Goldman Sachs analysis of the impact of climate change. The result are terrifying

[AlbertaFarmer5]

eating human flesh to combat climate change has been proposed....and spoiler alert it wasn't Trump

https://www.theepochtimes.com/swedish-researcher-pushes-human-flesh-eating-as-answer-to-future-climate-change-food-shortages_3068833.html https://www.theepochtimes.com/swedish-researcher-pushes-human-flesh-eating-as-answer-to-future-climate-change-food-shortages_3068833.html

That is the example I was referring to in my post, thanks for posting the link. These are the folks who are helping common sense and science win this debate.

[rumrocks]

In the last 10 years Australian house price have risen about 61% while the cost of claims has doubled (100%) even with adjustments for inflation which would account for some of the housing price rise.

Houses are only a portion of the insured assets in Australia and I doubt that rural houses or other assets would have risen as much as all housing.

https://www.globalpropertyguide.com/Pacific/Australia/price-change-10-years

The Australian Central Bank obviously has more resources to correctly assess the risk of climate change and insurance claims than you or I do. They have cited the increasing costs and risks of climate change as real.

But don't let that stop you from disagreeing with every world class scientific organization and central banks that has evidence that the costs and threat from climate change are real. LOL

As an engineer who believes that carbon is only soot, I don't think anyone should give much credibility to your arm chair analysis.

More people, insuring more assets, moving to coast lines where weather tends to be more destructive, equates to larger payouts from insurance companies.

[A990]

That is the example I was referring to in my post, thanks for posting the link. These are the folks who are helping common sense and science win this debate.

..I've actually flipped on this issue. I bought in completely for years but when alarming forecasts don't materialize and goal posts keep moving and key scientists selectively withhold data it starts to set off alarm bell..
...i liken this to markets....sometimes knowing human nature is just as useful as knowing the fundamentals

[beaverdam]

It's just too obvious, that each and every time a theory, a forecast or a prediction fails, no one in the MSM or from the glowbull warming side celebrate!

You'd think that if we found out things weren't as bad, or going to be as bad in the future,,, it'd be something to celebrate.

But ooooh nooooo, the Media doubles down harder, the warmists get even more hysterical, and the cut an' plasters, cut an' paste even more, and more, and longer and longer.

[furrowtickler]

It's just too obvious, that each and every time a theory, a forecast or a prediction fails, no one in the MSM or from the glowbull warming side celebrate!

You'd think that if we found out things weren't as bad, or going to be as bad in the future,,, it'd be something to celebrate.

But ooooh nooooo, the Media doubles down harder, the warmists get even more hysterical, and the cut an' plasters, cut an' paste even more, and more, and longer and longer.

That’s because the U.N. needs to push their agenda .... nothing more .

[jazz]

Since NASA is chucks go to, here they are admitting their models are crap. This hoax is over.

[fjlip]

Thanks jazz, end of issue, all HORSESHIT LIES AN AGENDA! Move on people, live, don't fear the future, nothing is going to happen.

[Bowerpower]

Since NASA is chucks go to, here they are admitting their models are crap. This hoax is over.

[ATTACH]5081[/ATTACH]

Trump hacked nasa

[furrowtickler]

Trump hacked nasa

It was the Russians lol

[AlbertaFarmer5]

Trump hacked nasa

No conspiracy theory required. If the alarmists bothered to read all the disclaimers and facts in the science behind the headlines, these uncertainties are stated in most case by all responsible and ethical scientists. They just don't make splashy headlines and people like Chuck looking for alarmist headlines don't repeat them ad nauseam.

What is interesting, is I tried reading this article on my phone and it was difficult to see, so I looked up the original, and I can not find it. Various paragraphs can be located, but not in its entirety( although I didn't try the way back machine). The paragraph about models needing to be 100 times more accurate to be useful, has been pared back to "more than 10 times", in the exact same paragraph on another NASA page. So much for the science being settled, what is an order of magnitude amongst friends, when you are already wrong by a factor of more than 10, after all they are only zeroes.