ALL extreme weather at record lows or declining!!! So much for wilder and wider swings!! :-)

[skookerasbil]

Well.........looks like more warmist predictions blowing up like a nuke in their faces!! And it happens continually, does it not?

A summary of the losing below.....................all exceedingly well sourced by the way and largely based upon NOAA statistics.


Below is a complete rundown of the very latest on extreme weather conditions: Update data from the 2016 Climate Depot report: Skeptics Deliver Consensus Busting ‘State of the Climate Report’ to UN Summit

Extreme Weather: Scientist to Congress in 2017: ‘No evidence’ that hurricanes, floods, droughts, tornadoes are increasing – Dr. Roger Pielke Jr. of University of Colorado

Tornadoes: NOAA Tornado data revealing 2016 as ‘one of the quietest years since records began in 1954’ and below average for 5th year in a row

Hurricanes: 1) Inconvenient NOAA report: ‘It is premature to conclude (AGW has) already had a detectable impact on’ hurricanes & 2) NOAA: U.S. Completes Record 11 Straight Years Without Major (Cat 3+) Hurricane Strike & 3) 30 peer-reviewed scientific papers reveal the lack of connection between hurricanes & ‘global warming’

Floods: ‘Floods are not increasing’: Dr. Roger Pielke Jr. slams ‘global warming’ link to floods & extreme weather – How does media ‘get away with this?’ – Pielke Jr. on how extreme weather is NOT getting worse: ‘Flood disasters are sharply down. U.S. floods not increasing either.’ “Floods suck when they occur. The good news is U.S. flood damage is sharply down over 70 years,” Pielke explained.

Heavy Rains: 1000 year rainfall study suggests droughts and floods used to be longer, worse

Extreme weather used to be blamed on ‘global cooling’ in the 1970s and early 80s Flashback NOAA 1974: ‘Extreme weather events blamed on global cooling’ – NOAA October 1974: ‘Many climatologists have associated this drought and other recent weather anomalies with a global cooling trend and changes in atmospheric circulation which, if prolonged, pose serious threats to major food-producing regions of the world’


http://www.climatedepot.com/2017/04/27/analysis-its-not-just-droughts-but-nearly-all-extreme-weather-is-either-declining-or-at-or-near-record-lows/




Now...........how many times in the past few years have we seen the 3 or 4 regular warmist/alarmist guys in here telling us all the weather was getting far more wild and far more widespread? How about like 450,000 times or so...........

All a bunch of nonsense crap...........hysterical ranting by people who are perpetually hysterical any time a hurricane forms or there is a major thunderstorm. These people just tend to the hysterical in life........go to an Italian wake in Brooklyn sometime = this is what it would be like living around the regular alarmists in this forum ( and we know who they are too ).

We don't have to name them but to be sure, you know who they are when you see the following >>

1. Posts where the narrative conveys deep anger and misery ( veritable head explosions )
2. Fabulous predictions based upon a single weather event.
3. The most colorful of graphs/maps.
4. Gigantic font sizes.

Its all theatre s0ns!!!

 

[gipper]

Wait! What?

You mean Al Gore is a FRAUD!

Al Gore’s New Group Demands $15 Trillion To Fight Global Warming – Tennessee Star

 

[skookerasbil]

Wait! What?

You mean Al Gore is a FRAUD!

Al Gore’s New Group Demands $15 Trillion To Fight Global Warming – Tennessee Star

You know what.......these frauds play to the emotional hemophiliacs out there in the real world.....who kneejerk to anything that is embellished and overstated. They are all around us........we have known them our whole lives. Think of the last time you went to a supermarket when a 4" snowstorm was coming and there are about 50 women filling their carts to the ceiling with 2 months worth of food. The people at the water cooler who are devastated because the night before their stoopid cat was left out in the rain overnight. The people you know you can sell a bag of dog doo for $1,000 a pop if it was packaged just right. The suckers.

