From USA Today: Report: Climate change behind rise in weather disasters
12:53PM EST October 10. 2012 – The number of natural disasters per year has been rising dramatically on all continents since 1980, but the trend is steepest for North America where countries have been battered by hurricanes, tornadoes, floods, searing heat and drought, a new report says.
The study being released today by Munich Re, the world’s largest reinsurance firm, sees climate change driving the increase and predicts those influences will continue in years ahead, though a number of experts question that conclusion.
Whatever the causes, the report shows that if you thought the weather has been getting worse, you’re right.
Two words: Oh, please. This is easily dispelled by looking at the data. Apparently Doyle Rice can’t be bothered to do some basic research.
Time for a graphjam, starting with this:
But wait, there’s more:
How about Hurricanes?
How about heat waves?
Droughts
Finally I wonder why Doyle Rice takes the word of a company with a vested interest in such a report? Showing that there are “more disasters” is a prelude to an insurance rate increase justification.
To his credit, he at least got some other views:
However, other experts take issue with Munich Re’s findings. “Thirty years is not an appropriate length of time for a climate analysis, much less finding causal factors like climate change,” says Roger Pielke, a professor of environmental studies at the University of Colorado.
Another reinsurer, Axa, isn’t quite sure of the link either: “While a clear upward trend arises from the figure with respect to the number of reported natural events, the attribution of this rise to a climate change signal should be investigated very cautiously,” the French company says in its report “Climate Risks” released earlier this month.
Atmospheric scientist Clifford Mass of the University of Washington also has a problem with Munich Re’s findings, saying that once the data are adjusted for population there is no recent upward trend in tornado or hurricane damages. Also, he adds that there is no evidence that global warming is causing more extreme weather in the USA.
Hoppe, however, says that even if we adjust for population spread and increased property values, Munich Re still says there were significant increases in the costs of weather disasters over the past few years.
But that doesn’t excuse him saying:
Whatever the causes, the report shows that if you thought the weather has been getting worse, you’re right.
When the data doesn’t support it. Once again it is time to review the essay I wrote last year:
You can send Doyle Rice a message here on the right sidebar.
Munich Re…..more risk (where none exists)…….equals higher premiums. As transparant as Glad Wrap.
Any insurance company that supports the Socialist/Collectivist meme that humans cause CAGW should think ahead 20 years to the inevitable nationalizaton of the insurance industry. The seeds have already been sown on the health insurance front.
David Ross says (October 10, 2012 at 1:01 pm): [snip]
In other words, paraphrasing Barack Obama, under Munich Re’s worsening weather scenario, insurance rates would necessarily skyrocket?
DirkH, thanks for the link to the Wilhelm Gustloff disaster.
The Gray Monk;
My experience in fire prevention, emergency planning and public safety (confirmed by a few studies of a more scientific sort) is that the “life” of any major disaster is about 35 years.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Remember the movie “Jaws”? The year it came out, the beaches were empty. My recollection (which is admittedly faulty) was that it took several years for things to get back to normal. Human beings have a “memory” that guides their actions even when it is a memory of something that they know was completely fictional. I questioned your 35 year assertion at first, but on reflection, if a fictional movie can empty the beaches for a few years, an actual event ought to pull off 35!
There is so much personal identification with the “issues” of global warming, I doubt that few warmists would become skeptical even if continental glaciers were knocking down the White House. Even a serious cooling spell would be a sign of global warming, the “weirding” that happens just before the world burns up.
What would happen to the mind and soul of a Joe Romm if Al Gore were caught out saying he lost belief in the IPCC and CAGW just after getting his Nobel prize? The priests of Savaronala were burnt in the public square after convincing the townsfolk to cleanse themselves of their vanity by incinerating their precious possessions. Would Big Al end up running down the street, chased by a mob bearing torches?
Jimmy Swaggart: perhaps you could advise Al of what to expect when your pedestal falls apart.
Matt:
The insurance company makes maximum money when the risks are low, but they can portray them as being high. It’s the same with the warm-earthers regarding taxpayer grants….a sophisticated sham, that would make P.T. Barnum envious.
