First on February 16, Hanno Böck of Klimaretter wrote in piece titled The Financing Of Climate Change Doubt, where he gleefully broke the story about the acquired Heartland documents: He wrote:

Internal documents of the conservative Heartland-Institute of the USA show the strategies that the organization pursues in order to discredit climate sciences. The institute receives donations from industry and finances other blogs and alleged neutral organizations, who then spread doubt about climate change. Among others, donators include Bayer, Microsoft and General Motors.[...]

Canadian DeSmogBlog has revealed internal documents from conservative lobby organization Heartland Institute. [...] From the documents it is clear that many seemingly independent voices in the debate are funded by donations from industry provided though Heartland Institute.”

Up to now, neither corrections nor omissions have been undertaken by Klimaretter, which is run by journalists and German Parliamentarians. To the contrary, as you will read below, they actively took steps to sustain the phony Heartland story by posting an opinion piece by Dr. Hermann Ott, who again using the fake document smears Heartland and the skeptics.

In its February 16 piece, Klimaretter listed the alleged funders of skeptic sites: Koch Industries, Microsoft, AT&T, Time Warner, Bayer – but did point out that the donations were mainly targeted for pharmaceutical lobbying.

Klimaretter then singled out blogger Anthony Watts, claiming he received donation checks from industry. Böck wrote:

One of these for example is the project of blogger Anthony Watts, who writes the widely read “Climate skeptical” blog Watts up with That, and the organization NIPCC (Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change) of American physicist Fred Singer, who views himself as a counter voice to the UN IPCC, but who is regarded as unscientific by climate scientists.

In the year 2012 the Institute plans to create educational material for schools.”

Klimaretter then wrote that Heartland had been funded by Big Tobacco to fight against the rights of non-smokers before it began to focus on climate change. Klimaretter claimed that much the pressure to attack scientists stemmed from the Tea Party movement.

Concerning the document “2012 Heartland Climate Strategy”, Klimaretter wrote that “the Heartland Institute claims the questionable document is a fake” and that “no further details concerning the authenticity of the other documents could be added, so says Heartland in a Press Release.”

Geick confesses, Ott quotes a faked document

Now, six days later, a full day after Gleick confessed he had faked a document, you’d think Klimaretter would have taken down the story by now and added a correction. They haven’t. In fact, they’ve added an opinion by German Green party member Dr. Hermann Ott, who goes after Fred Singer and Heartland with renewed vigor. He posted his opinion (read it here) at Klimaretter 12 hours after Gleick’s confession.

Green Parliamentarian Dr. Hermann Ott, who is a regular contributor at Klimaretter and skeptic smearer, posted his piece yesterday (February 21, 3:01 pm CET) ) dubbed: How US Companies Undermine Climate Policy, which more or less reiterates everything Hanno Böck had written days earlier, and quotes the faked document:

And what does the Institute [Heartland] do with the money? Taking a first look at the figures, one sees that climate change denier Fred Singer alone, who unfortunately appeared in the Bundestag, is financed by the Heartland Institute with 5000 dollars per month (plus expenses). $100,000 is available for developing alternative educational curricula for schools for promoting doubt about climate change. In the description of this project for schools, there’s even the sentence that their goal includes: ‘dissuading teachers from teaching science’. Unbelievable and revealing.”

Ott later writes:

The entire ‘datacheck’ of the Heartland-Institute makes it perfectly clear what I was saying about the strategies of the climate change skeptics in my discussion in the Green Bundestag faction last year, namely that the funders stem mostly from the fossil fuel industry and that it is always about increasing doubt and nothing to do with scientific findings.”

Scientific findings? Does he mean the sort that Gleick fakes? Why Ott would continue to insist the Heartland story is real is baffling, and if done intentionally – it is malicious and slanderous. I can only speculate that he thinks nobody in Germany is going to notice, and so he thinks he can get away with it.

In light of the known fact that Gleick faked a document (because the other docs simply weren’t going to produce the desired effect), Ott still has the temerity to conclude:

One can only hope that making the documents public will hamper the strategy of the fossil fuel industry and also lead to such books like the one by RWE-Manager Vahrenholt to disappear from the bestseller charts.”

And

Instead, they will be seen for what they really are: cold hearted egoists who put the future chances of humanity at stake for the sake of their profits.”

P.S.: If you wish to give Peter Gleick some kind words, you can do so at Twitter unter @PeterGleick.”