 

[Old Rocks]

Weather and Climate Extremes

Volume 11, March 2016, Pages 70–79


Open Access

Trends in weather related disasters – Consequences for insurers and society

• Peter Hoeppe

Abstract
As extreme weather events affect the core business of insurance this industry has quite early addressed potential effects of natural climate cycles and global warming on natural catastrophe hazards. Munich Re’s experts have been researching loss events caused by natural hazards around the globe for 40 years. These losses are documented in the NatCatSERVICE database currently documenting more than 36,000 single events. The analyses of the NatCatSERVICE data clearly show a high interannual variability, in some regions decadal oscillations, and a long term trend to an increase in the number of natural catastrophes around the globe, with ever growing losses. The trend curve indicating the number of loss relevant natural catastrophes worldwide reveals an increase by a factor of about three within the last 35 years.

As the rise in the number of natural catastrophes is predominantly attributable to weather-related events like storms and floods, with no relevant increase in geophysical events such as earthquakes, tsunamis, and volcanic eruptions, there is some justification in assuming that changes in the atmosphere, and global warming in particular, play a relevant role.

Trends in weather related disasters – Consequences for insurers and society

 

[skookerasbil]

Weather and Climate Extremes

Volume 11, March 2016, Pages 70–79


Open Access

Trends in weather related disasters – Consequences for insurers and society

• 
  
  
  • Peter Hoeppe

Abstract
As extreme weather events affect the core business of insurance this industry has quite early addressed potential effects of natural climate cycles and global warming on natural catastrophe hazards. Munich Re’s experts have been researching loss events caused by natural hazards around the globe for 40 years. These losses are documented in the NatCatSERVICE database currently documenting more than 36,000 single events. The analyses of the NatCatSERVICE data clearly show a high interannual variability, in some regions decadal oscillations, and a long term trend to an increase in the number of natural catastrophes around the globe, with ever growing losses. The trend curve indicating the number of loss relevant natural catastrophes worldwide reveals an increase by a factor of about three within the last 35 years.

As the rise in the number of natural catastrophes is predominantly attributable to weather-related events like storms and floods, with no relevant increase in geophysical events such as earthquakes, tsunamis, and volcanic eruptions, there is some justification in assuming that changes in the atmosphere, and global warming in particular, play a relevant role.

Trends in weather related disasters – Consequences for insurers and society

Hmmm........I think I'll go with NOAA statistics rather than an insurance company thank you!!!

 

[skookerasbil]

Oh.....ps.....this is a top story on DRUDGE at the moment!! And we know what that means.......30 million hits by days end!!

 

[Billy_Bob]

Weather and Climate Extremes

Volume 11, March 2016, Pages 70–79


Open Access

Trends in weather related disasters – Consequences for insurers and society

• 
  
  
  • Peter Hoeppe

Abstract
As extreme weather events affect the core business of insurance this industry has quite early addressed potential effects of natural climate cycles and global warming on natural catastrophe hazards. Munich Re’s experts have been researching loss events caused by natural hazards around the globe for 40 years. These losses are documented in the NatCatSERVICE database currently documenting more than 36,000 single events. The analyses of the NatCatSERVICE data clearly show a high interannual variability, in some regions decadal oscillations, and a long term trend to an increase in the number of natural catastrophes around the globe, with ever growing losses. The trend curve indicating the number of loss relevant natural catastrophes worldwide reveals an increase by a factor of about three within the last 35 years.

As the rise in the number of natural catastrophes is predominantly attributable to weather-related events like storms and floods, with no relevant increase in geophysical events such as earthquakes, tsunamis, and volcanic eruptions, there is some justification in assuming that changes in the atmosphere, and global warming in particular, play a relevant role.

Trends in weather related disasters – Consequences for insurers and society

Events equivocated by dollar amounts.. A National Insurance Institute slight of hand fabrication.. SO as the dollar amount increased (which it will do just because of inflation and number of people affected), so does the so called severity of the event. More people tightly in a small area equals greater cost and effect. The comparison is total bull shit..

