myiW Current Conditions and Forecasts Community Forums Buy and Sell Services
 
Hi guest · myAccount · Log in
 SearchSearch   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   RegisterRegister 
Global cooling
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 524, 525, 526, 527  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    iWindsurf Community Forum Index -> Politics, Off-Topic, Opinions
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
nw30



Joined: 21 Dec 2008
Posts: 4174
Location: The eye of the universe, Cen. Cal. coast

PostPosted: Thu Oct 26, 2017 4:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Gee thanks, another "suggestion", I find it hard to get all worked up over suggestions, no matter who publishes them.

From the article: “The steady and gradual sea-level rise, observed over the past two centuries [may] not be a complete characterization of how sea level would rise in the future,” the study concludes.
Just to let you know that I do read things, lot of things.

And as a reminder, the sea level is constantly, slowly rising, as the geology is slowly eroding (or sinking if you prefer), and that I believe there isn't a damn thing we can do about it, nature is the boss, not us.

_________________
I don't drink the 'cool' aid, I drink tequila, it's more honest.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
MalibuGuru



Joined: 11 Nov 1993
Posts: 6660

PostPosted: Thu Oct 26, 2017 4:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Mac based on the data, when will my house that's currently at 65 feet above sea level be ocean front? Calculating when to sell....and when to start worrying.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mac



Joined: 07 Mar 1999
Posts: 9585

PostPosted: Thu Oct 26, 2017 5:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

nw30 wrote:
...Just to let you know that I do read things, lot of things.

the sea level is constantly, slowly rising, as the geology is slowly eroding (or sinking if you prefer),....


I guess reading is one thing and understanding is another. But thanks for the laugh. The only silly thing you didn't do is echo the orange menace and claim to be real intelligent.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
nw30



Joined: 21 Dec 2008
Posts: 4174
Location: The eye of the universe, Cen. Cal. coast

PostPosted: Thu Oct 26, 2017 6:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Just let me know when you want me to come over to your place to shine your boots.
_________________
I don't drink the 'cool' aid, I drink tequila, it's more honest.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mac



Joined: 07 Mar 1999
Posts: 9585

PostPosted: Thu Oct 26, 2017 6:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

It's called evidence. The more of it you have, the more certain you are of your conclusion. I guess you slept through that class too.

I'm still waiting for some.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mac



Joined: 07 Mar 1999
Posts: 9585

PostPosted: Mon Oct 30, 2017 3:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

You'll hear it from the insurers first, they don't need campaign funds from the Koch's:

Quote:
Since 2011, reinsurers have benefited from several years of relatively benign catastrophe losses. However, reinsurers are now tallying their losses from Hurricanes Harvey, Irma, and Maria (HIM) as well as the Mexico City earthquake that took place during third-quarter 2017, which will likely wipe out the industry's annual earnings and ultimately become a capital event for the global reinsurance sector.

Reinsurers are also nervously watching the remainder of the Atlantic hurricane season and the California wildfires. As a result, with likely more than $100 billion in insured catastrophe losses in the third quarter alone, the two seminal questions remain: Has the reinsurance pricing cycle reached an inflection point? And how will traditional reinsurers and alternative capital providers react to these capital events?

As reinsurers are coping with their third-quarter catastrophe-related losses, their capital could take a hit. Although our ratings are supported by robust capital adequacy levels, we would consider a reinsurer that incurs large losses that translate into capital erosion as an outlier that could be subject to a negative rating action. However, the extent of rating actions will depend on a reinsurer's capital buffer for the current rating, suffered catastrophe losses relative to our expectations given its risk profile and relative to peers' and to the overall market, its earnings power over the next couple of years, and management's intent and plan to replenish capital to pre-event levels
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
boggsman1



Joined: 24 Jun 2002
Posts: 5696
Location: at a computer

PostPosted: Fri Nov 03, 2017 2:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

https://www.wunderground.com/cat6/blockbuster-assessment-humans-likely-responsible-virtually-all-global-warming-1950s
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mac



Joined: 07 Mar 1999
Posts: 9585

PostPosted: Fri Nov 03, 2017 7:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

But that's science, and people still believe in angels, demons, Trump, and other myths.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
nw30



Joined: 21 Dec 2008
Posts: 4174
Location: The eye of the universe, Cen. Cal. coast

PostPosted: Fri Nov 03, 2017 7:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

"likely" = wiggle room.
A far cry from "are", but that's just splitting hairs under a sun lamp.

Chime in mac, 3, 2, 1.....

_________________
I don't drink the 'cool' aid, I drink tequila, it's more honest.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
isobars



Joined: 12 Dec 1999
Posts: 18326

PostPosted: Sat Nov 04, 2017 7:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Today's headline: : "13 Federal agencies blame humans for global warming".

1. Despite this report's draft having been debunked by its own data last winter, they repeated the same cherry picking. And again, even NOAA disputes the report's message.

No, I'm not going to repeat the counterarguments and sources from last winter. You can pick up any newspaper and find them yourselves, such as in today's WSJ.

2. Is this the same federal government which to this day still tries to tell us that saturated fat will raise our bad cholesterol and that high cholesterol causes heart disease? That we fat-assed Americans should eat grains, especially wheat? That the only way to stop and reverse Type II diabetes, high blood pressure, and much more is with drugs?

I'll spare you the next two page list of total BS the government feeds us.

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    iWindsurf Community Forum Index -> Politics, Off-Topic, Opinions All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 524, 525, 526, 527  Next
Page 525 of 527

 
Jump to:  
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

myiW | Weather | Community | Membership | Support | Log in
like us on facebook
© Copyright 1999-2007 WeatherFlow, Inc Contact Us Ad Marketplace

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group