I remember that back in the day there were people who denied El Nino/La Nina/ENSO had much effect outside Peru or even existed. I realized this was changing when a trader called me because he was interested in the relation between ENSO and Ethiopian coffee bean futures. The real turning point was when insurance companies routinely started including ENSO in their risk assessments for crop futures and Atlantic hurricanes.
I haven't really followed up on insurance companies and climate change but the following report is interesting as a starting point: "This report is the first attempt to utilize the public NAIC disclosure filings from 88 companies to evaluate the extent to which US insurers consider climate change a key risk factor to their business. The findings are illuminating and disillusioning: while the NAIC survey revealed a broad consensus among insurers that climate change will have an effect on extreme weather events, only 11 of the 88 companies reported having formal climate risk management policies in place, and more than 60 percent of the respondents reported having no dedicated management approach for assessing climate risk." http://www.ceres.org/resources/reports/naic-climate-disclosure So when insurance companies routinely include climate change, the hearts and minds, or at least wallets, of the general public are likely to follow. David On Tue, Jul 3, 2012 at 8:19 AM, David L. McNeely <[email protected]> wrote: > Pretty simple, Cherubini. eight years (which is how long the flattened > area of the graph is, not the 14 that you stated) does not make a long-term > trend. You are committing the fallacy of claiming that if the models do > not predict exact temperatures for each year of the future, the models are > faulty. Despite that statement, I will also point out that the > temperatures in the years in question are notably higher than those just a > few years earlier in the series. > > As another poster mentioned, people chase after Big Foot, invent perpetual > motion machines, and obtain endless returns on investment that exceed what > is reasonably possible. > > David McNeely > > ---- Paul Cherubini <[email protected]> wrote: > > This NOAA graph http://tinyurl.com/6ca5gzt shows global > > mean temps have stabilized since 1998. That flattening of > > warming was not predicted by the anthropogenic warmists > > to my knowledge. > > > > So we could be potentially be at the same point on that > > graph as we we were in 1940-1945: i.e. looking at 20-30 > > more years of relatively stabilized temperatures. > > > > If the anthropogenic warmists on this forum don't think it's > > plausible we could be looking at 20-30 more years of relatively > > stabilized temperatures, then please explain why the > > flattening of the warming since 1998 was not predicted in > > advance. Thanks. > > > > Paul Cherubini > > El Dorado, Calif. > > -- > David McNeely > -- Pacific Cooperative Studies Unit Botany University of Hawaii 3190 Maile Way Honolulu Hawaii 96822 USA 1-808-956-8218