IF you looked at geographical areas affected, then vs now, they are not bigger or stronger.. And that is the hidden truth clouded by all of the lies..

 

[edthecynic]

Oh.....ps.....this is a top story on DRUDGE at the moment!! And we know what that means.......30 million hits by days end!!

As ten millions of circles can never make a square, so the united voice of myriads cannot lend the smallest foundation to falsehood.

- OLIVER GOLDSMITH, The Vicar of Wakefield

 

[Old Rocks]

Weather and Climate Extremes

Volume 11, March 2016, Pages 70–79


Open Access

Trends in weather related disasters – Consequences for insurers and society

• 
  
  
  • Peter Hoeppe

Abstract
As extreme weather events affect the core business of insurance this industry has quite early addressed potential effects of natural climate cycles and global warming on natural catastrophe hazards. Munich Re’s experts have been researching loss events caused by natural hazards around the globe for 40 years. These losses are documented in the NatCatSERVICE database currently documenting more than 36,000 single events. The analyses of the NatCatSERVICE data clearly show a high interannual variability, in some regions decadal oscillations, and a long term trend to an increase in the number of natural catastrophes around the globe, with ever growing losses. The trend curve indicating the number of loss relevant natural catastrophes worldwide reveals an increase by a factor of about three within the last 35 years.

As the rise in the number of natural catastrophes is predominantly attributable to weather-related events like storms and floods, with no relevant increase in geophysical events such as earthquakes, tsunamis, and volcanic eruptions, there is some justification in assuming that changes in the atmosphere, and global warming in particular, play a relevant role.

Trends in weather related disasters – Consequences for insurers and society

Events equivocated by dollar amounts.. A National Insurance Institute slight of hand fabrication.. SO as the dollar amount increased (which it will do just because of inflation and number of people affected), so does the so called severity of the event. More people tightly in a small area equals greater cost and effect. The comparison is total bull shit..

IF you looked at geographical areas affected, then vs now, they are not bigger or stronger.. And that is the hidden truth clouded by all of the lies..

What a fucked up liar you continue to be, Silly Billy. The Chart quite clearly states that it is the number of events, not the dollar amounts. But of course, one cannot expect room temperature IQ's to notice things like that.

 

[ScienceRocks]

Weather and Climate Extremes

Volume 11, March 2016, Pages 70–79


Open Access

Trends in weather related disasters – Consequences for insurers and society

• 
  
  
  • Peter Hoeppe

Abstract
As extreme weather events affect the core business of insurance this industry has quite early addressed potential effects of natural climate cycles and global warming on natural catastrophe hazards. Munich Re’s experts have been researching loss events caused by natural hazards around the globe for 40 years. These losses are documented in the NatCatSERVICE database currently documenting more than 36,000 single events. The analyses of the NatCatSERVICE data clearly show a high interannual variability, in some regions decadal oscillations, and a long term trend to an increase in the number of natural catastrophes around the globe, with ever growing losses. The trend curve indicating the number of loss relevant natural catastrophes worldwide reveals an increase by a factor of about three within the last 35 years.

As the rise in the number of natural catastrophes is predominantly attributable to weather-related events like storms and floods, with no relevant increase in geophysical events such as earthquakes, tsunamis, and volcanic eruptions, there is some justification in assuming that changes in the atmosphere, and global warming in particular, play a relevant role.

Trends in weather related disasters – Consequences for insurers and society

Events equivocated by dollar amounts.. A National Insurance Institute slight of hand fabrication.. SO as the dollar amount increased (which it will do just because of inflation and number of people affected), so does the so called severity of the event. More people tightly in a small area equals greater cost and effect. The comparison is total bull shit..

IF you looked at geographical areas affected, then vs now, they are not bigger or stronger.. And that is the hidden truth clouded by all of the lies..

What a fucked up liar you continue to be, Silly Billy. The Chart quite clearly states that it is the number of events, not the dollar amounts. But of course, one cannot expect room temperature IQ's to notice things like that.

