View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
GURGLETROUSERS
Joined: 30 Dec 2009 Posts: 2643
|
Posted: Wed Jan 08, 2014 3:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Of course there is doubt Mac. But the Met Office is one of the leading world authorities on climate, with state of the art computer modelling, and records going back some.
The graph I quoted from IS smoothed with a running mean, and is for the U.K. only. The remarkable point of the downward line from 2000 (1999 really) is that it is steep and steady, year on year, with no indication that it is slowing. Extrapolation for 2014 would suggest it isn't going to halt. If so, the U.K. would be back to levels of the past. (Assuming it stopped falling then.)
But that is the question! The Met Office were pro warming up until recently, but are now more guarded in their statements. This latest 'extreme' storm and rain weather hitting our country is, according to them, owing to a longish term Atlantic (I forget what they called it) cycle, and is quite normal in its effects. (The jet stream diverted and so on, which I gather is also bringing cold air cells down from the Arctic over America at the moment, with record cold temps.)
It occurs to me that 2014 could be quite a defining year if our temps (U.K.) continue to fall, and other parts of the globe do also. I not betting either way, but the cooling scenario isn't yet out of the picture. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
techno900
Joined: 28 Mar 2001 Posts: 4161
|
Posted: Wed Jan 08, 2014 3:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
From the article: Quote: | By November 2012 the NFIP was more than $20 billion in debt, a number that was expected to grow to nearly $30 billion by the time the bill from Superstorm Sandy was finally tallied. |
This is what you get when the government is in control. Socialized insurance -everyone must pay to cover the damage to a few, with no option to opt out. And even if you believe this is a good concept, why are they 30 billion in debt? Surprise storms - give me a break!
Why not leave the insurance option to the buyer if they are in a flood zone, assuming their mortgage company doesn't require flood insurance? If they own their house/property outright, why not let the owner choose to insure or not? Let the insurance companies provide the coverage and not the government. If people take the risk and go without insurance and their home gets washed away, so be it. It happens all the time now with fires and thefts.
I guess it's the same concept as the ACA, keep costs down with everyone in the pool. But through poor management, the government is in the hole 30 billion. Do you wonder why some of us are skeptical of the ACA. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
mac
Joined: 07 Mar 1999 Posts: 17747 Location: Berkeley, California
|
Posted: Wed Jan 08, 2014 3:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Techno--I agree with you on the flood program. But efforts to reform the program, or scrap it, have not come from the Republican old guard, or the new Tea baggers. And it took so long to roll out the rather modest, and insufficient new rates because politicians from both parties squawked. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
isobars
Joined: 12 Dec 1999 Posts: 20935
|
Posted: Wed Jan 08, 2014 3:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
techno900 wrote: | Why not leave the insurance option to the buyer if they are in a flood zone, assuming their mortgage company doesn't require flood insurance? |
Even if the lender does require flood insurance, it should be the buyer's responsibility. No one's forcing them to buy that home. If ya can't afford a given home, ya buy a cheaper home. Taxpayers don't owe us a home worth twice our annual income. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
mac
Joined: 07 Mar 1999 Posts: 17747 Location: Berkeley, California
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
swchandler
Joined: 08 Nov 1993 Posts: 10588
|
Posted: Wed Jan 08, 2014 4:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
G.T., while the UK might be getting abnormally cool weather, there are those of us here in Southern California seeing record high temperatures a lot lately. In 2013, the Santa Barbara area received only 27% of our normal rainfall average. Things are very much out of sorts, but around here I find it hard to blame it all on global cooling.
Last edited by swchandler on Wed Jan 08, 2014 9:19 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
Back to top |
|
|
nw30
Joined: 21 Dec 2008 Posts: 6485 Location: The eye of the universe, Cen. Cal. coast
|
Posted: Wed Jan 08, 2014 7:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
swchandler wrote: | G.T., while the UK might be getting abnormally cool weather, there are those of us here in Southern California seeing record high temperatures a lot lately. In 2013, Santa Barbara we received only 27% of our normal rainfall average. Things are very much out of sorts, but around here I find it hard to blame it all on global cooling. |
Sounds like you just fell into the same trap that the alarmists always use as example of a lame statement, when somebody says something that starts out with something like, "well around here.....".
True, the lower half of Cali. is warm, and in a terrible drought, but that's it.
It's not an indicator of anything other than we're having another drought cycle, big woop.
P.S. L.A. used to be a aired before Mulholland brought water into the basin.
Read "Rivers in the Desert" by Margaret Davis, all about how Mulholland did it, it's a fascinating read. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
mac
Joined: 07 Mar 1999 Posts: 17747 Location: Berkeley, California
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
nw30
Joined: 21 Dec 2008 Posts: 6485 Location: The eye of the universe, Cen. Cal. coast
|
Posted: Wed Jan 08, 2014 9:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
mac wrote: | Los Angeles is still arid. Attention to detail is the trademark of a mind that can actually focus and absorb facts.
|
Hea, shouldn't "mac" be spelled with one of these 'M', or is it that you consider yourself quite diminutive? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
swchandler
Joined: 08 Nov 1993 Posts: 10588
|
Posted: Wed Jan 08, 2014 10:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
NW30, I have to say that I'm not one that is adamant about the issue of global warming, but I couldn't waste an opportunity to give G.T. a bit of a rub. Lately, he's been quite strong on the issue of global cooling as predicted by Russian science sources, and seemingly UK weather makes a case in point. Yet, with the usually dry and warmer weather that we've been experiencing, the idea of global cooling appears far fetched.
Am I really serious about the issue of world wide global warming? Not really. However, if there is something that I am adamant about, it would be supporting tougher regulations focused on reducing environmental pollution. Moreover, we should be concerned about untoward release of CO2 into the atmosphere. We can do better, and I see tougher regulations as an opportunity to grow high quality jobs, and to advance state of the art technology into the future. Leadership has its costs. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum You cannot attach files in this forum You cannot download files in this forum
|
|
|