Am I Imagining Things (Climate Change And Personal Observations)?

Miscellaneous and Personal Stuff I Must Share
61

Suggesting that anthropogenic climate change is beneficial has long been one of the standard talking points of climate change deniers. If they can’t argue that it’s not happening, they try to point to isolated examples of benefits, ignoring the overwhelming scientific evidence of primarily negative impacts, just the way you ignored the chart I posted summarizing the numerous serious impacts on our health, welfare, and economies. It is emblematic of exactly the same kind of anti-science ranting as outright denial of climate change itself.

The IPCC Working Group 2 has for decades now summarized these scientific findings. Trying to debate settled science on a message board is a waste of everyone’s time.

https://www.ipcc.ch/working-group/wg2/

Until you read and understand the IPCC summaries of the basic science and the global impacts of climate change, and until you refute their thousands of citations with equivalently credible peer-reviewed papers, you are not “facing the facts”, you’re just another fact-free denier on an internet message board. This is evident from the misinformation you’ve already posted.

It might surprise you to learn that Africa overall is one of the most vulnerable regions to the deleterious effects of climate change. For the African population, already at risk from crop failures and shortages of clean water, climate change is an existential threat:

https://unfccc.int/news/climate-change-is-an-increasing-threat-to-africa

There’s nothing like a sound, well reasoned, fact-based argument, I always say! :grinning_face_with_smiling_eyes:

Both of those periods were believed to have been influenced by orbital fluctuations called Milankovitch cycles, which makes them irrelevant as a comparison to the strong forcing being created by long-lived greenhouse gases in the post-industrial era. The atmospheric concentration of CO2 is currently higher than it’s been in millions of years. Also, it’s doubtful that the Holocene Climatic Optimum was warmer than today. This may have been true once, but in recent decades global average temperatures have climbed significantly higher.

Actually, on balance this is false. While studies confirm that some plants (primarily trees) show some benefit from increased CO2, in general the growth benefits are constrained by other limiting factors, most notably soil nutrients. More importantly, any benefits that may exist are generally outweighed by negative factors such as long-lived regional climate changes (drought or floods) or the northerly migration of invasive pests. The earth’s ecosystem is incredibly complex, and half-baked aphorisms like “CO2 is good for plants” or “warming is good” are worse than useless in describing actual reality.

62

Like I said, that was over 100K years ago. Humanity was not transitioning from a massively developed global civilization in a stable Holocene climate to those significantly higher temperatures in around a century.

Nope, current temps either are already, or will be within the next several decades, higher than the Holocent Climate Optimum: see GIGO’s and my previously posted links.

Apples to oranges. You’re comparing the stable average temperatures of the past few thousand years of human civilization (with societies and organisms optimized for those average temperatures) with historical “cold snaps” within that period. Of course the stable average temperatures will be better for human societies and the natural environments they depend on.

That doesn’t say jack-squat about whether it will be a net improvement in the near term to shift from those stable average temperatures to significantly higher temperatures and much less predictable climate circumstances.

Did you read the Scientific American link I posted containing a discussion among actual climate scientists on that very issue? Do you understand the difference between looking at a specific beneficial input like added CO2 in isolation and looking at the complex consequences of GHGs on a whole ecosystem?

In other words, do you understand the difference in scale and impact between a farmer adding some CO2 to a few plants in a greenhouse and human beings altering the composition of the entire global atmosphere?

Because if you really can’t grasp that, and can’t understand that climate scientists as a group understand it, then you’re never going to be able to get past your simplistic fixation on this one isolated piece of the whole climate-change phenomenon.

I repeat: The global warming from the last glacial period to the current interglacial norm took place over thousands of years while there were not billions of humans dependent on extremely resource-intensive complex civilization.

If you can’t understand any more complicated aspects of this situation than “duh, warmer temperatures and more CO2 are good for plants!” and “duh, warming up from the last glacial period was good for human societies!”, then you’ll never be able to understand what climate scientists are concerned about.

Sheesh. Your argument is like somebody claiming that because it’s healthier to be at a normal body temperature in a warm room than to be hypothermic outdoors in a blizzard, then it’s not a problem for a Covid patient to start running a temperature of 105F. “Duh, getting warmer is good for people! Warm people are more productive!”

All they do is signal that the person uttering them isn’t actually “thinking for themselves”, but has bought into the “climate skeptic” propaganda which flatters their imagined “shrewdness” and “common sense” while allowing them to avoid engaging with the actual science.