Recall that Hermann Ott posted this on February 21 at 3:01 p.m. CET, 12 hours AFTER Anthony Watts broke the story that Gleick had confessed. Obviously Ott is comfortable putting hinslef in the same comapny as document forgers and mudrakers.

In case Heartland, WUWT, or the lawyers representaing them, would like to give Klimaretter some kind words, you can reach the editor in chief at:

nick.reimer@klimaretter.info

They undertand English very well.

Prof. em. Dr. Arthur Rörsch

Dutch scientist and chemical engineer Dr. Arthur Rörsch has distributed a working paper to Dutch officials in his country to request a comprehensive review of the results and recommendations of the IPCC, especially its upcoming 5th assessment report.

H/t: http://www.kaltesonne.de/?p=926:

In his paper Rörsch, former vice-president of the Netherlands Organisation for Applied Research, writes that the IPCC has “deviated from the traditional scientific principles”.  On man-made warming from CO2, he writes “that no indisputable scientific proof, or even strong empirical evidence, has been provided for such an effect, which therefore remains a matter of speculation.”

Read his entire working paper here.

He adds:

These reviews would best be undertaken by senior and established scientists whose reputation rests in the traditional enabling disciplines that underpin climate science, specifically physics, chemistry, geology and meteorology.”

The draft volume for WG1 AR5 is a summary and compilation of papers published in scientific journals up to 2011. Rörsch makes two observations:

- The prevailing hypothesis of the assessment report is that Dangerous Anthropogenic Global Warming (DAGW) is occurring; this hypothesis has been under challenge for many years by numerous independent scientists. These scientists were not invited to participate in the preparation of the AR5 report.

- The scientific literature cited in the draft AR5 is selective towards papers that support the DAGW hypothesis, and even the papers that are included are then selectively analysed towards the same ends. These two underlying biases set the tone of the message that the authors of the AR5 report want to transmit.

Rörsch particularly criticizes the following points:

1. The IPCC assumes that atmospheric CO2 is a dominant forcing agent for global temperature without providing evidence.

2. The report authors are instructed to express their conclusions in terms of a qualitative (i.e. opinion-based) probability scale.

3. The IPCC’s use of “self-appointed experts”.

4. There’s arrogance and intolerance for alternative views displayed by the self-appointed climate experts. These experts should be treated with extreme suspicion.

5. The style of the draft AR5 report marks it as a political rather than a scientific document, for it has been fashioned within the framework of a particular cultural paradigm.

Here’s what Dr. Rörsch concludes:

The IPCC’s draft AR5 report shows insufficient objectivity, and lacks the ‘traditional’ scientific balance necessary for it to be used as the basis for policy making. Regrettably, the report exemplifies some of the worst features of the ‘post-modern’ approach to science…”

 

Joachim Gauck (Photo by J. Patrick Fischer)

Now that Christian Wulff has resigned in disgrace from the office of President of Germany in the wake of a scandal, a new nominee has been found: former pastor and anti-communist  Joachim Gauck. He is expected to be appointed easily.

If you’re like me, the question that comes to mind is: How skeptical is he when it comes to climate science? Surprisingly, there are signs for optimism.

First a bit of background from Wikipedia, my short version:

Endured brutal Soviet occupation
Joachim Gauck was born in Rostock in 1940, is a German politician, Protestant pastor, and former anti-communist human-rights activist in East Germany. His family was a victim of Soviet persecution. When Joachim Gauck was eleven years old, his father disappeared after being arrested by Soviet occupation forces. He was accused of espionage and deported to a Gulag in Siberia, where he was severely mistreated. For nearly three years, the family knew nothing about what had happened to him and whether he was still alive. Only in 1955, he was freed.

An “incorrigible anti-communist”
Gauck’s political activities were inspired by the ordeal of his father, and stated that he grew up with a well-founded anti-communism. In school in East Germany he made no secret of his anti-communist position, and he steadfastly refused to join the Free German Youth. He became a pastor in the Protestant church in Mecklenburg. His work as a pastor in East Germany was very difficult due to the hostility of the communist regime towards the church, and for many years, he was under constant observation and was harassed by the Stasi secret police.The Stasi described Gauck in their file on him as an “incorrigible anti-communist”.

