3 ms·

Ah, well this is old now, but since you're the author I'll respond anyway because I think it might help you in the future. I think you got a little dramatic wi

Ah, well this is old now, but since you're the author I'll respond anyway because I think it might help you in the future. I think you got a little dramatic with a weak connection: > "If you turn out to be wrong, you will likely be jailed like Ex-Enron CEO Jeffrey Skilling." So your argument is that you'll likely go to jail because you'll likely lie because your company will likely fail. That's more than a bit of a stretch. It might help you to know that you undermined yourself and your point with this sort of dramatic claim. You had a really good thought going: if you think climate change is not happening, bet against it! There are enough people betting for climate change that you can probably make money. No need to make a sloppy connection to Enron. Again, by way of advice, I don't think people believed that insurance companies are pulling out of Flordia or the UK, and I didn't believe you had the facts to even prove they were raising rates because of climate change. I'd believe they are, but I want more than conjecture I could do on my own. Establish your premise a bit, build your credibility, and avoid the weak claims - had you done that you'd have a solid article that could have done well here.

mncolinlee 13y ago
I, too, am hesitant to respond to an old story. That's especially the case because some offended denialist on this thread is downvoting all of my comments out of pure vendetta. Perhaps you're right about the jail claim reaching too far. I didn't think it was too much of a stretch to guess that a company founder would fight to keep his company's investment thesis sound. I did indeed have the data to back up all of the insurance market claims, but wanted to make this a self-contained article rather than direct people away to footnote links. Here's an industry paper written by employees from a plethora of reinsurance companies. The paper directly argues for higher rates to account for risk models failing to account for worst case climate scenarios and somewhat lower rates where climate mitigations are used. They also cite an academic paper describing how UK flood and Florida wind storm insurance markets will become uninsurable without climate mitigations. https://www.genevaassociation.org/media/616661/ga2013-warming_of_the_oceans.pdf https://www.genevaassociation.org/media/616661/ga2013-warmin... The UK had such a hard time keeping their insurance against floods that they had to enact government protections to stop insurers from pulling out of the market completely. http://www.theguardian.com/money/2013/jun/27/flood-insurance-deal-industry-government http://www.theguardian.com/money/2013/jun/27/flood-insurance...
- ignostic 13y ago
  Thanks, interesting sources :)

mncolinlee 13y ago

I, too, am hesitant to respond to an old story. That's especially the case because some offended denialist on this thread is downvoting all of my comments out of pure vendetta. Perhaps you're right about the jail claim reaching too far. I didn't think it was too much of a stretch to guess that a company founder would fight to keep his company's investment thesis sound. I did indeed have the data to back up all of the insurance market claims, but wanted to make this a self-contained article rather than direct people away to footnote links. Here's an industry paper written by employees from a plethora of reinsurance companies. The paper directly argues for higher rates to account for risk models failing to account for worst case climate scenarios and somewhat lower rates where climate mitigations are used. They also cite an academic paper describing how UK flood and Florida wind storm insurance markets will become uninsurable without climate mitigations. https://www.genevaassociation.org/media/616661/ga2013-warming_of_the_oceans.pdf https://www.genevaassociation.org/media/616661/ga2013-warmin... The UK had such a hard time keeping their insurance against floods that they had to enact government protections to stop insurers from pulling out of the market completely. http://www.theguardian.com/money/2013/jun/27/flood-insurance-deal-industry-government http://www.theguardian.com/money/2013/jun/27/flood-insurance...

ignostic 13y ago
Thanks, interesting sources :)