September 13, 2004

"Tim K." wrote in message :

"Thomas Lee Elifritz" wrote in message :

and the fact that there are "a **** load more" people living in
Florida
than ever did before. You cannot measure weather effects by economic


damage!

Global warming debate aside,

Global warming via hydrocarbon combustion is not subject to debate, it
is well within the 'cone of probability'.

But it wasn't my point so I set it aside.

A simple google search reveals your biases.

about the only way to refute that paragraph is
call him a name because it's exactly right on. I've lived on the barrier
island in Brevard County all my life (45 years) and guess what - there
are a
"****-load" more people living here. Comparing storms across decades by
comparing damage *estimates* is absurd.

So, you claim that quantification via estimation, i.e. science by
numbers, is absurd.

I claim that only valid estimation is worthy of direct comparison. Your
estimations do not take inflation of escalating property values into
account. It is invalid.

Then adjust the figures for inflation and recalculate.

It is not scientifically defensible.

The result still stands after recalculation, by the numbers, including
an unnamed tropical low that killed thousands, by damages, deaths,
number of storms, intensity of storms, duration,, size, frequency,
chronology of storms, etc., other metrics are indeed possible, I'm
sure any reasonable scientific estimation confirms that this is a
'relatively active' Atlantic Hurricane season. Only an idjit would
continue to debate the result.

And you call me an idiot. heh, nice.

No, I called you an idjit. You are also a Troll, and most probably a
Conchy Joe.

Yet Another Idjit.

The issue is the original claim, this Atlantic hurricane season is
'relatively mild'. Uh huh.

Which has nothing to do with what I wrote.

You write nonsense.

Nice reading skills.

Conchy Joe Alert!

Thomas Lee Elifritz
http://elifritz.members.atlantic.net/next.htm