The climate change flip flop. No more winters, no more summers... whatever!

reply to post by Masterjaden

...Too huge to justify ANY change in behavior.

I am not talking about cause. What needs to be addressed -and can be- is that people and their children are dying because of changed weather patterns and tsunami-like storm surges - it doesn't matter what caused the changes. They are real. And so are their effects.

Global corporations and businesses in vulnerable locations are very aware of climate change - and strategize to deal with it. And whatever individuals might "believe," climate change is factored into actuarial reports and used to determine insurance risks and rates.

You can find good basic primers on climate change in publicly available re-insurance documents (re-insurers insure insurance companies). Here are a few quick picks from Swiss Re, a global re-insurance company.

RE THINKING, MANAGING CLIMATE AND NATURAL DISASTER RISK

Disaster risk mitigation and climate adaptation are keys to strengthening the resilience of communities around the world. Re/insurance plays an important role in achieving this goal.

Swiss Re understands the relationship between climate and natural disaster risk and the societal impact of both. We've been shaping the global climate agenda through dialogue with our public and private sector partners, cutting-edge research and innovative risk transfer solutions for over two decades.

Managing climate and disaster risk is part of Swiss Re's DNA. Find out why below.

BUILDING CLIMATE RESILIENT CITIES IN THE US AND CANADA
Swiss Re and partners spread the message of urban resilience through a series of workshops in North America.

SWISS RE IS RECOGNISED FOR ITS LEADERSHIP ON CLIMATE CHANGE
Businesses play a key role in reducing carbon emissions and curbing climate change. Every year, companies at the forefront of this important effort are recognized by the Carbon Disclosure Programme (CDP),...

tothetenthpower
reply to post by gladtobehere

 

They aren't 'making' anything up.

It's climate CHANGE, not 'Global Warming'.

Are people so disconnected from scientific reality that they take the term "Global Warming" as something literal?

The climate is changing, all over the world and it has been, forever. Let's just remember that during the Dark Ages there was a very long period where Earth was warmer than it is now.

It's natural cycles.

~Tenth

What are you talking about ? They are "making" everything up, for consumption.

Are people so disconnected from scientific reality that they take the term "Climate Change" as something so literal?

"They" do not mention natural cycles hardly ever, they mention most of the change is due to HUMANS, and "they" also control the science which maps these "cycles" even.

I do not believe any of the released official statements can ever hold the full truth, for they are schemes.

Dark Ages, I wonder if they even existed ?? Anyone got proof?

I think that geo engineering methods are making the climate unpredictable and cause unseen weather patterns all over the world. . Like maybe countries that never had tornadoes will likely have some soon...

reply to post by 0bserver1

But Geo-engineering is still in the planning phase. How could talks about it be causing anything?

Please see this to understand.

soficrow
reply to post by Masterjaden

 

...Too huge to justify ANY change in behavior.

I am not talking about cause. What needs to be addressed -and can be- is that people and their children are dying because of changed weather patterns and tsunami-like storm surges - it doesn't matter what caused the changes. They are real. And so are their effects.

edit on 16/12/13 by soficrow because: (no reason given)

Why don't they just move? Man made or not climate change and ultimately will lead to attempts to control. This is infinitely scarier than letting the poles melt. I think we will fail to find a technical solution to this and superficial understanding is just not good enough to deal with it. There will be wars about immigration and resources.

Antarctica will provide a pristine new continent to settle and is earths natural way of sorting the problem.

Long term probably a bloody and drastic overthrow of our way of life and consumption would be needed as tptb will simply try and exploit the land which will trigger further war.

soficrow
reply to post by Masterjaden

 

...Too huge to justify ANY change in behavior.

I am not talking about cause. What needs to be addressed -and can be- is that people and their children are dying because of changed weather patterns and tsunami-like storm surges - it doesn't matter what caused the changes. They are real. And so are their effects.

edit on 16/12/13 by soficrow because: (no reason given)

Soficrow, i would like to understand why do you think people are dying because of 'changed weather patterns'. What changes exactly are you referring to? From your comments in this thread i take it that you believe something about the 'behaviour' of tropical? storms has changed. Could you explain what do you believe is different now compared to the past?

reply to post by bluepill

Why don't they just move? ...There will be wars about immigration and resources. ...Long term probably a bloody and drastic overthrow of our way of life and consumption would be needed as tptb will simply try and exploit the land which will trigger further war.

You answered your own question. Nowhere to go. Man loses Climate Change Refugee Plea

soficrow
reply to post by bluepill

 

Why don't they just move? ...There will be wars about immigration and resources. ...Long term probably a bloody and drastic overthrow of our way of life and consumption would be needed as tptb will simply try and exploit the land which will trigger further war.