63

Do your own research? Show, don’t tell? WWG1WGA? I am not sure I want to follow you there.

64

Not exactly “doing my own research”, but awhile back I tallied up around 20 years of weather observations from my garden diary. It turned out that the first fall frost was occurring on average several days later by the end of that period. Not proof of widespread climate change, but an indicator on a personal level.

It’d be useful if major media could resist the temptation to hype extreme weather events* as proof of climate change, instead emphasizing long-term trends to bring the point home. That might dampen the enthusiasm of climate deniers who seize upon one deep freeze event to mock the idea of a warming Earth.

*referring to cold fronts as a “polar vortex” or “polar plunge” makes for dramatic headlines. ABC News a couple of days ago was handwaving about 70% of people in the lower 48 states due to experience temps of 32F or below. You know, that really isn’t so unusual for February 20.

65

Answering the OP, I don’t think you’re imagining things. Yes I know it’s not a scientifically proven study, but my observations, notes from a personal weather station and my own journal have convinced me of the following:

  • There are a lot more windy days.
  • There are a lot more days of high, straight-line winds.
  • Those high winds are far more likely to be from about 350deg to 040 deg (N-NE), probably due to local hills and topography around me.
  • On a few stormy days, the above winds have been lifting and torquing my deck and its roof on the NE side (I’ve been looking closely at the movement and marks on the supports, it has definitely been “lifted” in a few storms).
  • Although the average isn’t changing much, rainfall is concentrating into more and stronger deluges.
  • These higher concentrations of heavy rains are causing movement and damage to retaining walls on my property (again, measuring both distance from walls/objects, and level/true). This movement has only happened in the last 5 years.

There are more violent storms in the last few years. We’ve been doing much more repair than in the past, and have so far had severe damage or total loss of: a roof, vents/turbines, deck surface and railings, total loss of one car to hail, damage to other vehicles, sections of fencing down, gates wrenched loose, water damage to some areas due to roof unable to handle and move water away (not steep enough). This is all new, happening in the last 3-4 years, and has not happened before in the 29 years we’ve lived here.

Due to all the above, and the past 4 years we’ve strengthened a lot of the house. Braced a lot of the fencing, adding deeper sunk poles, some triangular, anchored bracing of exposed regions, added additional bracing and electromagnetic locks to gates (resists wind movement).

We’ve replaced some of the deck areas, and the entire roof (roof was insured, thankfully, I had to foot the bill for all the rest). Replaced turbines/vents with lower profile versions, and changed some angles and added deflectors to move water in different directions.

I had the contractors remove some of the upper floor exterior walls near rooflines in order to add flashing underneath (18 inches high) and replaced the walls with treated wood before repainting. These were deteriorating due to splashing water. Additionally I had several areas with flashing moved higher, requiring cutting into masonry to install and seal.

The lower patio/deck roof had lifted so much (I watched it one time) I was worried about it flying away. So I had the entire roof removed. It has been replaced with a steel version, which is steel beams welded to 3” thick steel supports, which are sunk 3 feet into the ground/concrete to anchor them. The exposed edges of the metal roofing are protected by 2-inch C-channel beams welded in place a few inches outward – these protect the edges from high winds, but leave a gap for water to fall through. The deck itself has been replaced with a new one installed tight to the flat roof it covers, along with wind breaks to “seal” the edges. This hopefully will keep wind from getting under and “lifting” the deck any more.

The wooden railings around the exposed and damaged NE deck were replaced with metal rails, and these had (at my request) additional bracing added which extends down the sides of the wall and into the beams below (attached with lag-bolts in multiple directions – this “clamps” the deck itself to the structure, and ensures any movement must shear multiple bolts instead of pull them out of wood).
The stairs are steel and now anchored to concrete and brick. I had the stairs, the edges of the railing and roof beams (above) all welded together as a single, continuous, anchored unit.

I hired a retaining wall company to reset the retaining walls to vertical and install steel support poles into the ground on either face of the walls. These poles are winched together with twisted cable between each pole (like safety wire in aviation fasteners). The cable/wire reaches between the rows of railroad ties and effectively ties the entire wall into a single unit that’s much harder to “push” from vertical.

So no, OP, you’re not imagining things and neither am I. The weather is getting wilder and I’ve put considerable effort and expense into strengthening our house for it. I realize it won’t withstand an F3 (or even EF3) tornado, but I think it will now stand up to the increased ferocity of local storms.