To be an liberterian or archaist you have to be sub-iq'ed as you have to be able to be brainwashed against all government, common sense and logic. Billy is dumber then a box of dogshit but he believes that he is better then all the scientist on earth...Kind of sad.

 

[gipper]

Well.........looks like more warmist predictions blowing up like a nuke in their faces!! And it happens continually, does it not?

A summary of the losing below.....................all exceedingly well sourced by the way and largely based upon NOAA statistics.


Below is a complete rundown of the very latest on extreme weather conditions: Update data from the 2016 Climate Depot report: Skeptics Deliver Consensus Busting ‘State of the Climate Report’ to UN Summit

Extreme Weather: Scientist to Congress in 2017: ‘No evidence’ that hurricanes, floods, droughts, tornadoes are increasing – Dr. Roger Pielke Jr. of University of Colorado

Tornadoes: NOAA Tornado data revealing 2016 as ‘one of the quietest years since records began in 1954’ and below average for 5th year in a row

Hurricanes: 1) Inconvenient NOAA report: ‘It is premature to conclude (AGW has) already had a detectable impact on’ hurricanes & 2) NOAA: U.S. Completes Record 11 Straight Years Without Major (Cat 3+) Hurricane Strike & 3) 30 peer-reviewed scientific papers reveal the lack of connection between hurricanes & ‘global warming’

Floods: ‘Floods are not increasing’: Dr. Roger Pielke Jr. slams ‘global warming’ link to floods & extreme weather – How does media ‘get away with this?’ – Pielke Jr. on how extreme weather is NOT getting worse: ‘Flood disasters are sharply down. U.S. floods not increasing either.’ “Floods suck when they occur. The good news is U.S. flood damage is sharply down over 70 years,” Pielke explained.

Heavy Rains: 1000 year rainfall study suggests droughts and floods used to be longer, worse

Extreme weather used to be blamed on ‘global cooling’ in the 1970s and early 80s Flashback NOAA 1974: ‘Extreme weather events blamed on global cooling’ – NOAA October 1974: ‘Many climatologists have associated this drought and other recent weather anomalies with a global cooling trend and changes in atmospheric circulation which, if prolonged, pose serious threats to major food-producing regions of the world’


http://www.climatedepot.com/2017/04/27/analysis-its-not-just-droughts-but-nearly-all-extreme-weather-is-either-declining-or-at-or-near-record-lows/




Now...........how many times in the past few years have we seen the 3 or 4 regular warmist/alarmist guys in here telling us all the weather was getting far more wild and far more widespread? How about like 450,000 times or so...........

All a bunch of nonsense crap...........hysterical ranting by people who are perpetually hysterical any time a hurricane forms or there is a major thunderstorm. These people just tend to the hysterical in life........go to an Italian wake in Brooklyn sometime = this is what it would be like living around the regular alarmists in this forum ( and we know who they are too ).

We don't have to name them but to be sure, you know who they are when you see the following >>

1. Posts where the narrative conveys deep anger and misery ( veritable head explosions )
2. Fabulous predictions based upon a single weather event.
3. The most colorful of graphs/maps.
4. Gigantic font sizes.

Its all theatre s0ns!!!

Weather and Climate Extremes

Volume 11, March 2016, Pages 70–79


Open Access

Trends in weather related disasters – Consequences for insurers and society

• 
  
  
  • Peter Hoeppe

Abstract
As extreme weather events affect the core business of insurance this industry has quite early addressed potential effects of natural climate cycles and global warming on natural catastrophe hazards. Munich Re’s experts have been researching loss events caused by natural hazards around the globe for 40 years. These losses are documented in the NatCatSERVICE database currently documenting more than 36,000 single events. The analyses of the NatCatSERVICE data clearly show a high interannual variability, in some regions decadal oscillations, and a long term trend to an increase in the number of natural catastrophes around the globe, with ever growing losses. The trend curve indicating the number of loss relevant natural catastrophes worldwide reveals an increase by a factor of about three within the last 35 years.