“Tireless pro-democracy advocate”
During the Revolutions of 1989, he was a co-founder of the New Forum opposition movement in East Germany, which contributed to the downfall of the Soviet-backed dictatorship of the Socialist Unity Party of Germany (SED). Following the Reunification of Germany, he was elected by the Bundestag as the first Federal Commissioner for the Stasi Archives, serving from 1990 to 2000. As Federal Commissioner, he earned recognition as a “Stasi hunter” and “tireless pro-democracy advocate,” exposing the crimes of the former communist political police.

Gauck’s views today
Gauck today does not belong to any particular party. His views on an array issues are unknown. But perhaps some of his earlier comments can provide valuable clues.

According to the FAZ, Gauck is quoted as saying:

I’m unbelievably allergic to any politics that reacts to fear. This also applies to other issues, for example the use of nuclear power. We should refrain from forms of actions that are based on the fear of people and derive a dynamic from it.”

Surely he must be absolutely aware of the crude fear driving the global warming movement.

The Sueddeutsche Zeitung here provides more interesting quotes and insights on controversial issues.

Occupy-Wall-Street movement
While the media found general praise for the protesters, Gauck had another opinion. He found it “inexpressibly absurd” that people were demonstrating against the unbridled power of the financial markets, and called the dream of a world that simply does away with markets a “romantic idea” and that it is mistake to think that it would be nice to conquer capital.

On the Stuttgart-21-mega rail station project
Here warned of a growing culture of protest. He characterized the German tendency to fall into hysteria and fear as “abhorrent”.

On Thilo Sarrazin
The politically incorrect Sarrazin dared to question multi-culturalism in Germany, Gauck said Sarrazin “showed courage” writing his controversial best-seller Deutschland schafft sich ab (Germany is going down the tubes). “He spoke about a problem that exists in our society more openly than the politicians.”

Climate change?
That’s the mystery – one that even has the warmists a bit worried and wondering. We do know he is no fan of fear and intimidation. A few hours with a good skeptic would probably suffice. The warmists such as Klimaretter have already researched Gauck and found little. That’s encouraging. If he felt half-strong about climate change, then he would have said something to support combating it. But if he disagrees with all the hysteria, and wished to avoid poking a hornets’ nest, then he would have remained silent. That is precisely what he has done on the issue.

Here’s what the warmist Klimaretter (Climate Rescuer) writes about Gauck:

The word “climate change” up to now has only appeared when he criticized the German’s so-called addiction to fear that he himself diagnosed and placed it, from his perspective, on a level with swine flu and e-coli.  Otherwise: a total blank. Gauck’s ecological plea: total silence.”

and,

Gauck, the President to be, is a contemplative man who is certainly ready to reconsider his own positions. Perhaps this will be true for his so far neglected “green” issues. One thing is clear: With this guy, the country will experience some surprises.”

Gauck appears to be a man of principle, integrity - someone who thinks policies have to be based on foundations of truth. The climate movement and its promises, like communism, are not; they are based on a plain lies and distortions. The movement is driven by fear and hysteria over scenarios 100 years in the future. This is not the sort of thing a man like Gauck readily embraces.

Modern German solar park.

MUST READ!

Boy, I’m sure our great grandchildren will be thanking us for that one extra day!

Here’s a sad, yet funny evluation of one of the greatest engineering follies of all time.  H/t DirkH

Björn Lomborg has a new article out that assesses Germany’s solar energy “boom”.

Germany’s Sunshine Daydream

By Bjørn Lomborg:

COPENHAGEN – One of the world’s biggest green-energy public-policy experiments is coming to a bitter end in Germany, with important lessons for policymakers elsewhere.

Germany once prided itself on being the “photovoltaic world champion”, doling out generous subsidies – totaling more than $130 billion, according to research from Germany’s Ruhr University – to citizens to invest in solar energy. But now the German government is vowing to cut the subsidies sooner than planned, and to phase out support over the next five years. What went wrong?

There is a fundamental problem with subsidizing inefficient green technology: it is affordable only if it is done in tiny, tokenistic amounts. Using the government’s generous subsidies, Germans installed 7.5 gigawatts of photovoltaic (PV) capacity last year, more than double what the government had deemed “acceptable.” It is estimated that this increase alone will lead to a $260 hike in the average consumer’s annual power bill.

…

To put it another way: by the end of the century, Germany’s $130 billion solar panel subsidies will have postponed temperature increases by 23 hours.” Continue reading…

For all you others countries out there considering the German model – think about it! What more do you need to be convinced it’s a folly?

