Sen. Barbara Boxer of California delivered a speech in the Senate last week in which she linked global warming to the San Diego wildfires, Darfur, the imminent loss of the world’s polar bears and even a poor 14-year-old boy who died from “an infection caused after swimming in Lake Havasu,” because its water is warmer. Forget arson. Forget genocide. Forget nature. There is no tragedy that cannot be placed at the doorstep of global-warming skeptics.
San Francisco Chronicle: ‘Polar bear pandering’
Jennifer Marohasy BSc PhD is a critical thinker with expertise in the scientific method.
“Projections Now Stand as Fact”?
That sounds like an excuse offered by someone addicted to gambling. Geesh.
Well, on the other hand, the IPCC and friends take projections as fact… so that vaunted “consensus” definitely proves that “projections” are “facts”.
Or do I repeat myself.
As for polar bears, that’s all a fabrication. But for those who don’t believe it’s a fabrication, it would be good to transport polar bears and seals (food for bears) to the South Pole so they can “colonize” it. Antarctica seems quite robust in its refusal to *warm*. This could be a *refuge* and maybe even the WWF would pay for moving the colonists. Might have to give the WWF drilling rights, though.
The WWF is, fundamentally, a tax-free real-estate scam.
Schiller – “it would be good to transport polar bears and seals (food for bears) to the South Pole so they can “colonize” it.”
Just like it was a good idea to introduce rabbits into Australia? Or cane toads?
Ender,
Don’t forget Caucasians!
Err Neil Herwett – Could that be SOME Caucasians;-).
(no names no pack drill eh?)
Dare I say it? … It looks like Boxer was punch drunk.
Lawrie,
No, I meant Caucasians, introduced into Australia, collectively.
All the claimed economic benefits of so-called climate abatement measures have the unmistakable stench of all those (zilch) “eco-tourism jobs” that were supposed to be created from the moment good working forests were handed over to the “environmental (titter, titter) guardians” (gufffaaaaww).
We need to recognise that the green left have always been nothing more than ignorant cargo cultists who wouldn’t recognise a job based on commercial value for service in a pink fit.
A climate cretin speaking about employment prospects is like taking stock market advice from Bugs Bunny. Be my guest.
Neil – “Don’t forget Caucasians!”
Yes – good point however the aborigines also did a lot of damage when they introduced themselves thousands of years ago. They took thousands of years to learn to live with the Australian climate. There is a debate raging about the Australian megafauna dieout and how much humans contributed.
http://www.abc.net.au/science/features/megafauna/default.htm
Though maybe not as eloquent as Ian – I agree with the sentiment.
Why is it that the phrase ” this will be good for business/the economy/employment/the bottom line , always seems to emanate from someone who’s never operated a business, employed staff on their own account , invested their own money in their own initiative etc?
In the good ole days Industrial Relations Commissioners had it down to a fine art – from their tenured bubble they were always quick to lecture dumb employers about the unrecognised commercial benefits of the most ridculous ambits.
Given that this was the San Francisco Chronicle, as LEFT-coast of media outlet as one can get, this was a one very brave Op-Ed piece. Expect calls for heresy trials and dismissal (before burning at the stake) to be in the “letters to the editor” by mid-week!
Questioning catastrophic AGW and Sen. Boxer are capital offenses in that part of the U.S.; and that says something, since SF is a city the runs over 3 to 1 AGAINST capital punishment!
Aha, Sanfrancisco. Have they apologised yet, (collectively of course) for their role in the world HIV pandemic?
Now lets see, what other enduring intellectual movements based on solid science has SF given to the world?
Well, there was that flower power thing that was going to save the planet (yes, save the f#$%g planet) but which Beetle George Harrison described as “a bunch of ‘orrible spotty drop-out kids”.
And this, of course, was all wrapped up in new age rural communal living that yielded an average of about five tomatoes for each commune member. Oh, yes, and it was funded with inheritance and family embarrasment money and maintained by the sale of psychosis inducing substances to those “less fortunate” who had not yet achieved nouveau rustification.
And this powerful new perception of the self styled “leaders of the future” ended with a wimper as couples busted, minds atrophied and all sorts of messianic morons drifted into new age real estate development. And a fresh bunch of neglected, sexually abused children were left to drift along on the anoxic edges of mainstream current.