Pull My Finger (October 10, 2012 at 11:01 am): “Yea, you can really trust an insurance company who makes more money when risk is higher.”
I understand what you meant, but to clarify for casual readers make that, “…a company that makes more money when the perception of risk (driving people to increase coverage) is higher than the actual risk of payout by the company.”
Short form: Insurance companies make more money when they can frighten people unnecessarily.
The Gray Monk says:
October 10, 2012 at 12:44 pm
DirkH, Indeed, the Gustloff was a far more deadly loss, as was the British Lancastrian, sunk in the evacuation of France with an estimated 9,000 troops and civilians on board. I left them out since they were the result of “enemy action” whereas the Titanic and the Hindenburg were “accidents” or perhaps “naturally caused disasters.”
=================================================================
For non-wartime disasters, the SS Sultana was the greatest loss of life for the US. More than the Titanic.
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2001/05/0501_river5.html
If you want to see direct evidence of Munich Re fleecing U.S. homeowners with their propaganda, I recommend this article. It exposes the mendacious doings of Risk Management Solutions.
Florida insurers rely on dubious storm model
By Paige St. John, November 14, 2010 at 1:00 a.m.
http://www.heraldtribune.com/article/20101114/ARTICLE/11141026/2055/NEWS?p=all&tc=pgall&tc=ar
————————————————————-
Munich Re’s involvement with Risk Management Solutions
————————————————————-
Munich Re, Swiss Re May See Higher Rates After Katrina Losses
By Jon Menon, Bloomberg – September 9, 2005
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=avCvdYIRrS0I&refer=europe
Sept. 9 (Bloomberg) — Munich Re and Swiss Reinsurance Co., the world’s largest reinsurers, may lead companies in raising premium rates for catastrophe coverage after Hurricane Katrina caused an estimated $35 billion in insured losses.
Reinsurers and their customers, including insurers Allianz AG and Axa SA, will begin negotiating 2006 contracts when they meet in Monte Carlo starting Sept. 11. They’ll convene again in the German town of Baden-Baden in October to complete agreements.
For the second year in a row, executives are gathering amid record U.S. hurricane losses. Katrina dislodged offshore oil rigs, flattened homes, flooded New Orleans, left hundreds dead and brought commerce on the U.S. Gulf Coast to a standstill when it battered four states on Aug. 29. The storm may be the costliest ever, according to estimates from analysts including Risk Management Solutions, and follows four hurricanes last year.
[…]
The shares of Munich Re and Swiss Re have gained since Aug. 26, the last day of trading before Katrina hit. The 27-member Bloomberg Europe 500 Insurance Index has advanced 3.8 percent during the period.
[…]
Munich Re Issues $128.7 Million Windstorm Cat Bonds
November 28, 2005
http://www.insurancejournal.com/news/international/2005/11/28/62530.htm
[…]
The reinsurer’s announcement noted that “Munich Re entered the insurance securitisation market for its own purposes five years ago with PRIME Capital, also using the concept of parametric triggers.
[…]
The bulletin also gave the following details: “BNP Paribas, as sole bookrunner, has placed the deal with capital market investors. Risk Management Solutions modeled the underlying risk. Munich American Capital Markets, the capital markets unit of Munich Re, worked closely together with BNP Paribas in structuring and managing the transaction.
[…]
Tsunami Survivor at Munich Re Warns of Intense Hurricane Season
By Oliver Suess – June 7, 2007 19:12 EDT
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=aBfwZ45W3YgU&refer=uk
June 8 (Bloomberg) — Peter Hoeppe, the chief scientist at Munich Re, saw nature’s destructive power up close. He found himself in hip-deep water during the tsunami that left 229,000 people dead or missing in December 2004.
“It felt life-threatening,” said Hoeppe, who was on vacation in the Maldives when an underwater earthquake off Sumatra sent waves as high as 30 meters (100 feet) crashing into coastlines from southeast Asia to eastern Africa.