You answered your own question. Nowhere to go. Man loses Climate Change Refugee Plea

There are lots of places for them to go. Whether the other people already there like it or not is largely irrelevant.

reply to post by talklikeapirat

Soficrow, i would like to understand why do you think people are dying because of 'changed weather patterns'. What changes exactly are you referring to? From your comments in this thread i take it that you believe something about the 'behaviour' of tropical? storms has changed. Could you explain what do you believe is different now compared to the past?

The insurance and re-insurance industries explain it best. They have to cover the costs of insurance claims and so, have a seriously vested interest. Insurance companies use computer models like climate scientists but have a different goal for their predictions - short term projections to maintain profits. Of course all they really have to do is raise their premiums and cancel coverage. But still, it's an issue...

How the Insurance Industry Is Dealing With Climate Change

When it comes to the calculating the likelihood of catastrophic weather, one group has an obvious and immediate financial stake in the game: the insurance industry. And in recent years, the industry researchers who attempt to determine the annual odds of catastrophic weather-related disasters—including floods and wind storms—say they’re seeing something new.

...The tricky part, though, is determining just how much these companies need to charge to make sure they have enough to pay for disasters and to stay in business...

...“In the past, when making these assessments, we looked to history. But in fact, we’ve now realized that that’s no longer a safe assumption—we can see, with certain phenomena in certain parts of the world, that the activity today is not simply the average of history.”

This pronounced shift can be seen in extreme rainfall events, heat waves and wind storms. The underlying reason, he says, is climate change...

...(computer) models are not unlike those used by scientists to estimate the long-term changes our climate will undergo as it warms over the next century, but there’s one important difference: Insurance companies care mainly about the next year, not the next 100 years, because they mostly sell policies one year at a time.

But even in the short term, Muir-Wood’s team has determined, the risk of a variety of disasters seems to have already shifted. ...

...On the whole, it seems likely that insurance premiums for houses and buildings in flood-prone coastal regions will go up... On the other hand, because of the complex impacts of climate change, we might see risks—and premiums—go down in other areas.

Risky business: insurance industry inaction on climate change

...This sector took a $35 billion hit from Hurricane Sandy and other extreme weather events last year. From the New York Times to wonky industry reports, the evidence is in: climate change is real, and it’s negatively impacting not only the insurance industry but U.S. taxpayers as well. According to a report from our friends at Environmental Entrepreneurs, the U.S. taxpayer bill came to $96 billion alone in 2012 for droughts, storms, floods, and forest fires. The global economic impact of climate change tops $1 trillion per year!

...In Europe, industry think tanks are generating reports that examine the bottom line impacts of climate change, and companies are allying to “drive action on climate change risk.” Re-insurers are also calling for action ...

...At a June 2013 hearing in Washington, D.C., the head of the Reinsurance Association of America told a Senate committee, “The industry is at great financial peril if it does not understand global and regional climate impacts, variability and developing scientific assessment of a changing climate.”

For Insurers, No Doubts on Climate Change

If there were one American industry that would be particularly worried about climate change it would have to be insurance, right?

From Hurricane Sandy’s devastating blow to the Northeast to the protracted drought that hit the Midwest Corn Belt, natural catastrophes across the United States pounded insurers last year, generating $35 billion in privately insured property losses, $11 billion more than the average over the last decade.

And the industry expects the situation will get worse. “Numerous studies assume a rise in summer drought periods in North America in the future and an increasing probability of severe cyclones relatively far north along the U.S. East Coast in the long term,” said Peter Höppe, who heads Geo Risks Research at the reinsurance giant Munich Re. “The rise in sea level caused by climate change will further increase the risk of storm surge.” Most insurers, including the reinsurance companies that bear much of the ultimate risk in the industry, have little time for the arguments heard in some right-wing circles that climate change isn’t happening, and are quite comfortable with the scientific consensus that burning fossil fuels is the main culprit of global warming.

...When insurers canceled policies and raised premiums in Florida in 2006, politicians jumped on them. “Insurers in Florida,” he said, “became Public Enemy No. 1.”

And that’s the best hope for those concerned about climate change: that global warming isn’t just devastating for society, but also bad for business.

reply to post by bluepill

There are lots of places for them to go. Whether the other people already there like it or not is largely irrelevant.

Not sure what you recommend? Illegal immigration to avoid deportation? Maybe via voyaging canoes?

soficrow
reply to post by TheRedneck

 

AGW or Climate Change does not address anything else.

My point exactly. It should - the whole thing is misdirected. The discussion here begs the question of what could/might/should be done about the disasters.

edit on 15/12/13 by soficrow because: add end last sentence

Your question seems odd. Are you going to stop a volcano from going off? Is man going to stop the next hurricane or earthquake? The only thing we can do is build safer buildings and communities. Many of the disasters involve people dying because their communities literally collapse on them or mud engulfs them, and that is up to the people living there to fix unless you want to shell out another $500.00 a month in taxes to ship money over there to build safe buildings and construct proper walls to stop mud slides.

