One Clear Sign of Climate Change, Not That Retards Won't Still Be Retards

Of course, higher urban density creates a much greater urban heat island effect that is far worse than Gorebal Warming ever was.

Ah, of course, those “urban heat islands” the scientists never heard of, and Al Gore got the science wrong, a gift if you're a denier that as the decades roll by keeps on giving, so it’s hard to imagine, isn’t it, why scientists aren’t listening to website posters, many of whom even went to college, but instead insist on keeping on with their research and publishing findings that just upset people who can take it when their swimming pools get hot to the touch.
 
Last edited:
3ea4e10be40b22bb0efddf60f060126d.gif
Ah, of course, those “urban heat islands” the scientists never heard of, and Al Gore got the science wrong, so it’s hard to imagine, isn’t it, why scientists aren’t listening to website posters, many of whom even went to college, but instead insist on keeping on with their research and publishing findings that just upset people who can take it when their swimming pools get hot to the touch.

UHI is real. Cities are warmer than surrounding rural land because of pavement, buildings, waste heat, and reduced evapotranspiration. Nighttime minima rise more than daytime maxima. Station records in growing metro areas pick that up if you don’t adjust or if you overweight urban sites. Scientists have known this for decades; it’s not a secret website posters discovered.








 
Before people will change anything they have to believe it is needed. That change is what needs to be done.
Thinking about this further, it completely reminds me of housing in California.

A lot of people will acknowledge we have a housing crisis and housing is unaffordable for way too many people.

But propose new housing, anywhere near them, and they will fight life and death to stop it from being built. And since that happens throughout the entire state, we have our current crisis.

So simply getting people to acknowledge the crisis isn’t creating change. And the same goes for climate change people can acknowledge the issue, but it doesn’t mean they will agree on the measures to address it. And as I’ve shown with density, even if they know it will help they still fight against it.
 
Ah, of course, those “urban heat islands” the scientists never heard of, and Al Gore got the science wrong, so it’s hard to imagine, isn’t it, why scientists aren’t listening to website posters, many of whom even went to college, but instead insist on keeping on with their research and publishing findings that just upset people who can take it when their swimming pools get hot to the touch.
Well, those that claim the environmental high ground on this listen to people like James "Hockey Stick" Hanson who based his theories on climate change on his mediocre master's thesis...

Just because someone is in a position of "scientist" doesn't mean they know what the hell they're talking about. Proof is in results. As stated earlier in the thread, If your predictions are wrong, you hypothesis is wrong. Climate is more than CO2 and in any complex system it is often difficult to impossible to figure out all the causes and issues.

Urban heat island effect is a well demonstrated principle. People like Brad Lancaster in Tucson have come up with alternatives that the usual crop of urban planners overlook because that's not what the mainstream teaches them at university.


Moderate urban density with a lot of greenbelt involved is far superior to high urban density in terms of climate. We have left the Industrial Age and are in the Electronics Age. More people today can work from wherever they are. The need to concentrate labor for factories and administrative facilities is no longer a need. Packing people into a dense urban landscape is no longer necessary.
 
The anti-climate change argument is pathetically stupid. Always has been stupid. Because it is a problem of science confronted with considerations based on wishful thinking. So its advocates look for science based or at least science dressed counter arguments to nick at the margins, the Internet their ideal home. All the while the science itself marches on, firm or firmer today as it was twenty years ago that the climate is heating.
 
A last-resort insurance policy with fewer homeowner protections and less government oversight is booming, a Washington Post analysis finds, as traditional insurers continue to back away from areas of the country most vulnerable to extreme weather.

The policies are growing fastest in California, Florida, Texas and South Carolina because increasingly intensifying weather and massive disasters are putting more insurers on the hook for substantial claim payouts. Last year in California, insurance companies paid out $23 billion in homeowners claims, according to industry data.

The amount of premiums written under what is known as “surplus” or “excess” insurance lines has nearly tripled nationwide in the past five years, from about $1.5 billion in 2021 to $4.1 billion in 2025, according to data from the National Association of Insurance Commissioners (NAIC) — which insurers submit to the organization — and analyzed by the independent firm Weiss Ratings and provided to The Post. The Post reviewed the data and the Weiss analysis.

While this represents only a small share of the total $187 billion in premiums written in the United States each year, according to the Weiss data, industry experts say they reflect a problem where Americans living in the most weather-exposed places are becoming harder to insure.

In 2025, the Treasury Department’s Federal Insurance Office released a report showing how, due to climate-related events, millions of Americans were finding it harder to obtain insurance and had to pay more for it.

And as more insurers pull back or limit coverage, more Americans have struggled to find it and have sought out surplus line plans. Independent brokers often steer homeowners to surplus policies when they cannot obtain a traditional plan, though carriers also advertise directly to consumers.

These once-niche policies, which date to the late 1800s, historically covered commercial, high-risk or unusual properties.
They can sometimes be more expensive and often have more limitations and restrictive clauses, including arbitration clauses stating that homeowners cannot select their own contractors or price adjusters.

Experts said they have fewer consumer protections, prompting some advocates and state regulators to warn that homeowners may get lower payouts in the event of a disaster.

California’s surplus line industry is expanding more than almost any other state, according to The Post and Weiss analysis of NAIC data, which only includes insurers based in the U.S. Since 2021, the amount of surplus premiums written in California increased tenfold from $135 million to nearly $1.3 billion, now accounting for 7 percent of all homeowners premiums in the state compared with just 1 percent five years ago.

1ezgif-489cdff3091d5344.gif
 
The anti-climate change argument is pathetically stupid. Always has been stupid. Because it is a problem of science confronted with considerations based on wishful thinking. So its advocates look for science based or at least science dressed counter arguments to nick at the margins, the Internet their ideal home. All the while the science itself marches on, firm or firmer today as it was twenty years ago that the climate is heating.
You obviously don't have to answer this and I'm not trying to fight you, but I am asking for the sake of discussion.

If someone says the climate does change and humans contribute to it but completely disagree with you on what should be done, is that ok because at least they acknowledge it?

Or going back to the housing density battle, are the people who say climate change is an existential crisis but fight against climate friendly housing policies like increased density near public transportation given a pass because they acknowledge climate change?

Because ultimately dealing with climate change involves trade offs and costs, and people who think climate change is real can disagree on what the best course of action should be given that.
 
Back
Top