[Bored chemist]

Tim, I recommend this link: https://www.skepticalscience.com/global-warming-positives-negatives-intermediate.htm

Choose the "intermediate" or "advanced" tabs, and it will walk you through the studies (with citations) of the pros and cons of climate change with respect to agriculture, health, economics, environment and sea level.

And recomend you actually do the challenge.

Say which single scary thing it is you want to look at.

Then explain the mechanism that will cause this in your own words. Linking to drivel will not do. You want the world to react to this global warming thing so you have to know what you are talking about or shut up.

Then link to and quote from supporting science.

The we can see the degree of badness that that will cause. Without such rigor you are just a hand waving man in the high street with a sign saying that the end of the world is neigh.

Already did.
You ignored it.

You ask these questions: we answer them, and then you ask them again.
Why is that?

[Bored chemist]

Going back a few posts, drought is not an example of extreme weather. It hardly ever rains in the Nazca plain, and Antarctica is a desert. It rarely rains in the Canaries but the soil is kept fertile by night fog. This is all called "climate". Occasional extreme weather occurs when warm, wet air penetrates the Antarctic high, but continuous dryness is not associated with high winds or damaging precipitation. I guess it depends on what you mean by "weather" and "extreme"

And if it started raining regularly in the Nazca plains, would you accept that was a change in climate?
The UK  is famously drizzly  in Summer.
Do you realise that regular Summer droughts represent a change in climate?
Do you realise that regular Summer floods also represent a change in climate?

[jeffreyH]

There are some traffic lights in this montage and also reports of fatalities in son of the footage.

[jeffreyH]

More than a flash flood.

[jeffreyH]

It's in Italy

[jeffreyH]

It's in Spain.

[jeffreyH]

What would be the cost of a 100 year flood in Paris and does it beat traffic lights.

[jeffreyH]

And it happens in Germany.

[jeffreyH]

Also China.

[jeffreyH]

Baton Rouge Florida 2016.

[jeffreyH]

Flash flood evolution Utah 2016.

[Tim the Plumber (OP)]

There are determinations for 100, 500 & 1000 year floods based on the limited hydrological data we have so far gathered. These are revised as more data is gathered. This was where the alarm signals started to sound for hydrologists.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/extreme-floods-may-be-the-new-normal/

It is becoming increasingly pathetic that there is not the actual correct response to the challenge. You are unable to actually read the stuff you link to.

Some communities in Louisiana have already begun such adaptation, including requiring higher minimum elevation of new structures and requiring older ones to be raised higher to qualify for lower flood insurance rates. In some communities where Superstorm Sandy flooded homes and businesses, building codes now require construction of what’s known as freeboard, the space between where 100-year flood levels are projected to rise to in major storms or floods and the start of the building.

So that is sorted then. A little more protection.

Still not found an actual paper that describes the mechanism and looks at the degree of change or couse. Fail all round.

So you think that because Louisiana has woken up then everything is sorted? What about everywhere else? You really should think before you type.

The challenge is that the cost has to be more than the budget for traffic lights for any local council that has the things.

Given that you slected a particular example, where there is a lot of subsidance, the point that they have it sorted is obviously going to be locally done.

[Tim the Plumber (OP)]

Tim, I recommend this link: https://www.skepticalscience.com/global-warming-positives-negatives-intermediate.htm

Choose the "intermediate" or "advanced" tabs, and it will walk you through the studies (with citations) of the pros and cons of climate change with respect to agriculture, health, economics, environment and sea level.

And recomend you actually do the challenge.

Say which single scary thing it is you want to look at.

Then explain the mechanism that will cause this in your own words. Linking to drivel will not do. You want the world to react to this global warming thing so you have to know what you are talking about or shut up.

Then link to and quote from supporting science.

The we can see the degree of badness that that will cause. Without such rigor you are just a hand waving man in the high street with a sign saying that the end of the world is neigh.

Already did.
You ignored it.

You ask these questions: we answer them, and then you ask them again.
Why is that?

Which post did you do this in?

[Bored chemist]

Tim, I recommend this link: https://www.skepticalscience.com/global-warming-positives-negatives-intermediate.htm

Choose the "intermediate" or "advanced" tabs, and it will walk you through the studies (with citations) of the pros and cons of climate change with respect to agriculture, health, economics, environment and sea level.

And recomend you actually do the challenge.

Say which single scary thing it is you want to look at.

Then explain the mechanism that will cause this in your own words. Linking to drivel will not do. You want the world to react to this global warming thing so you have to know what you are talking about or shut up.

Then link to and quote from supporting science.

The we can see the degree of badness that that will cause. Without such rigor you are just a hand waving man in the high street with a sign saying that the end of the world is neigh.

Already did.
You ignored it.

You ask these questions: we answer them, and then you ask them again.
Why is that?

Which post did you do this in?

Well,  I illustrated the point by answering the first 2 or 3 yesterday in post 272.
Is your memory not up to that, or do you just not read stuff?

[Tim the Plumber (OP)]

Helicopter rescue. The accumulative cost is more than traffic lights.

This is utterly pathetic!!!

Are you arguing that there have never been such events until it has warmed up a bit recently?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_natural_disasters_in_Great_Britain_and_Ireland

Great Storm of 1703

The great storm of 1703 killed 15,000 people. Was that due to CO2 from fossil fuels?

Weather and climate are different and you will need to show that extreme events have increased in frequency due to the minute warming we have had so far. Or that you have compelling science that describes how this wil happen in the future. The mechanism. You will be expected to actually show that you understnad this mechanism yourself.

[Tim the Plumber (OP)]

Tim, I recommend this link: https://www.skepticalscience.com/global-warming-positives-negatives-intermediate.htm

Choose the "intermediate" or "advanced" tabs, and it will walk you through the studies (with citations) of the pros and cons of climate change with respect to agriculture, health, economics, environment and sea level.

And recomend you actually do the challenge.

Say which single scary thing it is you want to look at.

Then explain the mechanism that will cause this in your own words. Linking to drivel will not do. You want the world to react to this global warming thing so you have to know what you are talking about or shut up.

Then link to and quote from supporting science.

The we can see the degree of badness that that will cause. Without such rigor you are just a hand waving man in the high street with a sign saying that the end of the world is neigh.

Already did.
You ignored it.

You ask these questions: we answer them, and then you ask them again.
Why is that?

Which post did you do this in?

Well,  I illustrated the point by answering the first 2 or 3 yesterday in post 272.
Is your memory not up to that, or do you just not read stuff?

Which is not passing the challenge then is it?

You have failed to explain the mechanism for any of your chosen dooms.

You have then failed to quote from supporting scince that you cite.

Thus it is impossible to asses the extent of any doom. Fail.

[jeffreyH]

The challenge is that the cost has to be more than the budget for traffic lights for any local council that has the things.

Given that you slected a particular example, where there is a lot of subsidance, the point that they have it sorted is obviously going to be locally done.

You deflect as well as my daughter when she knows she is losing.

[jeffreyH]

Helicopter rescues cost more than traffic lights. You stated the criteria. The flooding necessitated the rescue. Flooding events are becoming more frequent. Mechanism climate change. You won't accept evidence so case closed.

[jeffreyH]

Insulting people by insinuating they are talking drivel or are pathetic is like shouting over an opponent in a debate. It is a defence against admitting defeat.

[jeffreyH]

European flood data.
https://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/data/european-past-floods