Germany deals with its climate skeptics (Public domain work)

Needless to say, the reaction to Germany’s bestselling skeptic book has been brutally harsh. In his piece, Iken reminds us of three rules in Germany:

1. Never praise the Pope!
2. Never doubt the multi-cultural society!
3. And do believe in climate change!”

Violating any of the above will get you into serious trouble. Since Vahrenholt’s and Lüning’s skeptic book has hit the bookshelves, the two authors have been met with a storm of outrage from the much of the media, numerous zealot activists and the political establishment. Vahrenholt’s own party comrade Michael Müller even labelled him a “climate denier”.

Germany stomps “skeptic physics“

As Die kalte Sonne website mentions, Iken writes:

It is best kept silent that Vahrenholt is the director of RWE subsidiary Innogy for alternative energies. The same applies to the fact that the former environmental politician fought as a pioneer for the ecological movement, as the author of the book Seveso ist überall [Seveso is everywhere} and that he was the manager of the wind power company Repower. He has earned the right to be taken seriously. No one has to agree with him, but he needs to be discussed with.”

Die kalte Sonne website writes that one has to wonder about the massivve blind trust placed in the keepers of the unchallenged IPCC climate truth. Instead of entering into a fruitful discussion, brimstone and fire has rained down. Numerous scientists who agree at least with parts of the book's argumentation are keeping silent for fear of being chastised by colleagues and loss of grant money. Unfortunately Germany has seen similar days some decades ago. The only difference today is that the science that challenges climate orthodoxy now gets called skeptic physics.

No. 14 on bestseller list

Critics also unfairly claim that the book was not written by real climate scientists. However, not only is Vahrenholt a professor of chemistry, he is also an expert in renewable energies – something the media keeps burying. One critic scientist even made the mistake of claiming that Lüning has not authored any real peer-reviewed papers. However, it turns out that he has authored or co-authoredover 30 publications, and, since two weeks, is the author of a bestseller: “Die kalte Sonne”, now ranked No. 14 on Spiegel’s bestseller list.

On the other hand, warmist Mojib Latif, a fierce critic of Vahrenholt and Lüning, has also just released a climate book. It’s ranked number 31,500 at Amazon, making it a real loser. Latif obviously is seething with envy and so has resorted to petty back-biting.  

Die kalte Sonne also includes 4 guest authors who are distinguished experts and pioneers in their respective fields: Nir Shaviv, Henrik Svensmark, Nicola Scarfetta and Werner Weber. Scientifically, it’s as solid as can be.

Ikes reminds us:

As Francis Picabia once said: Our heads are round so that we can think in all directions. In Germany we often act like blockheads.”

Publications Sebastian Lüning, click here.

Why is it cooling? H/t: Real Science

The interview covers a number of areas. But a few points I found particularly interesting. On the lack of warming since 2000, the KURIER asks if it’s too short of a time period.

Of course it is. But we still need an explanation on why CO2 emissions, which the IPCC says is responsible for global warming, and which rose continuously since 2000, has not caused any warming. There has to be natural causes: the sun and the 60-year ocean cycles –  they were the reasons why we wrote the book.”

Vahrenholt also has words on Germany’s current attempt to move to renewable energy:

We’ve  gone into a hectic rush and today in Germany we are converting wheat into bioethanol, and installing 50% of all the world’s photovoltaic systems in a country that gets as much sunshine as Alaska – namely Germany.  This uncoordinated mad rush is rooted in fear: It’s our fault, we could trigger a climate catastrophe.”

On the IPCC filtering out the sun and other factors:

It is indeed interesting that of the 34 members of the IPCC editorial team that wrote the summary report, one third are connected to the WWF and Greenpeace. That is legitimate, but that has to be made transparent. Imagine just the opposite and the editorial team were one third Exxon supporters. Wouldn’t people say: ’Hello! Is that really necessary?’”

Vahrenholt on why the climate debate has inquisitorial undercurrents:

Because it has long since not been about a purely scientific issue,  rather it is about how to run society. Some are saying that we are entering an uncontrollable situation, and so claim any means against it is justified.”

Like throwing democracy overboard, as some are advocating. Here Vahrenholt specifically singles out Schellnhuber’s WBGU and his Great Transformation of society masterplan, which calls for:

…changes in consumption behavior, changed trade behavior and that non-sustainable living styles be stigmatized by society.”

On the success of the book?

It’s no. 14 on the Spiegel bestseller list. Of course I hope the book will be read. The worst thing that could happen would be a spiral of silence, a discussion that never gets held. In five or ten years, we’ll know who is right.”