A week later, Hoeppe took over the Geo Risks department at Munich Re. He and his team of 30 geophysicists, geographers and weather experts pore through research and simulate disasters to make sure the world’s second-largest reinsurer is ready for the costliest catastrophes — from an earthquake in Tokyo to a Category 5 hurricane striking Houston.
Hoeppe predicts this year’s Atlantic hurricane season, which began last week, will be worse than usual, with insured damages surpassing the $20 billion average of the last seven years and far exceeding last year’s $250 million. His models show a high probability that at least one storm will hit land and cause major insured losses.
[…]
“The current warm phase of sea-surface temperatures, which started in 1995, is still the most important driver behind higher hurricane intensity and frequency,” Hoeppe said in an interview last week at Munich Re’s headquarters. “We will remain in this phase for at least another 10 years.”
[…]
Munich Re almost doubled rates for property and casualty reinsurance in hurricane-affected areas after Katrina. Prices for coverage of oil rigs in the Gulf of Mexico jumped as much as 400 percent. The company said it further raised rates for storm-prone regions this January.
The 127-year-old Munich-based company and larger rival Swiss Reinsurance Co., based in Zurich, help insurers such as American International Group Inc. and Allstate Corp. shoulder risks for clients.
Climate Change
“The trend clearly points toward more frequent and more expensive natural disasters,” said Ernst Konrad, the Munich- based head of equities at Bayern-Invest, which manages about $35 billion and owns shares of Munich Re and Swiss Re. “That’s good for reinsurers as it will drive demand and prices.”
Munich Re’s net income rose for the past three years, reaching a record 3.4 billion euros ($4.6 billion) in 2006. Shares of Munich Re rose 32 percent in the past year, topping the 24 percent gain of the Bloomberg Europe 500 Insurance Index.
Hoeppe expects human-driven global warming to trigger more severe natural disasters.
This winter he predicted a major storm in Europe after noting that warmer-than-usual weather left less snow cover in the region. In mid-January, winter storm Kyrill swept through Britain, France and Germany, resulting in more than 40 deaths. Climate models indicate winter storms in Europe will become more intense and less frequent, Hoeppe said.
[…]
Hoeppe and most of his team work from the reinsurer’s five- story complex in the Schwabing district of Munich, where a glass- encased mock-tornado machine whips up a cloud of mist to greet visitors. They analyze loss reports connected with major catastrophes since 1975, and have archives stretching back to the eruption of Mount Vesuvius in 79 AD.
[…]
Hoeppe foresees a storm resulting in insured damages of $100 billion within the next 20 years. Climate change may eventually bring hotter summers to Europe, hurricanes to Lisbon and bigger storms in the Mediterranean, he said.
[…]
Down the hall from Hoeppe’s office, past maps showing ocean currents and storm systems, a computer model pinpoints the oil rigs in the Gulf of Mexico that are reinsured by Munich Re.
[…]
“Berz was a famous personality in the international research community,” said Robert Muir-Wood, chief research officer at Newark, California-based risk-modeler Risk Management Solutions Inc. “Hoeppe is well on the way to establishing a similar reputation.”
[…]
Munich Re, Swiss Re May Gain on Mild Hurricane Season (Update2)
By Oliver Suess and Jon Menon – September 7, 2007 12:18 EDT
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=aDQvhqTROSG0&refer=home
Sept. 7 (Bloomberg) — Swiss Reinsurance Co. and Munich Re, the world’s largest reinsurers, may be headed for record profits as hurricanes miss the U.S. for a second straight year.
[…]The worst hurricane season on record caused $58 billion of insured losses in 2005 and prompted reinsurers to raise rates for coverage by 100 percent or more in storm-prone areas. While prices for catastrophe reinsurance are likely to decline in 2008, they’re still at “relatively high levels,” Huttner said in a note to investors.
“The better the weather, the less the damage and the higher the profitability,” said Guy de Blonay, who helps oversee $41 billion at London-based New Star Asset Management Group, which owns Munich Re shares. “Long term, the industry is a buy.”
