Comments on: Munich ReDux http://www.climate-resistance.org/2009/01/munich-redux.html Challenging Climate Orthodoxy Wed, 08 Feb 2012 23:47:31 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: Editors http://www.climate-resistance.org/2009/01/munich-redux.html#comment-1024 Editors Wed, 21 Jan 2009 00:11:27 +0000 http://www.climate-resistance.org/?p=258#comment-1024 J, thanks for the heads up. To be honest, we're less interested in what Munich Re has to say on the subject (it's the least we'd expect of a commercial enterprise) than the fact that the British Bleedin Broadcasting Corporation is happy to parrot its bleatings without a hint of journalistic scrutiny. That said, Pielke makes a great comment in response to a Mr Schneider's defence of Munich Re... "I wonder if Mr. Schneider would also excuse ExxonMobile (for example) from adhering to scientific consensus and calling things like they see them?" J, thanks for the heads up. To be honest, we’re less interested in what Munich Re has to say on the subject (it’s the least we’d expect of a commercial enterprise) than the fact that the British Bleedin Broadcasting Corporation is happy to parrot its bleatings without a hint of journalistic scrutiny. That said, Pielke makes a great comment in response to a Mr Schneider’s defence of Munich Re…

“I wonder if Mr. Schneider would also excuse ExxonMobile (for example) from adhering to scientific consensus and calling things like they see them?”

]]> By: J Valjean http://www.climate-resistance.org/2009/01/munich-redux.html#comment-1023 J Valjean Fri, 16 Jan 2009 07:12:26 +0000 http://www.climate-resistance.org/?p=258#comment-1023 Munich Re has a formal response http://sciencepolicy.colorado.edu/prometheus/munich-re-responds-4867 Munich Re has a formal response

http://sciencepolicy.colorado.edu/prometheus/munich-re-responds-4867

]]> By: Alex Cull http://www.climate-resistance.org/2009/01/munich-redux.html#comment-1022 Alex Cull Sun, 11 Jan 2009 17:56:06 +0000 http://www.climate-resistance.org/?p=258#comment-1022 Scientific American has a slideshow featuring the "Top 10 Places Already Affected by Climate Change" here at: http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=top-10-places-already-affected-by-climate-change Slide 2 features the American Gulf Coast. Rather than directly repeat the old assertion that links GW to increased frequency and severity of hurricanes, the writer falls back on the "insurance premiums are increasing" argument. "Climate scientists may still be debating to what extent climate change is going to translate into stronger and more frequent hurricanes, but insurance companies aren't waiting for the final answer." Just a little bit sneaky, I thought. Scientific American has a slideshow featuring the “Top 10 Places Already Affected by Climate Change” here at:
http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=top-10-places-already-affected-by-climate-change

Slide 2 features the American Gulf Coast. Rather than directly repeat the old assertion that links GW to increased frequency and severity of hurricanes, the writer falls back on the “insurance premiums are increasing” argument.

“Climate scientists may still be debating to what extent climate change is going to translate into stronger and more frequent hurricanes, but insurance companies aren’t waiting for the final answer.”

Just a little bit sneaky, I thought.

]]>