People underestimate risk

[Chris]

Of all the various experts gathered to speak about global warming and sea level rise at last Friday’s Living on the Edge conference on Nantucket, Franklin W. Nutter, president of the Reinsurance Association of America, delivered perhaps the most disturbing message.

His insight was not related to the phenomenon itself so much as to the chances of a meaningful and concerted response. It was about politics and psychology more than environmental science.

Mr. Nutter spoke about the relationship between disaster preparedness, disaster relief and electoral results. The record showed that people reward politicians for disaster relief, but not disaster preparedness, he said.

It is far more politically advantageous to wait for the worst to happen — and then offer help — than to offer means by which the disaster might be averted in the first place, he said. People were grateful for money spent cleaning up a catastrophe, but resentful of expenditure aimed at averting catastrophe.

He suggested that explained a lot. Like the fact that between 1985 and 2004, natural disasters cost America some $16.5 billion in damage to property and crops, resulting in the expenditure of some $3 billion in federal disaster relief money. But the amount spent on disaster preparedness was just $195 million.

And that reality in turn, was just a political expression of human psychology: people underestimate risk, particularly when the risk does not seem immediate.

Experts Affirm Sea Level Rise - 10/1/10 - Vineyard Gazette Online

 

[ScienceRocks]

Earth can support life at a much higher temperature and in fact 60 million years ago the earth was 26c to todays 14c and life found away. It was about as warm during 120-140 million years ago and some of the biggest animals ever lived. Humanity will live even if we have to move some of our cities inland and do some things differently. Right Chris.

 

[Chris]

Earth can support life at a much higher temperature and in fact 60 million years ago the earth was 26c to todays 14c and life found away. It was about as warm during 120-140 million years ago and some of the biggest animals ever lived. Humanity will live even if we have to move some of our cities inland and do some things differently. Right Chris.

What a strange post.

No one said anything about humanity not surviving.

 

[skookerasbil]

Geez.........you assholes need a beer and a plan!!!

The environmental k00ks need to go out and get a life and stop worrying about shit...........my God!! Anyway..........if worse comes to worse, we can always RELEASE THE KRACKEN!!!

 

[skookerasbil]

The k00ks in this forum remind me of some traditional Italian families I have come across during the course of my life. Some wonderful, well meaning folks, but ALWAYS, ALWAYS, ALWAYS have to be hysterical about something.

 

[Oddball]

People underestimate risk

Yeah...They really underestimated the risk during the Y2K scare, didn't they?

 

[westwall]

Earth can support life at a much higher temperature and in fact 60 million years ago the earth was 26c to todays 14c and life found away. It was about as warm during 120-140 million years ago and some of the biggest animals ever lived. Humanity will live even if we have to move some of our cities inland and do some things differently. Right Chris.

No Mathew. Life didn't find a way. It bloomed. The largest creatures and the most verdant plant growth the planet has ever seen existed 60 million years ago.

 

[westwall]

Of all the various experts gathered to speak about global warming and sea level rise at last Friday’s Living on the Edge conference on Nantucket, Franklin W. Nutter, president of the Reinsurance Association of America, delivered perhaps the most disturbing message.

His insight was not related to the phenomenon itself so much as to the chances of a meaningful and concerted response. It was about politics and psychology more than environmental science.

Mr. Nutter spoke about the relationship between disaster preparedness, disaster relief and electoral results. The record showed that people reward politicians for disaster relief, but not disaster preparedness, he said.

It is far more politically advantageous to wait for the worst to happen — and then offer help — than to offer means by which the disaster might be averted in the first place, he said. People were grateful for money spent cleaning up a catastrophe, but resentful of expenditure aimed at averting catastrophe.

He suggested that explained a lot. Like the fact that between 1985 and 2004, natural disasters cost America some $16.5 billion in damage to property and crops, resulting in the expenditure of some $3 billion in federal disaster relief money. But the amount spent on disaster preparedness was just $195 million.

And that reality in turn, was just a political expression of human psychology: people underestimate risk, particularly when the risk does not seem immediate.

Experts Affirm Sea Level Rise - 10/1/10 - Vineyard Gazette Online

If these are the experts who show up then your religion is toast. Sarah Newkirk talked about non existant residence times for CO2. She still seems to think the IPCC's discredited report claiming 200 year residence times was accurate. She needs to get a tad more current. And I actually liked this passage.....

"Ben Strauss, interim executive director of a group called Climate Central, an expert in mapping, spoke about the shortcomings of online maps, accessible through Google, which purport to show the effects of rising water levels.

He said the maps are vague and based on topographical maps taken from satellite data which often had a margin of error of as much as 30 feet. Furthermore, the projections of sea level rise are very much “one size fits all,” Mr. Strauss said.

The generally accepted notion of sea level was “based on [measurement] at one rock in Quebec,” he said.