[…]
It was the first time that two Category 5 storms made landfall in a single season. Total insured losses will be less than $1.7 billion, according to estimates from Risk Management Solutions Inc. in Newark, California. That’s a fraction of the $40.6 billion of damages caused by Hurricane Katrina, which ravaged parts of Mississippi, Louisiana, and Alabama in August 2005, killing more than 1,500 people.
[…]
“Reinsurers are cheap and offer more attractive risk-return characteristics than banks,” Zurich-based Winet said.
[…]
Munich Re, RMS cooperate on insurance risk models
By Jonathan Gould
FRANKFURT | Tue Dec 16, 2008 7:52pm IST
http://in.reuters.com/article/2008/12/16/munichre-models-idINLG64349120081216
Dec 16 (Reuters) – The world’s biggest reinsurer, Munich Re (MUVGn.DE), and U.S. risk-modelling company RMS will work together to develop sophisticated new models to assess and price insurance risks such as hurricanes and earthquakes, the two companies said on Tuesday.
Munich Re said the non-exclusive, multi-year collaboration with RMS would allow it to improve its own in-house risk models and develop new insurance and capital market packages for its clients.
The deal also would allow RMS to extend the range of modelling products it offers clients, the two companies said in a joint statement. They declined to give financial details.
[…]”The risk landscape is changing very rapidly. If you think of natural perils, globalisation, climate change or longevity risks, for example, there are whole areas of challenges where quality, breadth and speed will be key.”
“We want to expand the frontiers of insurability for risks that have not been sufficiently modelled yet,” Proebstl said.
[…]
Munich Re, RMS Collaboration Extends Risk Research
Insurance Networking News, December 16, 2008
http://www.insurancenetworking.com/news/insurance_technology_risk_management_modeling_RMS_Munich_Re11607-1.html
[…]
Munich Re, Risk Management Solutions Extend Research Agreement
December 17, 2008
http://www.insurancejournal.com/news/international/2008/12/17/96377.htm
Risk Management Solutions announced from its London office that Munich Re is extending its “state-of-the-art” risk research and quantification capabilities through a cooperation agreement with RMS. “Munich Re and RMS will embark on research in new and also in emerging areas of risk modeling and, by that, expand the frontiers of risk modelablity and insurability,” the bulletin added.
[…]
“This initiative with RMS is part of our strategy to make use of a collaborative network to complement our insights with external knowledge and translate these insights into intelligent risk management solutions,” he continued. “This will create value for our clients and shareholders and, thus, reinforce our leadership role of being a ‘think factory’ for the insurance industry.”
The cooperation agreement assures that “Munich Re and RMS will collaborate to identify and pursue shared research priorities for new and emerging sources of risk yet to be modeled, and for areas of risk that continue to present challenges in modeling and its applications, including the key drivers of uncertainty and sensitivity to data quality,” said the bulletin.
[…]RMS President & CEO Hemant Shah commented: “Munich Re is already an industry leader in its utilization of models to make effective business decisions. Looking forward, both RMS and Munich Re see significant opportunities for catastrophe and other classes of risk models to catalyze an even greater degree of innovation and efficiency in risk management practices. We look forward to exploring the frontiers together, and to this exciting collaboration.”
How you pay for tomorrow’s scares, today
Disaster addiction – and the cost of your insurance
By Stuart Blackman • Get more from this author
Posted in Energy, 12th January 2009 15:34 GMT
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/01/12/blackman_bbc_climate_insurance/
[…]
RMS’ Paradex Model Plays Key Role in Munich Re, Tokio Marine Cat Swap
April 27, 2009
http://www.insurancejournal.com/news/international/2009/04/27/99945.htm
[…]
Munich Re closes cat bond using U.S. T-bill collateral
By Sarah Hills
LONDON | Thu May 20, 2010 6:24am EDT
http://www.reuters.com/article/2010/05/20/catbond-issuance-idUSLDE64J11020100520
[…]
Insurers have used catastrophe bonds since the 1990s to manage their exposure to natural disasters by transferring potential losses to investment funds. Investors receive a high rate of interest but risk losing part or all of their principal if a catastrophe occurs.
