Climate change is to blame, apparently.

[zakelwe]

funkyrobot said:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-1091...

So it's 'partly' to blame. What they mean is they are maybe a little too scared to say it's fully to blame, but they want to scare people anyway.

Love the snippet of info from the Met Office (who cannot predict tomorrow's weather accurately, let alone further into the future) saying there are likely to be more higher temperatures in the future.

Jeff Knight, a climate variability scientist at the UK Met Office, attributed the situation in Moscow to a number of factors, among them greenhouse gas concentrations, which are steadily rising.

So what are the other factors?

Edited by funkyrobot on Wednesday 11th August 11:05

Climate change is supposed to enhance extremes, so the extreme here was enhanced, hence why it partly to blame.

You don't need to explain all the factors given that definition.

Andy

[chris watton]

"What the Chinese really think of 'Man Made Global Warming'"
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jamesdelingpole/...

[turbobloke]

zakelwe said:

funkyrobot said:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-1091...

So it's 'partly' to blame. What they mean is they are maybe a little too scared to say it's fully to blame, but they want to scare people anyway.

Love the snippet of info from the Met Office (who cannot predict tomorrow's weather accurately, let alone further into the future) saying there are likely to be more higher temperatures in the future.

Jeff Knight, a climate variability scientist at the UK Met Office, attributed the situation in Moscow to a number of factors, among them greenhouse gas concentrations, which are steadily rising.

So what are the other factors?

Edited by funkyrobot on Wednesday 11th August 11:05

Climate change is supposed to enhance extremes, so the extreme here was enhanced, hence why it partly to blame.

You don't need to explain all the factors given that definition.

Andy

The point you missed somehow is that it hasn't enhanced extremes, any such nonsensical claim depends solely on the arbitrary timescale in any comparison and not surprisingly there is 'a convenient choice' so what else is there?

Global climate cooling leads to more extreme weather, is that what you had in mind? Unfortunately tax gas is said to be a global warmer so that's no use.

chris watton said:

"What the Chinese really think of 'Man Made Global Warming'"
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jamesdelingpole/...

Certain countries are using their wealth to buy up millions of acres of crop growing land near the equator. No doubt that's because they expect to be living at the poles soon.

We have no wealth left to use and can't even guarantee our own energy supply because of this lunacy.

[odyssey2200]

Today was the __ist day since yesterday, Shocker!

[turbobloke]

odyssey2200 said:

Today was the __ist day since yesterday, Shocker!

Tomorrow will be a tipping point, apparently it will inexorably lead to another day, and the lack of doubt is worse than previously thought.

We're doomed.

[odyssey2200]

And it's all my fault!

[Get Karter]

Hedders said:

Get Karter said:

Also, the monies collected from companies in the CRC Energy Efficiency Scheme (to give it its full title) are meant to be redistributed to all the companies taking part....with the top of the class getting the larger share of the spoils, so to speak.

So this is publicly funded organisation that takes your money and redistributes it to what it considers to be worthy recipients, but it is not taxation?

Not sure about that one !

Unlike taxation, it's the ones who put in the effort that get more of the 'spoils'.

I'm not supporting it, indeed in my earlier post I stated my position quite clearly, I just wanted to point out that the money collected does not go into the tax pot!

[kerplunk]

Global warming blamed for weather disasters doubling in 30 years:

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/world/global-...

....There were 828 "weather catastrophes" involving loss of life and major economic damage across the world last year, compared with 317 in 1980.

The analysis by Munich Re, the reinsurance company, found 385 such events in the first six months of this year - the second highest in any January to June period since records began in 1974. The report does not include this week's flooding in Pakistan, landslides in China and wildfires in Russia....

[Hedders]

Get Karter said:

Hedders said:

Get Karter said:

Also, the monies collected from companies in the CRC Energy Efficiency Scheme (to give it its full title) are meant to be redistributed to all the companies taking part....with the top of the class getting the larger share of the spoils, so to speak.

So this is publicly funded organisation that takes your money and redistributes it to what it considers to be worthy recipients, but it is not taxation?

Not sure about that one !

Unlike taxation, it's the ones who put in the effort that get more of the 'spoils'.

I'm not supporting it, indeed in my earlier post I stated my position quite clearly, I just wanted to point out that the money collected does not go into the tax pot!

It may not go into the 'tax pot' but when the government demands money from me, it is taxation in my mind, no matter how they dress it up

[Jinx]

kerplunk said:

Global warming blamed for weather disasters doubling in 30 years:

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/world/global-...

....There were 828 "weather catastrophes" involving loss of life and major economic damage across the world last year, compared with 317 in 1980.

The analysis by Munich Re, the reinsurance company, found 385 such events in the first six months of this year - the second highest in any January to June period since records began in 1974. The report does not include this week's flooding in Pakistan, landslides in China and wildfires in Russia....

If a tree falls in a forest and no-one reports it has it still fallen? Admittedly there is no link to the original analysis (so don't know how much of the original report conclusions have been "glammed up" ) but "GW" is to blame?
So GW is to blame for all increases in reporting of "bad things" (tm) is it?
KP - Wizard's First Rule definitely applies to the above.

[mondeoman]

chris watton said:

"What the Chinese really think of 'Man Made Global Warming'"
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jamesdelingpole/...

try this one - a transcript of an introduction to an "official" Chinese book on AGW.

[Spiritual_Beggar]

Jinx said:

kerplunk said:

Global warming blamed for weather disasters doubling in 30 years:

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/world/global-...

....There were 828 "weather catastrophes" involving loss of life and major economic damage across the world last year, compared with 317 in 1980.