As the rise in the number of natural catastrophes is predominantly attributable to weather-related events like storms and floods, with no relevant increase in geophysical events such as earthquakes, tsunamis, and volcanic eruptions, there is some justification in assuming that changes in the atmosphere, and global warming in particular, play a relevant role.

Trends in weather related disasters – Consequences for insurers and society

Well than...who is lying?

What we KNOW:
Warmers and Leftists (funny how they are one an the same) have a long history of lying...so it must be them.

18 Spectacularly Wrong Prophecies from the First Earth Day
EconomicPolicyJournal.com: 18 Spectacularly Wrong Prophecies from the First Earth Day

 

[skookerasbil]

Well.........looks like more warmist predictions blowing up like a nuke in their faces!! And it happens continually, does it not?

A summary of the losing below.....................all exceedingly well sourced by the way and largely based upon NOAA statistics.


Below is a complete rundown of the very latest on extreme weather conditions: Update data from the 2016 Climate Depot report: Skeptics Deliver Consensus Busting ‘State of the Climate Report’ to UN Summit

Extreme Weather: Scientist to Congress in 2017: ‘No evidence’ that hurricanes, floods, droughts, tornadoes are increasing – Dr. Roger Pielke Jr. of University of Colorado

Tornadoes: NOAA Tornado data revealing 2016 as ‘one of the quietest years since records began in 1954’ and below average for 5th year in a row

Hurricanes: 1) Inconvenient NOAA report: ‘It is premature to conclude (AGW has) already had a detectable impact on’ hurricanes & 2) NOAA: U.S. Completes Record 11 Straight Years Without Major (Cat 3+) Hurricane Strike & 3) 30 peer-reviewed scientific papers reveal the lack of connection between hurricanes & ‘global warming’

Floods: ‘Floods are not increasing’: Dr. Roger Pielke Jr. slams ‘global warming’ link to floods & extreme weather – How does media ‘get away with this?’ – Pielke Jr. on how extreme weather is NOT getting worse: ‘Flood disasters are sharply down. U.S. floods not increasing either.’ “Floods suck when they occur. The good news is U.S. flood damage is sharply down over 70 years,” Pielke explained.

Heavy Rains: 1000 year rainfall study suggests droughts and floods used to be longer, worse

Extreme weather used to be blamed on ‘global cooling’ in the 1970s and early 80s Flashback NOAA 1974: ‘Extreme weather events blamed on global cooling’ – NOAA October 1974: ‘Many climatologists have associated this drought and other recent weather anomalies with a global cooling trend and changes in atmospheric circulation which, if prolonged, pose serious threats to major food-producing regions of the world’


http://www.climatedepot.com/2017/04/27/analysis-its-not-just-droughts-but-nearly-all-extreme-weather-is-either-declining-or-at-or-near-record-lows/




Now...........how many times in the past few years have we seen the 3 or 4 regular warmist/alarmist guys in here telling us all the weather was getting far more wild and far more widespread? How about like 450,000 times or so...........

All a bunch of nonsense crap...........hysterical ranting by people who are perpetually hysterical any time a hurricane forms or there is a major thunderstorm. These people just tend to the hysterical in life........go to an Italian wake in Brooklyn sometime = this is what it would be like living around the regular alarmists in this forum ( and we know who they are too ).

We don't have to name them but to be sure, you know who they are when you see the following >>

1. Posts where the narrative conveys deep anger and misery ( veritable head explosions )
2. Fabulous predictions based upon a single weather event.
3. The most colorful of graphs/maps.
4. Gigantic font sizes.

Its all theatre s0ns!!!

