industry for many years comes out saying tobacco doesn't cause cancer, hey, let's listen to them, they must be an expert