I'm inclined to agree with you, (I'm based in the south). But, I do wonder on occasions if the weather patterns are actually being more severe. We've had terrible floods in East Scotland and North England. Around the world we see tornadoes, hurricanes, drought, flooding etc. All said to be the worst in generations. In the 19th century, apparently it was so cold, the river Thames froze and they held markets on it and skating.
I don't really know myself Colin. I do know that in the 50s and 60s I remember it being colder between October and March. Weather is never constant. Before and during Roman times Britain was certainly warmer. Then there was a period of mini ice ages as you mentioned. Since the 1700s it has tended to be going warmer though. So not altogether due to the industrial revolution in the 1800s.
The housing developer will point to the local council for granting planning permission. The homeowner is unlikely to get building insurance or contents insurance. So, unless there is a government assistance to help, the ultimate loser is the homeowner and the local council seem to get away unscathed. So actually, I'm not sure is the answer to your question. Maybe someone else from the UK may know more.
In Britain the government and local authorities have cosy agreements with insurance companies. The costs of completing suitable flood defences can be considerable. As these events are not usually frequent all attempts are made to avoid the expenditure. Furthermore, the number of people directly affected is small when viewed on a national basis. The insurance companies agree to insure properties that are likely to flood and if exceptional events occur and the insurance company suffer extraordinary losses then government will compensate them. If losses persistent the insurance companies will begin to insist that adequate defences are installed in order that they can continue providing insurance. It is the case that all houses must be able to have insurance or some sort. As far as government is concerned they must not be uninsurable. If they were then the owners of flooded properties would have valid claims against local councils and eventually the government would suffer that loss. Insurance may be slightly higher in a flood prone area but must still be affordable to work in this devious system.
If the earth was the size of a basketball, then the breathable air would only be a bit under 2 mm thick. Why are we having all these bad storms and hottest years ever? in 1900 there were 1.6 billion people on the planet. Now there 8.05 billion residents, all of whom require some form of energy to survive. You do thhe math.
Be fruitful and multiply.
Population growth is the cause of the claimed (fictional) climate crises. Nevertheless, population growth does manifest itself through "all of whom require some form of energy to survive". That population growth is unsustainable. Our standard of living is dependent on the ability to waste resources. It is counter intuitive, but if you want a clean environment, a high degree of personal liberty, with a high standard of living you need to impose population control.
We are still on the way out of an ice age but that larger cycle doesn't seem to count.
interestingengineering.com
What you seem to believe is an illusion.
Are you suggesting population control? China tried that. Look how that turned out for them. Females are worthless so female fetuses got aborted. Now we have a generation of young men who have no potential wifes available and who will not be able to procreate.