Weather and Climate Extremes

Volume 11, March 2016, Pages 70–79


Open Access

Trends in weather related disasters – Consequences for insurers and society

• 
  
  
  • Peter Hoeppe

Abstract
As extreme weather events affect the core business of insurance this industry has quite early addressed potential effects of natural climate cycles and global warming on natural catastrophe hazards. Munich Re’s experts have been researching loss events caused by natural hazards around the globe for 40 years. These losses are documented in the NatCatSERVICE database currently documenting more than 36,000 single events. The analyses of the NatCatSERVICE data clearly show a high interannual variability, in some regions decadal oscillations, and a long term trend to an increase in the number of natural catastrophes around the globe, with ever growing losses. The trend curve indicating the number of loss relevant natural catastrophes worldwide reveals an increase by a factor of about three within the last 35 years.

As the rise in the number of natural catastrophes is predominantly attributable to weather-related events like storms and floods, with no relevant increase in geophysical events such as earthquakes, tsunamis, and volcanic eruptions, there is some justification in assuming that changes in the atmosphere, and global warming in particular, play a relevant role.

Trends in weather related disasters – Consequences for insurers and society

Well than...who is lying?

What we KNOW:
Warmers and Leftists (funny how they are one an the same) have a long history of lying...so it must be them.

18 Spectacularly Wrong Prophecies from the First Earth Day
EconomicPolicyJournal.com: 18 Spectacularly Wrong Prophecies from the First Earth Day

But Gipper..........they say all their predictions have been correct!!

 

[skookerasbil]

Weather and Climate Extremes

Volume 11, March 2016, Pages 70–79


Open Access

Trends in weather related disasters – Consequences for insurers and society

• 
  
  
  • Peter Hoeppe

Abstract
As extreme weather events affect the core business of insurance this industry has quite early addressed potential effects of natural climate cycles and global warming on natural catastrophe hazards. Munich Re’s experts have been researching loss events caused by natural hazards around the globe for 40 years. These losses are documented in the NatCatSERVICE database currently documenting more than 36,000 single events. The analyses of the NatCatSERVICE data clearly show a high interannual variability, in some regions decadal oscillations, and a long term trend to an increase in the number of natural catastrophes around the globe, with ever growing losses. The trend curve indicating the number of loss relevant natural catastrophes worldwide reveals an increase by a factor of about three within the last 35 years.

As the rise in the number of natural catastrophes is predominantly attributable to weather-related events like storms and floods, with no relevant increase in geophysical events such as earthquakes, tsunamis, and volcanic eruptions, there is some justification in assuming that changes in the atmosphere, and global warming in particular, play a relevant role.

Trends in weather related disasters – Consequences for insurers and society

Events equivocated by dollar amounts.. A National Insurance Institute slight of hand fabrication.. SO as the dollar amount increased (which it will do just because of inflation and number of people affected), so does the so called severity of the event. More people tightly in a small area equals greater cost and effect. The comparison is total bull shit..

IF you looked at geographical areas affected, then vs now, they are not bigger or stronger.. And that is the hidden truth clouded by all of the lies..

The alarmist stuff ALWAYS looks so stoopid when it is compared to something............which is why in this forum, the alarmists are dominated on a daily basis.

Smart people will notice........when alarmist stuff is presented on its own, it always looks daunting. But once it is compared to something, as it is on this thread.........their information ends up looking laughable, as Billy astutely points out.

Again.........here.........we have an insurance company providing data on extreme weather vs data supplied by the NOAA.

Hmmm...........wonder which is more credible?

 

[Billy_Bob]

The Chart quite clearly states that it is the number of events, not the dollar amounts.

Now you silly little libtard liar, you cant even read the study, from which you took the graph, which clearly states "the damage estimates, in dollars, were used to determine the severity of each event"...

Do you ever read the bullshit you post or do you just lie about what it represents to further your cause?

 

[Billy_Bob]

Weather and Climate Extremes

Volume 11, March 2016, Pages 70–79


Open Access

Trends in weather related disasters – Consequences for insurers and society

• 
  
  
  • Peter Hoeppe

Abstract
As extreme weather events affect the core business of insurance this industry has quite early addressed potential effects of natural climate cycles and global warming on natural catastrophe hazards. Munich Re’s experts have been researching loss events caused by natural hazards around the globe for 40 years. These losses are documented in the NatCatSERVICE database currently documenting more than 36,000 single events. The analyses of the NatCatSERVICE data clearly show a high interannual variability, in some regions decadal oscillations, and a long term trend to an increase in the number of natural catastrophes around the globe, with ever growing losses. The trend curve indicating the number of loss relevant natural catastrophes worldwide reveals an increase by a factor of about three within the last 35 years.