MEAG, Munich Re’s asset management company, set up a U.S. Treasury bill fund as collateral for the bond.
[…]
The U.S. hurricane losses will be quantified on the basis of a market-loss trigger prepared by Property Claim Services (PCS). European windstorm losses will be quantified using risk catastrophe firm Risk Management Solutions’ PARADEX parametric index.
“In these turbulent times, catastrophe bonds are a very interesting option for institutional investors, since they are not correlated with financial market risks and thus offer diversification benefits,” said Munich Re board member Thomas Blunck.
[…]
————————————————————-
Bob Ward works for Risk Management Solutions. Previously, as press officer for the Royal Society, he organized a campaign to censor climate skepticism in the U.K.
————————————————————-
Move to block emissions ‘swindle’ DVD
The Guardian, Wednesday 25 April 2007
http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2007/apr/25/controversiesinscience.channel4
Dozens of climate scientists are trying to block the DVD release of a controversial Channel 4 programme that claimed global warming is nothing to do with human greenhouse gas emissions.
Sir John Houghton, former head of the Met Office, and Bob May, former president of the Royal Society, are among 37 experts who have called for the DVD to be heavily edited or removed from sale. The film, the Great Global Warming Swindle, was first shown on March 8, and was criticised by scientists as distorted and misleading.
In an open letter to Martin Durkin, head of Wag TV,…
[…]
Ofcom said it had received 246 complaints, and was investigating. The letter was coordinated by Bob Ward, a former press officer with the Royal Society. He said: “This isn’t about censorship, it’s a question of quality control. We have no objection to the DVD being distributed if all the errors are corrected, but if they correct all the errors then the whole premise of the program will fall to pieces.”
Mr Durkin said: “This contemptible attempt at gagging won’t work. The reason they want to suppress The Great Global Warming Swindle is because the science has stung them. By comparison look at the mountains of absurd nonsense pedalled in the name of ‘manmade climate change’. Too many scientists have staked their reputations and built their careers on global warming. There’s a lot riding on this ridiculous theory. The DVD will be on sale shortly at a shop near you.”
Scientists want edits to warming skeptic’s film
Documentary aired on British TV, and is about to go to DVD
updated 4/25/2007 10:36:18 AM ET
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18307782/ns/us_news-environment/t/scientists-want-edits-warming-skeptics-film/
[…]
“Free speech does not extend to misleading the public by making factually inaccurate statements,” said Bob Ward, the former spokesman for the Royal Society, Britain’s academy of science, and one of the letter’s signatories. “Somebody has to stand up for the public interest here.”
The documentary, which first aired on Channel 4 in March, argues that man-made emissions have only a marginal impact on the world’s climate, and that instead, climate change can better be explained by changing patterns of solar activity.
Ward said the film’s director, Mark Durkin, made a “long catalog of fundamental and profound mistakes” — including the claim that volcanoes produce more carbon dioxide than humans, and that the Earth’s atmosphere was warmer during the Middle Ages than it is today.
[…]
Ward has also complained to Britain’s media regulator, which said it was investigating the matter. British broadcast law demands impartiality on matters of major political and industrial controversy — and penalties can be imposed for misrepresentations of fact.
[…]
The decision to broadcast Durkin’s documentary — billed as “the definitive response to Al Gore’s ‘An Inconvenient Truth'” — on Channel 4 was an unusual move in a country where the role of man-made carbon emissions in heating the globe is largely taken for granted and politicians regularly spar over which party has the greenest environmental policy.
Gore, for his part, has been hired as an adviser to the British government, which plans to send copies of his film to schools all around England.
More Heat than Light on the Warming Swindle
Posted by admin on April 27, 2007
http://www.climate-resistance.org/2007/04/more-heat-than-light-on-warming-swindle.html
Martin Durkin’s Great Global Warming Swindle is in the news again following an open letter to Wag TV signed by 37 scientists. The Letter, organised by Bob Ward – former Senior Manager for Policy Communication at the Royal Society, complains about the DVD release of the film.