The analysis by Munich Re, the reinsurance company, found 385 such events in the first six months of this year - the second highest in any January to June period since records began in 1974. The report does not include this week's flooding in Pakistan, landslides in China and wildfires in Russia....

If a tree falls in a forest and no-one reports it has it still fallen? Admittedly there is no link to the original analysis (so don't know how much of the original report conclusions have been "glammed up" ) but "GW" is to blame?
So GW is to blame for all increases in reporting of "bad things" (tm) is it?
KP - Wizard's First Rule definitely applies to the above.

Also...I wouldn't say Munich Re are the most trustworthy source of impartiality on this....since they openly state their views on Climate Change...and actively go around talking about the 'benefits' and 'financial gains' available by adopting green policies.

Also, lets not forget the fingers they have in the pies of CC;

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive...

http://sustainability.munichre.com/en/profile/focu...

"Faust, who is Head of Climate Risk Research at Munich Re concluded: "Over the last decade, climate modelling became increasingly relevant for the steering of insurance business, but still is in its early stages. Scientific facilities and insurers have been advancing in knowledge about operational practices and scientific capabilities, respectively. Although there are fundamental challenges in terms of the choice of the methodology and dealing with uncertainties, the financial services industry can already make fruitful use of climate model information." "

http://shareholderportal.munichre.com/en/profile/f...

This from their CEO;
"Industry is certain to move ahead now and actively develop solutions to curb climate change and prevent its consequences. After all, such solutions make economic sense. One example is the Dii, the huge desert-power project. We at Munich Re will make every effort together with our partners to rapidly turn this vision into reality. In the long run, however, the economy will need a global agreement to prevent a distortion in competitive conditions and relocation of high-carbon production processes and jobs into countries without any regulation mechanisms."

Oh....and Munich Re have already spurted this 'Mantra' in the past;

http://climateresearchnews.com/2009/01/prometheus-...

[turbobloke]

kerplunk said:

Global warming blamed for weather disasters doubling in 30 years:

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/world/global-...

....There were 828 "weather catastrophes" involving loss of life and major economic damage across the world last year, compared with 317 in 1980.

The analysis by Munich Re, the reinsurance company, found 385 such events in the first six months of this year - the second highest in any January to June period since records began in 1974. The report does not include this week's flooding in Pakistan, landslides in China and wildfires in Russia....

Munich Re probably forgot the 2009 European Commission paper by Barredo showing that there is no greenhouse gas signal in normalized European flood losses for 1970 to 2006.

As to the first six months of a year, what sort of limited and unsuitable sample is that? Convenient? Full of cherries, recently picked?

[turbobloke]

Sticking with the flooding theme, increased flooding occurrence has been identified in geological records ca. 11220, 5790, 4900, 4580, 3600, 2790, 2610, 2340, 2010, 1350, 720, & 630 years ago. This from Macklin et al (2005).

Again we have effects from human tax gas emissions travelling back in time on tachyon beams.

Munich Re - causality, FFS.

[chris watton]

turbobloke said:

Sticking with the flooding theme, increased flooding occurrence has been identified in geological records ca. 11220, 5790, 4900, 4580, 3600, 2790, 2610, 2340, 2010, 1350, 720, & 630 years ago. This from Macklin et al (2005).

Again we have effects from human tax gas emissions travelling back in time on tachyon beams.

Munich Re - causality, FFS.

It would be very interesting to see the world's coastlines, and how much they have changed even in a very short time period of 2000 years.
I know Calais has moved several times in that period, from its original ground, which is now several miles out to sea - and Alexandria, where the royal dwellings of Cleopatra are now underwater. Never get any answers as to why this is so, as there were very few people (in relation to now), back then. I wonder if they also blamed the gods for their dwindling coastline, like they do now.....

[Spiritual_Beggar]

Guam said:

chris watton said:

turbobloke said:

Sticking with the flooding theme, increased flooding occurrence has been identified in geological records ca. 11220, 5790, 4900, 4580, 3600, 2790, 2610, 2340, 2010, 1350, 720, & 630 years ago. This from Macklin et al (2005).

Again we have effects from human tax gas emissions travelling back in time on tachyon beams.

Munich Re - causality, FFS.

It would be very interesting to see the world's coastlines, and how much they have changed even in a very short time period of 2000 years.
I know Calais has moved several times in that period, from its original ground, which is now several miles out to sea - and Alexandria, where the royal dwellings of Cleopatra are now underwater. Never get any answers as to why this is so, as there were very few people (in relation to now), back then. I wonder if they also blamed the gods for their dwindling coastline, like they do now.....

Come on now, you know this is due to all those V8 chariots both Cleopatra and the Legions were using back then Keep up at the back

There was a lot of romping back then!!! I think we've all seen Caligula!

Lots of heavy breathing (CO2 release) must have gone on

[Mr Whippy]

kerplunk said:

Global warming blamed for weather disasters doubling in 30 years:

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/world/global-...

....There were 828 "weather catastrophes" involving loss of life and major economic damage across the world last year, compared with 317 in 1980.

The analysis by Munich Re, the reinsurance company, found 385 such events in the first six months of this year - the second highest in any January to June period since records began in 1974. The report does not include this week's flooding in Pakistan, landslides in China and wildfires in Russia....

I take it they correct for things like population density change etc?

Or is it like saying twice as many people die in a country with a twice as large population?

Hmm

Dave

[turbobloke]

It doesn't matter how little or how far back they go with the 'baddest Z since X' nonsense.

X-1 stuffs them, every time.

Causality rules over PR ecohype garbage.