And thirty years later they are at it again. Dumping on non-believers for their supposed incapacity to grasp their vision for the future. Sermonising as some sort of intellectual prime movers on the cliche’s edge. leaping from isolated fact to extrapolated extreme and worshiping both as equal, and proven, deities before Baal.
Ah San Francisco, exhibiting all the intellectual rigour of an overly massaged sphincter.
I think it’s more “projections now identify risk”. In most areas of life, rational humans like to identify risk and deal with it. We usually have insurance policies, even though for most of us the claims, if we make any, will be less than the price of the premiums.
SJT clearly has no idea how an insurance policy is costed. It is based on the realistic probability of an adverse event taking place for an individual. To suggest there is any similarity between that process and the amorphous mass of primeval sludge that some call “climate science” is bunkumatosis.
Good point, Jim, the other classic line is, “I’m from the government, trust me, I’m here to help” (myself).
SJT,
Projections do *not* identify risk. Projections identify risks the projector projects.
And if you’re an insurance company selling hurricane insurance, you want to “project” a turbulent season and jack your prices up.
It’s been a quiet hurricane season, though… I’m sure the champagne corks are popping everywhere in the hurricane insurance industry.
Dude (or dudette), did you flunk the college course on risk management, and was that because you didn’t show up for class? Or didn’t get educated?
Schiller
Good luck getting hurricane insurance in the high risk areas of the US, and if there is a hurricane, good luck getting a claim paid.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/4552180.stm
Well SJT if you bothered to do a modicum of homework you will find that there is plenty of evidence to support the fact that insurance companies have paid out ..big time.
So much so it affected the UK govts externals— as but one snippet.
Sure Malcolm, they pay out a lot, and they don’t. If you do your homework, there are plenty of stories about what exactly constitutes ‘flood’ damage, ‘water’ damage, ‘storm’ damage and ‘hurricane’ damage. It’s a fine line the insurance companies are expert at playing with. I used to work for an insurance company, and someone there tried to explain it to me once. What it comes down to is, “How much can we afford to pay out”. I think there is only one government backed insurance company operating in Florida now. Everyone else doesn’t want to take the risk, no mater what the premium.
You are talking rubbish again SJT, 1st you say “Good luck getting hurricane insurance in the high risk areas of the US’ and then you say “I think there is only one government backed insurance company operating in Florida now”
The truth is that mortgage insurance compels the insuree to cover for flood and the NFIP does that.
You used to work for an insurance company? wow, Daddy will be impressed
Socialism? Way to go, Rog.
SJT
The issue is that there HAS been a history of people being able to get insurance, and there HAS been a history of the companies paying out–in rather large amounts.
The fact that the cover has now become harder to get, and the circumstances of that cover, is a commercial decision that the companies have made.
It might also have a lot more to do with
a) the propensity of people to live in risk prone areas, and in greater densities,and
b) build mansions that now have a high value.
The fact that Insurance MAY now be harder to get is because it is not a risk worth taking for reasons that have nothing to do with anything else.
Insurance companies make these trade-offs all the time. So surely, there is nothing unusual about applying these same commercial principles to hurricane prone areas.
The logic would then surely be, dont build a timber framed mansion ( or whatever) below the water line in a hurricane prone area.
When SJT compares insurance companies to socialism, it’s time to question his or her planet of origin.
Schiller
“What does FEMA or the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) have to do with my flood insurance?
The NFIP was created by Congress in response to the rising cost of disaster relief for flood victims. The NFIP is managed by FEMA (which is a part of DHS). Through FEMA’s “Write Your Own” (WYO) Program, private insurance companies write and service the standard federal flood insurance policy under their own names. The standard federal policy is also available from FEMA’s Direct Servicing Agent.
No matter which carrier issues your flood insurance policy, the coverage and rates are the same, as are the general conditions and provisions for loss settlements (claims). FEMA provides the funds used by the WYO companies to pay NFIP claims, and regularly audits those companies to ensure that they are handling policies and claims in accordance with the rules and regulations of the program.”
http://www.fema.gov/plan/prevent/floodins/faqs_floodinfo.shtm#2
Thank you, SJT.
These regulations, which you were so generous as to quote, have been established to prevent scammers and con-men from ripping people off.
If that’s your definition of socialism, you are definitely a capitalist.
“FEMA provides the funds used by the WYO companies to pay NFIP claims”