Overall, a solid and convincing interview by the KURIER. This will push book sales in Austria, Switzerland and Bavaria. Readers can visit the “http://kaltesonne.de/” site, which has an English translation button.

Yesterday NDR German public television had an interview with Fritz Vahrenholt, co-author with Sebastian Lüning of the bestselling book Die kalte Sonne now sweeping through Germany. The NDR piece is dubbed: “Vahrenholt and the ‘CO2 lies’”. The clip first introduces the climate topic and reminds viewers that “that man is causing global warming and storms.”

NDR says Vahrenholt has "opted to descend into another world".

Established climate science is indignant about the scrutiny

NDR first questions Hartmut Grassl and Jochem Marotzke, both of the Max Planck Institute for Meteorology. Grassl, obviously agitated by Vahrenholt’s skeptical book, crossly replies:

Ach, actually I have no desire to comment on such nonsense.”

If you listen closely, you’ll hear a burst of laughter from some hyena in the background. Jochem Marotzke also takes the same snobby attitude: No one should question AGW. Why the indignant reaction from Marotzke and Grassl? One can only speculate.

Suppressing open debate

Perhaps they feel that a chemistry professor (Vahrenholt) and a geologist (Lüning) have no business doubting their science. But my guess is that they are completely embarrassed, and thus terrified, about having been duped by what is turning out today to be a really dumb and simplistic hypothesis: climate trace gas CO2 rules the climate and other factors play no role. These two scientific men bought into the global warming end-of-the-world catastrophe hook, line and sinker. They have absolutely no desire to have all this exposed by an open debate.

And as Lüning writes at the “Die kalte Sonne site here:

One gets the sense they are now trying harder than ever to suppress debate.”

NDR could not resist delivering a low blow to Vahrenholt. The used old footage of him when he was Environment Senator for Hamburg over 20 years ago. The footage shows the young Vahrenholt climbing down through a manhole while the reporter says: “He has opted to descend into another world.” NDR’s message to the viewers is clear: “Skeptics belong in the sewers.  Now you know how nasty things can get in Germany.

Critics should first read the book

The NDR interview with Vahrenholt on the other was well handled.

During the interview, Vahrenholt’s calls out the major error made by the IPCC, not properly taking the sun and ocean currents into account, and falsely assigning all the warming to CO2 from 1980 to 2000. ARD asked Vahrenholt to respond to Mojib Latif’s recent criticism, also indignant. Vahrenholt replied.

“He really ought to first read the book.”

They all should read the book. From their comments, it’s clear that they haven’t, and they seem stunningly ignorant of the latest science – or they simply just don’t want to talk about it.

Good news! The book is selling like hot cakes – no. 14 on bestseller list

Here’s a little anecdote. I live in a small town and four weeks ago I ordered two copies of “Die kalte Sonne” from our local bookshop here in town – one for myself and one for the bookshop display window, which the owner kindly allowed. I told the owner that the book was highly controversial and politically incorrect. “What do you mean?” he asked. I told him “the book doesn’t believe in the climate catastrophe!” He just laughed.

Today the bookshop owner sent me a message to let me know that “Die kalte Sonne” is now on the Spiegel bestseller list and that customers have been snapping them up, and that he’s been ordering more copies.Then he told me on the phone that once a book is on the Spiegel bestseller list, then sales pick up.

So expect tens of thousands of copies to be sold nationwide!

h/t: Chris Smith

This is Al Gore repackaged. This is really a sorrowful, populist presentation. How did Kutscher get a PhD! We will redebunk this point by point.

It’s getting late – and I’ve watched the first half. Will finish tomorrow.

I can tell you right now that Fritz Vahrenholt’s and Sebastian Lüning’s new book Die kalte Sonne, using the latest data and peer-reviewed literature, completely demolishes every single point Kutscher makes. Sheesh – Kutscher is still stuck on TSI!

I can’t believe there are so many gullible suckers out there like Chris taking this crap in hook, line and sinker.

Debunking the presentation:

1. 4:30 mark – “Well-heeled misinformation campaign.” That’s bogus. Most of the doubt arises from privately run blogs with little or no money (Climate Audit, WUWT, etc.) and a rapidly growing number of skeptical scientists who are finding loads of flaws in the science. From time to time some media outlets are reporting on this. Public observation has also failed to detect the occurrence of any of the horror predictions. The warmist movement on the other hand is funded by billions.