[…]
But why would Bob Ward, who no longer holds a position at the RS, and who is not a climate scientist, have anything to say about who is right or wrong on matters of climate science? Ward left his job at the RS to take a job as Director of Global Science Networks at risk analysis firm RMS, which serves ‘more than 400 insurers, reinsurers, trading companies, and other financial institutions‘ so that they ‘achieve financial stability while optimizing profitability and growth[…]
What is causing our climate to change?
Published on Saturday 5 May 2007 01:06
http://www.scotsman.com/news/sci-tech/what-is-causing-our-climate-to-change-1-747356
[…]
Bob Ward, the global science networks director at the international consultancy Risk Management Solutions, and former head of media at the Royal Society, organised a letter signed by nearly 40 climate scientists including one, Carl Wunsch, who was featured in the programme, protesting against the release of the documentary on DVD, saying it has “misrepresented both the scientific evidence and the interpretations of researchers”.
[…]
WARD: The signatories of the letter simply seek for Martin to correct the major misrepresentations contained in his programme before it is distributed on DVD. Seven of these in summary are:
1. It misrepresented a graph of global average temperature published in 1995 and failed to acknowledge the most up-to-date analysis that shows none of the large-scale surface temperature reconstructions indicate medieval temperatures were as warm as in the last few decades.
[…]
E-mail exchange between Bob Ward and Martin Durkin (September 2007)
http://www.climateofdenial.net/
C4’s climate change documentary ‘was unfair but not misleading’
Tuesday 22 July 2008
http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/climate-change/c4s-climate-change-documentary-was-unfair-but-not-misleading-873753.html
[…]
The Great Global Warming Swindle, written and directed by Martin Durkin, misrepresented the views of the Government’s former chief scientific adviser Sir David King, Ofcom said yesterday in a long-awaited judgement.
The programme was further found to have unfairly treated Sir David, the American oceanographer Professor Carl Wunsch and the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and to have breached the section of the Broadcasting Code relating to impartiality. But while accepting that the programme contained inaccuracies, and that there were “aspects of the presentation (and omission) of facts which caused some concern”, Ofcom acquitted the broadcaster of “materially misleading the audience so as to cause harm or offence”.
[…]
Ofcom said serious allegations were made against the IPCC without the UN body being given a proper opportunity to respond and it also found the programme to be in breach of the impartiality code by alleging that the climate change policies of Western nations were holding back development in poorer countries, without putting forward an alternative view.
[…]
Many of those who complained were unhappy with this. “Ofcom has dropped the ball by finding that the programme did not breach the Broadcasting Code with respect to standards of accuracy,” said Bob Ward of the consultancy Risk Management Solutions, a former head of media at the Royal Society.
[…]
There are far-left politics behind the Durkin stance. Durkin, a graduate from LSE and former financial journalist, has in the past been associated with the Revolutionary Communist Party, an offshoot of the Seventies and Eighties militant group International Socialism, and its magazine Living Marxism. He joined London Weekend Television in 1989 and 10 years later was running his own production company, WAG TV.
The Great Global Warming Swindle was welcomed by a number of right-wing commentators – strange bedfellows for someone with connections to Living Marxism – but sometimes the far right and the far left have much in common.
Durkin doesn’t fit the Chris Mooney-Lewandoubtski stereotype of “climate deniers” (then again no-one does).
Apologies. The last sentence of my last post was my comment. It is not part of the preceding quoted article (which I neglected to block-quote indent)
G P Hanner says:
October 10, 2012 at 11:30 am
Who reads USAToday? I mean other than people in airport terminals waiting for their flights to be called.
—————————————————————————————-
How USA Today Slips $82 Million a Year Onto Your Hotel Bill
People checking out of a hotel are usually in a hurry, whether on their way to catch a plane, return a rental car or get back to their families. Certainly they’re too busy to notice or care about a measly extra charge for 75 cents for an unrequested newspaper.
