perceptions_now
Gold Member
Offline
Australian Politics
Posts: 11694
Perth WA
Gender: 
|
longweekend58 wrote on Mar 1 st, 2013 at 6:05pm: perceptions_now wrote on Mar 1 st, 2013 at 5:44pm: longweekend58 wrote on Mar 1 st, 2013 at 4:51pm: perceptions_now wrote on Mar 1 st, 2013 at 4:39pm: longweekend58 wrote on Mar 1 st, 2013 at 4:12pm: perceptions_now wrote on Mar 1 st, 2013 at 3:53pm: Doctor Jolly wrote on Mar 1 st, 2013 at 3:39pm: KJT1981 wrote on Mar 1 st, 2013 at 3:28pm: Doctor Jolly wrote on Mar 1 st, 2013 at 3:12pm: The scary thing is that the temperature of the upper atmosphere is increasing, and the oceans are increasing, but for the last couple of years the land has lagged behind due to La Nina and other longer cycle (multi year) weather events.
Its like an elastic band, the next El Nino could set all sorts of crazy records as the land catches back up to sea and atmosphere temps.
I see the magic word is used again................. Talk about clutching at straws. Ok, it "could" set all sorts of crazy records. It "will" track to atmosphere and ocean warming trends. There is "no chance" it will show any sign of cooling, because there isnt one part of the syetm that is showing any cooling to cause it. Let's forget about COULD, the Bureau of Meteorology has confirmed that Australia DID just experienced its hottest summer on record! AND, I can assure you, Perth DID more than it's fair share in getting that record, because it has been very warm here! on year proves precisely nothing. and i mean that literally. it is just one point of data that follows on after 3 years of LOWER than average temperatures. ON one hand we have ACC hysterics telling us that firstly 17years of temperature pauses hasn't happened and finally when forced to admit it is true says it is meaningless.. but one year of hot weather? THATs significant. I agree, one swallow does not make a summer!
However, it was done without the backing of an El Nino event!
So, I would suggest the prudent thing to do, would be to take whatever appropriate mitigation measures, are possible, which is merely sensible business practice.
Oh & btw, I do think the science will bear out, over time, BUT we can not wait for that, as it would then be far too late.
business doesn't 'mitigate' against problems that don't exist. they actually want a bit of proof and proof has been pretty thin on the ground. Yes, they do!
They continually mitigate against Risks, that they think is never going to happen to them.
Some of which are actually related to Climate Change OR weather OR whatever you want to call it.
Almost every Business takes out all forms of insurance against many forms of Risks, some such as Storms, Cyclones/Hurricanes, Flood, Hail etc are directly or indirectly related to Climate Change already.
Most businesses take out these insurances/mitigation's, even though they expect OR hope to never have need of it.
IN FACT, the insurance industry is built on the reality that "Sh!t Happens", people don't expect it, but "Sh!t still Happens"!
In short, people (Businesses) don't think these things exist or will be a problem for them, BUT they pay the mitigation (insurance) costs, just to be sure. actually you are wrong (again). business mitigates against ACTUAL RISK and insures against unlikely events. mitigation is against risks that are real and measurable and moderately predictable. UNlikely events such as flooding fire etc are insured against. climate change has zero predictability about it along with zero calculated odds. Businesses does not mitigate against something that has never happened nor shows any likelihood of doing so. Tell that to all the businesses in the new Climate zones, in Queensland & northern NSW, as they become "uninsurable" over the next 5-10 years & they start screaming for governments to mitigate against the RISKS of them losing their Businesses, due to Climate Change.
And, even by then, it will probably be too late?
|
Forum
Pages: 