2. 5:00 mark – “Climategate e-mails show the scientists wanted to get the message out.” Oh, that’s why they defied the requirements of thr FOIA and refused to make the data public. Read The Hockey Stick Illusion

3. 5:30 mark – “Independent panels exonnerated the Climategate scientists.” It’s proven that these were whitewashes led by warmist hacks. McIntyre has gone through all that.

4. 9:15 mark – “Mann’s hockey stick was fundamentally correct.” The national Academy of Sciences said Mann’s hockey stick was rubbish. The new ones that were made to replace it were also shown by McIntyre to be flawed as well. Don’t worry, we will go back and dig it all up again. The 2007 IPCC report did drop it. The one they depicted on page 457 was buried under the updated ones, which brought back the Medieval Warm Period and the Little Ice Age.  Here’s the IPCC hockey stick history.

1990 IPCC chart

Figure 1: hockeyschtick.blogspot.com/

IPCC 2001 - having gotten rid of the MWP. Orwellian rewrite of history.

Figure 2: www.martinfrost.climategate. Here they spliced thermometer data after 1960.

Moberg 2005. After 2005, science rediscovers the Medeival Warm Period!

Figure 3: p. 123 of “Die kalte Sonne”

[Drafting the remainder of this post is in progress and will be completed as time permits (debunking volumes of errors entails a proportionate amount of time, unfortunately). -PG]

The energy part of the conference is taking place this weekend, Saturday morning, February 18, 2012:

9:30 – 10:30: Energy – Keynote Jeremy Rifkin.
The Third Industrial Revolution: The New German Model for a Post-Carbon Economy, Radcliffe Yard

10:30 – 10:50: Coffee Break, Radcliffe Yard

10:50 – 11:15: Energy Address, Dr. Hermann Ott (MdB German Green Party), Radcliffe Yard

11:15 – 12:40: Energy – Panel and Q&A:
Full throttle towards green energy – Germany visionary or misguided?
Prof. Dr. Jürgen Kluge, Dr. Hermann Ott, Benjamin Schlesinger, Ph.D., Prof. Dr. Eicke Weber, Radcliffe Yard

And if you’re interested in finding out how the “new German model” is coming along, read about it here – it aint pretty! In fact, the power grid came only a whisker away from a collapse during the recent cold spell. And many German companies are relocating to places where supply is more reliable.

But who cares about these nuances – it’s the way the USA should go these misguided pointy heads tell us. I’ll let the German readers here tell you who these German masterminds are.

DR. KEIL’S FULL 28-PAGE REPORT IN ENGLISH

The above report is a must read if you are involved in energy engineering, planning or policy!

If you do, you’ll never want to touch the German strategy. In fact, according to experts from 21 of the World Energy Council’s country committees:

81% of the countries surveyed reject the German way as a model for the world, and none of the experts could imagine their own countries following the German way.”

I’ve read the entire 28-page report, and it sounds worse than Soviet-style central planning. If anyone happens to be near Harvard, go check out the conference.

So far in Germany, the current attempt to switch over to renewable energy has only succeeded in:
1) driving up electricty and energy rates for consumers,
2) making the power supply unreliable,
3. littering the landscape with windparks and solar panels,
4. driving up the price of food,
5. driving industry out of country,
6. regulating private lives more and more intensely, and
7. putting billions into the pockets of a few opportunists and carbon traders.

Hamburg storm of 1962

Today is the 50th anniversary of the great storm of 1962, which with winds peaking at 200 km/hr hit Hamburg, Germany particularly hard. More than 50 dikes burst as the tide surged and submerged one sixth of the city. Imagine if that heppened today!

In total, the homes of about 60,000 people were destroyed, and the death toll amounted to 347 in Hamburg alone.

The European storm of 1953 – the worst in 500 years
It caused floods that took 2,000 lives. Holland was worst hit. Dikes gave way and flooded towns all across Europe.

Other great European storm disasters (when CO2 was 280 ppm):

17 Feb. 1164: Julian Flood, 20,000 dead.
16 Jan. 1219: 1st Marcellus Flood Reportedly 36,000 dead
14 Dec. 1287: St. Lucia’s Flood 50,000 dead
16 Jan. 1362: 2nd Marcellus Flood 100,000 dead.
1 Nov. 1570: All Saint’s Flood over 20,000 dead
11 Oct. 1634: Burchardi Flood, at least 8,000 dead
24 Dec. 1717: Christmas Flood; 14,000 dead

Read more here from the Munich Re!