Gannett Co., the publisher of USA Today, has been profiting to the tune of tens of millions of dollars a year from these small charges. But now that revenue could be in jeopardy thanks to a lawsuit from a guest who not only noticed the item on his bill — he was angry enough to sue over it.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/jeffbercovici/2011/08/02/how-usa-today-slips-82-million-a-year-onto-your-hotel-bill/
Reblogged this on gottadobetterthanthis and commented:
Anthony calls this piece about increased losses for insurance companies “crazy.” It is. The data is clear. The weather is what it always has been. It is not getting worse, it is still normal. It gets dry, it gets wet, it floods, it snows, it gets hot, it gets cold, it blows, and blows, and blows, especially in the central USA. Don’t let anyone fool you. We just have short memories. It really has been worse, and it really will be worse when it starts cooling into the next glaciation cycle, but I think we have some centuries before that gets going in a bad way.
Is this collection of graphs linked to anywhere without comments, etc?
The Gray Monk says:
October 10, 2012 at 12:44 pm
“DirkH, Indeed, the Gustloff was a far more deadly loss, as was the British Lancastrian, sunk in the evacuation of France with an estimated 9,000 troops and civilians on board.”
Thanks. I knew about the evacuation and the destruction of military material but not about that disaster. I’ll look into it.
The RE in their name is for RE-Insurance… An insurance company finding cause to raise rates, I’m sure it’s all innocent….
who you gonna bleeve?- my facts or your lyin eyes?
I don’t see what the forth graph tells us about whether recent weather is worse or not.
Apart from the now defunct hurricane drought, that could have been stated in one sentence, all the graph shows is the distribution of frequency of land fall events. It is not a time series and gives us absolutely no information about how storm frequency has changes over time, which is the subject of this article.
Neither do I understand what P. Jr thinks he is demonstrating by putting a “trend” on this plot. How can you have a “trend” in a frequency spectrum and what does it mean?
It appears that Anthony may have been mislead by the presence of the near flat trend (which is not a trend), and thought it showed no trend in hurricane landfalls.
This is misleading. The following plot , which is also based on data from P. Jr shows there is a clear relation between N. Atlantic surface temperature and cyclone energy. It shows that both are predominantly cyclic and ceased rising near the turn of the century.
http://i49.tinypic.com/xbfqtw.png
“Two words: Oh, please. This is easily dispelled by looking at the data. Apparently Doyle Rice can’t be bothered to do some basic research.”
Not at all, it appears he did his journalistic research and spoke to the right people, made sensible comments in his article AND THEN summed up with a totally off the wall and contradictory final sentence.
One wonders how he could have made such a conclusion in view of what he had written.
I’m inclined to think that his editor changed the title and added the final line, or instructed Rice to make it more “politically correct” (as directors at CERN would say.)
Anyone writing to USA Today should write to the editor and ask him why closing sentence and the title were totally at odds with the facts reported in the article.
Hello oP – (appropriate given my name). But you give USA Today too much credit. They are not really guilty of shoddy journalism. To be guilty implies they practice Journalism. They do not. They are the MacPaper – they merely are the snippets for the uninformed.
I think this is another example of why public opinion has been turning against the warminsts.
I have memories of Hurricane Camille from 1969, the April 1974 tornado outbreak, the brutal winter of 1977, and the Midwest blizzard of 1978. All of these personal observations conflict with what I read in the mainstream media about weather becoming more severe, and the media loses its credibility.
Another example of the famous quote from Groucho Marx: Who are you going to believe, me or your lying eyes?
J.Christy.
Testimony to Congress September 2012.
Put it here: it refutes this stone dead.
Really? Seems to me the only increase is the increase in dollars from the damage and I don’t need a model to figure that out. Of course, hard to blame that on AGW so let’s just ignore it and arbitrarily pick a starting date that makes the assumption look good. SOP for the Chicken Little crowd.
Graphs are racist a preserve the hetero-normative patriarchal oligarchy.