“But the sea is not flat. Sea level is not the same everywhere. And tides are not the same everywhere,” Mr. Strauss said.

That sums up the climatologists methodology in a nutshell. Shoddy science at best and outright incompetance on the other. Then throw in a rather large dollop of fraud and you've got them defined.

 

[skookerasbil]

Crap and Tax
is DEAD


thats all ya gotta know s0n.........all the rest is jibbersih!!


Sorry............the k00ks lost

 

[Old Rocks]

Earth can support life at a much higher temperature and in fact 60 million years ago the earth was 26c to todays 14c and life found away. It was about as warm during 120-140 million years ago and some of the biggest animals ever lived. Humanity will live even if we have to move some of our cities inland and do some things differently. Right Chris.

No Mathew. Life didn't find a way. It bloomed. The largest creatures and the most verdant plant growth the planet has ever seen existed 60 million years ago.

The Creteceous ended 65 million years ago, Geologist.

And there were many areas of the planet that were deserts during that time.

 

[Old Rocks]

Of all the various experts gathered to speak about global warming and sea level rise at last Friday’s Living on the Edge conference on Nantucket, Franklin W. Nutter, president of the Reinsurance Association of America, delivered perhaps the most disturbing message.

His insight was not related to the phenomenon itself so much as to the chances of a meaningful and concerted response. It was about politics and psychology more than environmental science.

Mr. Nutter spoke about the relationship between disaster preparedness, disaster relief and electoral results. The record showed that people reward politicians for disaster relief, but not disaster preparedness, he said.

It is far more politically advantageous to wait for the worst to happen — and then offer help — than to offer means by which the disaster might be averted in the first place, he said. People were grateful for money spent cleaning up a catastrophe, but resentful of expenditure aimed at averting catastrophe.

He suggested that explained a lot. Like the fact that between 1985 and 2004, natural disasters cost America some $16.5 billion in damage to property and crops, resulting in the expenditure of some $3 billion in federal disaster relief money. But the amount spent on disaster preparedness was just $195 million.

And that reality in turn, was just a political expression of human psychology: people underestimate risk, particularly when the risk does not seem immediate.

Experts Affirm Sea Level Rise - 10/1/10 - Vineyard Gazette Online

If these are the experts who show up then your religion is toast. Sarah Newkirk talked about non existant residence times for CO2. She still seems to think the IPCC's discredited report claiming 200 year residence times was accurate. She needs to get a tad more current. And I actually liked this passage.....

"Ben Strauss, interim executive director of a group called Climate Central, an expert in mapping, spoke about the shortcomings of online maps, accessible through Google, which purport to show the effects of rising water levels.

He said the maps are vague and based on topographical maps taken from satellite data which often had a margin of error of as much as 30 feet. Furthermore, the projections of sea level rise are very much “one size fits all,” Mr. Strauss said.

The generally accepted notion of sea level was “based on [measurement] at one rock in Quebec,” he said.

“But the sea is not flat. Sea level is not the same everywhere. And tides are not the same everywhere,” Mr. Strauss said.

That sums up the climatologists methodology in a nutshell. Shoddy science at best and outright incompetance on the other. Then throw in a rather large dollop of fraud and you've got them defined.

You claim to have an education in science and then you repeat crap like this. Walleyes, you are a liar in every sphere.

 

[skookerasbil]

Of all the various experts gathered to speak about global warming and sea level rise at last Friday’s Living on the Edge conference on Nantucket, Franklin W. Nutter, president of the Reinsurance Association of America, delivered perhaps the most disturbing message.

His insight was not related to the phenomenon itself so much as to the chances of a meaningful and concerted response. It was about politics and psychology more than environmental science.

Mr. Nutter spoke about the relationship between disaster preparedness, disaster relief and electoral results. The record showed that people reward politicians for disaster relief, but not disaster preparedness, he said.

It is far more politically advantageous to wait for the worst to happen — and then offer help — than to offer means by which the disaster might be averted in the first place, he said. People were grateful for money spent cleaning up a catastrophe, but resentful of expenditure aimed at averting catastrophe.

He suggested that explained a lot. Like the fact that between 1985 and 2004, natural disasters cost America some $16.5 billion in damage to property and crops, resulting in the expenditure of some $3 billion in federal disaster relief money. But the amount spent on disaster preparedness was just $195 million.

And that reality in turn, was just a political expression of human psychology: people underestimate risk, particularly when the risk does not seem immediate.

Experts Affirm Sea Level Rise - 10/1/10 - Vineyard Gazette Online

If these are the experts who show up then your religion is toast. Sarah Newkirk talked about non existant residence times for CO2. She still seems to think the IPCC's discredited report claiming 200 year residence times was accurate. She needs to get a tad more current. And I actually liked this passage.....

"Ben Strauss, interim executive director of a group called Climate Central, an expert in mapping, spoke about the shortcomings of online maps, accessible through Google, which purport to show the effects of rising water levels.