As the rise in the number of natural catastrophes is predominantly attributable to weather-related events like storms and floods, with no relevant increase in geophysical events such as earthquakes, tsunamis, and volcanic eruptions, there is some justification in assuming that changes in the atmosphere, and global warming in particular, play a relevant role.

Trends in weather related disasters – Consequences for insurers and society

Events equivocated by dollar amounts.. A National Insurance Institute slight of hand fabrication.. SO as the dollar amount increased (which it will do just because of inflation and number of people affected), so does the so called severity of the event. More people tightly in a small area equals greater cost and effect. The comparison is total bull shit..

IF you looked at geographical areas affected, then vs now, they are not bigger or stronger.. And that is the hidden truth clouded by all of the lies..

The alarmist stuff ALWAYS looks so stoopid when it is compared to something............which is why in this forum, the alarmists are dominated on a daily basis.

Smart people will notice........when alarmist stuff is presented on its own, it always looks daunting. But once it is compared to something, as it is on this thread.........their information ends up looking laughable, as Billy astutely points out.

Again.........here.........we have an insurance company providing data on extreme weather vs data supplied by the NOAA.

Hmmm...........wonder which is more credible?

NII and NOAA are racing hard at being the least credible. IF we took physical damage paths and compared them by physical evidence, it all falls within natural variation over 500 year spans. NOAA is just being more credible this time..

 

[gipper]

Well.........looks like more warmist predictions blowing up like a nuke in their faces!! And it happens continually, does it not?

A summary of the losing below.....................all exceedingly well sourced by the way and largely based upon NOAA statistics.


Below is a complete rundown of the very latest on extreme weather conditions: Update data from the 2016 Climate Depot report: Skeptics Deliver Consensus Busting ‘State of the Climate Report’ to UN Summit

Extreme Weather: Scientist to Congress in 2017: ‘No evidence’ that hurricanes, floods, droughts, tornadoes are increasing – Dr. Roger Pielke Jr. of University of Colorado

Tornadoes: NOAA Tornado data revealing 2016 as ‘one of the quietest years since records began in 1954’ and below average for 5th year in a row

Hurricanes: 1) Inconvenient NOAA report: ‘It is premature to conclude (AGW has) already had a detectable impact on’ hurricanes & 2) NOAA: U.S. Completes Record 11 Straight Years Without Major (Cat 3+) Hurricane Strike & 3) 30 peer-reviewed scientific papers reveal the lack of connection between hurricanes & ‘global warming’

Floods: ‘Floods are not increasing’: Dr. Roger Pielke Jr. slams ‘global warming’ link to floods & extreme weather – How does media ‘get away with this?’ – Pielke Jr. on how extreme weather is NOT getting worse: ‘Flood disasters are sharply down. U.S. floods not increasing either.’ “Floods suck when they occur. The good news is U.S. flood damage is sharply down over 70 years,” Pielke explained.

Heavy Rains: 1000 year rainfall study suggests droughts and floods used to be longer, worse

Extreme weather used to be blamed on ‘global cooling’ in the 1970s and early 80s Flashback NOAA 1974: ‘Extreme weather events blamed on global cooling’ – NOAA October 1974: ‘Many climatologists have associated this drought and other recent weather anomalies with a global cooling trend and changes in atmospheric circulation which, if prolonged, pose serious threats to major food-producing regions of the world’


http://www.climatedepot.com/2017/04/27/analysis-its-not-just-droughts-but-nearly-all-extreme-weather-is-either-declining-or-at-or-near-record-lows/




Now...........how many times in the past few years have we seen the 3 or 4 regular warmist/alarmist guys in here telling us all the weather was getting far more wild and far more widespread? How about like 450,000 times or so...........