Sure we can hold companies accountable for dumping waste, but it seems only America is responsible for pollution and so only American companies have to upgrade equipments while China builds shoddy factories and pollutes at will.

Climate change is all about redistribution of wealth and just another nail in the Cloward Piven strategy to overwhelm our system until we collapse, and then I guess we can all live like the people in third world countries doing slave labor and scrounging in garbage pits for our supplies.

reply to post by UnifiedSerenity

Your question seems odd. Are you going to stop a volcano from going off?

In the same vein - Are you going to stick your head up your butt and deny the volcano erupted? ...My point is that millions of people are already impacted by climate change - and we should deal with the reality that's already upon us. Don't just walk away saying, "Didn't happen. Couldn't happen. Isn't happening. Can't see it. Can't smell it. It's not in MY face. It's not real."

soficrow
reply to post by UnifiedSerenity

 

Your question seems odd. Are you going to stop a volcano from going off?

In the same vein - Are you going to stick your head up your butt and deny the volcano erupted? ...My point is that millions of people are already impacted by climate change - and we should deal with the reality that's already upon us. Don't just walk away saying, "Didn't happen. Couldn't happen. Isn't happening. Can't see it. Can't smell it. It's not in MY face. It's not real."

You know, when people have to resort to ugly and inflammatory comments, it means they have lost the argument. Again, how are you going to change the weather system, the earths disasters? You seem to be tilting at windmills and inciting ugly discourse.

reply to post by soficrow

I don't think anyone is denying that these things happened. It's just that there are some things beyond our control. As was stated, we can't prevent volcanoes from erupting, earthquakes form occurring, or hurricanes/typhoons from forming. We can aid those affected, and we do aid those affected, but we cannot make things as though the disasters never happened.

You yourself have said that you do not blame carbon dioxide levels. If that is so, then by extension you cannot be blaming a lack of attention to the AGW theory, since it is based on CO2 levels. The term "Climate Change" then becomes the equivalent of "weather," which we cannot control and which has been adversely affecting social agendas since the first caveman got rained on in a hunt.

I'm just not sure what it is you are advocating?

TheRedneck

reply to post by UnifiedSerenity


Ah, the old "everyone else is doing it, so why shouldn't we?" argument

If eveyone in your street dumped their litter in the gutter, would you? Or would you set an example by not doing so and try and duscourgae your neighbours from doing so as well?

If we discovered that, although people die of cancer and lung disease anyway, smoking cigarettes make you more likely to get cancer and lung disease, should we try and discourage people from smoking quite as much? Even if people in China were smoking even more?

reply to post by TheRedneck

We can aid those affected, and we do aid those affected, but we cannot make things as though the disasters never happened. ...The term "Climate Change" then becomes the equivalent of "weather," which we cannot control and which has been adversely affecting social agendas since the first caveman got rained on in a hunt.

I'm just not sure what it is you are advocating?

I'm advocating looking beyond the possibilities offered by a purely adversarial approach. We can't effectively "make war" on plagues, geological events or climate - but we can mitigate the effects. In terms of say the Philippines and other areas being decimated by shifting and intensifying storm patterns - look further than aid. ...What's the point of providing aid when investors are avoiding the region because they can't get adequate insurance coverage, and Filipinos have no hope for jobs or a future - or infinite aid?

Also, imho, the effects of climate change go beyond 'weather' - I think we're looking at our world being "re-shaped" as it has been in the past. Difference is, our global society is more able to tackle the economic, social and other problems than we have been in the past. It's just a question of values and priorities.

reply to post by UnifiedSerenity

You seem to be tilting at windmills and inciting ugly discourse.

Moi?! Inciting ugly discourse? You're kidding, right? Compared to whom?

btw - I am mainly responding to those who deny that climate change is occurring - saying the effects of climate change are real and present in our world - and suggesting we deal with those effects on humanity. Wotta concept, huh?

soficrow
reply to post by bluepill

 

There are lots of places for them to go. Whether the other people already there like it or not is largely irrelevant.

Not sure what you recommend? Illegal immigration to avoid deportation? Maybe via voyaging canoes?

I wasn't offering a recommendation I believe mass immigration is inevitable if significant climate change happens.

My other point is that if the poles melt then Antarctica is the solution and that's where migrants will flock. However the pressure will ratchet up in the meantime so expect war after all your attempts at deportation fail.

Sending aid money to poor people to encourage them to stay where they are is a short term solution, they will need to move or adapt.

reply to post by bluepill

Sending aid money to poor people to encourage them to stay where they are is a short term solution, they will need to move or adapt.

I agree - but don't see how it's possible to adapt to the current level of change. For one thing, adaptation of this sort needs money - and investors aren't going to take the risk.