He said the maps are vague and based on topographical maps taken from satellite data which often had a margin of error of as much as 30 feet. Furthermore, the projections of sea level rise are very much “one size fits all,” Mr. Strauss said.

The generally accepted notion of sea level was “based on [measurement] at one rock in Quebec,” he said.

“But the sea is not flat. Sea level is not the same everywhere. And tides are not the same everywhere,” Mr. Strauss said.

That sums up the climatologists methodology in a nutshell. Shoddy science at best and outright incompetance on the other. Then throw in a rather large dollop of fraud and you've got them defined.

You claim to have an education in science and then you repeat crap like this. Walleyes, you are a liar in every sphere.

Lets say he was ( which he isnt.......he dominates this forum based upon substance)!!!

Botom line is..............and based upon the very true saying that "Reality is 95% perception".........the American people have spoken and they said the science is shakey at best = no legislation in favor of the true believers.

Indeed..........if there were a "consensus", we'd have seen a slam dunk on Cap and Trade 18months ago!!!



sorry s0ns..............some people in here have the political IQ of a handball and need to get some education

 

[CrusaderFrank]

The guys name was "Nutter" does that not say it all?

 

[Chris]

The real question is, how much will the sea levels rise in the next 100 years?

 

[skookerasbil]

The real question is, how much will the sea levels rise in the next 100 years?

 

[westwall]

Of all the various experts gathered to speak about global warming and sea level rise at last Friday’s Living on the Edge conference on Nantucket, Franklin W. Nutter, president of the Reinsurance Association of America, delivered perhaps the most disturbing message.

His insight was not related to the phenomenon itself so much as to the chances of a meaningful and concerted response. It was about politics and psychology more than environmental science.

Mr. Nutter spoke about the relationship between disaster preparedness, disaster relief and electoral results. The record showed that people reward politicians for disaster relief, but not disaster preparedness, he said.

It is far more politically advantageous to wait for the worst to happen — and then offer help — than to offer means by which the disaster might be averted in the first place, he said. People were grateful for money spent cleaning up a catastrophe, but resentful of expenditure aimed at averting catastrophe.

He suggested that explained a lot. Like the fact that between 1985 and 2004, natural disasters cost America some $16.5 billion in damage to property and crops, resulting in the expenditure of some $3 billion in federal disaster relief money. But the amount spent on disaster preparedness was just $195 million.

And that reality in turn, was just a political expression of human psychology: people underestimate risk, particularly when the risk does not seem immediate.

Experts Affirm Sea Level Rise - 10/1/10 - Vineyard Gazette Online

If these are the experts who show up then your religion is toast. Sarah Newkirk talked about non existant residence times for CO2. She still seems to think the IPCC's discredited report claiming 200 year residence times was accurate. She needs to get a tad more current. And I actually liked this passage.....

"Ben Strauss, interim executive director of a group called Climate Central, an expert in mapping, spoke about the shortcomings of online maps, accessible through Google, which purport to show the effects of rising water levels.

He said the maps are vague and based on topographical maps taken from satellite data which often had a margin of error of as much as 30 feet. Furthermore, the projections of sea level rise are very much “one size fits all,” Mr. Strauss said.

The generally accepted notion of sea level was “based on [measurement] at one rock in Quebec,” he said.

“But the sea is not flat. Sea level is not the same everywhere. And tides are not the same everywhere,” Mr. Strauss said.

That sums up the climatologists methodology in a nutshell. Shoddy science at best and outright incompetance on the other. Then throw in a rather large dollop of fraud and you've got them defined.

You claim to have an education in science and then you repeat crap like this. Walleyes, you are a liar in every sphere.

I hate to tll you doofus but this is Chris's post not mine. I am merely posting what his source said. I understand why you don't like that but it is a fact.

 

[skookerasbil]

On Monday, people I work with ask me how my weekend was and what did I do...................


I always say, "Well........I did spend part of my weekend publically humiliating some mental cases on the internet and it was a hoot!!!!"

 

[Chris]

On Monday, people I work with ask me how my weekend was and what did I do...................


I always say, "Well........I did spend part of my weekend publically humiliating some mental cases on the internet and it was a hoot!!!!"

Which McDonalds do you work at?

 

[del]

On Monday, people I work with ask me how my weekend was and what did I do...................


I always say, "Well........I did spend part of my weekend publically humiliating some mental cases on the internet and it was a hoot!!!!"

Which McDonalds do you work at?

the one across the street from your homeless shelter

 

[Chris]

On Monday, people I work with ask me how my weekend was and what did I do...................


I always say, "Well........I did spend part of my weekend publically humiliating some mental cases on the internet and it was a hoot!!!!"

Which McDonalds do you work at?

the one across the street from your homeless shelter

Del, your posts are embarrassing.

I feel bad for your children.