All a bunch of nonsense crap...........hysterical ranting by people who are perpetually hysterical any time a hurricane forms or there is a major thunderstorm. These people just tend to the hysterical in life........go to an Italian wake in Brooklyn sometime = this is what it would be like living around the regular alarmists in this forum ( and we know who they are too ).

We don't have to name them but to be sure, you know who they are when you see the following >>

1. Posts where the narrative conveys deep anger and misery ( veritable head explosions )
2. Fabulous predictions based upon a single weather event.
3. The most colorful of graphs/maps.
4. Gigantic font sizes.

Its all theatre s0ns!!!

Weather and Climate Extremes

Volume 11, March 2016, Pages 70–79


Open Access

Trends in weather related disasters – Consequences for insurers and society

• 
  
  
  • Peter Hoeppe

Abstract
As extreme weather events affect the core business of insurance this industry has quite early addressed potential effects of natural climate cycles and global warming on natural catastrophe hazards. Munich Re’s experts have been researching loss events caused by natural hazards around the globe for 40 years. These losses are documented in the NatCatSERVICE database currently documenting more than 36,000 single events. The analyses of the NatCatSERVICE data clearly show a high interannual variability, in some regions decadal oscillations, and a long term trend to an increase in the number of natural catastrophes around the globe, with ever growing losses. The trend curve indicating the number of loss relevant natural catastrophes worldwide reveals an increase by a factor of about three within the last 35 years.

As the rise in the number of natural catastrophes is predominantly attributable to weather-related events like storms and floods, with no relevant increase in geophysical events such as earthquakes, tsunamis, and volcanic eruptions, there is some justification in assuming that changes in the atmosphere, and global warming in particular, play a relevant role.

Trends in weather related disasters – Consequences for insurers and society

Well than...who is lying?

What we KNOW:
Warmers and Leftists (funny how they are one an the same) have a long history of lying...so it must be them.

18 Spectacularly Wrong Prophecies from the First Earth Day
EconomicPolicyJournal.com: 18 Spectacularly Wrong Prophecies from the First Earth Day

But Gipper..........they say all their predictions have been correct!!

Proving they are easily duped by propaganda.

Old Crotch is a perfect example.

 

[Old Rocks]

Well Gipper, you are the perfect example of the low IQ 'Conservative'. Never took a science class in your life, yet you know more than all the scientists in the world. LOL

 

[gipper]

Well Gipper, you are the perfect example of the low IQ 'Conservative'. Never took a science class in your life, yet you know more than all the scientists in the world. LOL

I am not a con and I have a very high IQ, which is why I KNOW you are an idiot.

Why do you believe the ruling class? You have nothing in common with them.

 

[mamooth]

Pielke is a paid denier propagandist and smear artist. Hence, it's a given Skook would fall for his shilling hard. The interesting thing is how he seems new to Skook. Most of us have known about Pielke's scams for many years.

Here are a few takedowns of Pielke's shoddy science, accusations of fraud, and constant victim-bully routines. These guys don't dumb down their writing, hence deniers have no hope of understanding it, but normal people won't have a problem.

MIT Climate Scientist Responds on Disaster Costs And Climate Change

John Holdren: Drought and Global Climate Change: An Analysis of Statements by Roger Pielke Jr | Climate Science Watch

Rabett Run: Roger Pielke Jr.'s Annus Horribilis

The most common fallacy in discussing extreme weather events + Update

The Moscow Warming Hole

 

[skookerasbil]

meh.......we'll still go with the statistics provided by the NOAA!! The alarmist's heads explode when somebody comes along and uses NOAA statistics to obliterate their narrative.......and then pull that typical ghey progressive stunt = attacking the person presenting authentic NOAA statistics.

Kinda funny.........the alarmists are ALWAYS posting up NOAA statistics in here........BUT NOT THESE!!