There had been no rain in Dallas for 67 days - second longest in record - before this epic rainstorm. The baked dry soil cannot absorb that much water quickly so it is running off in flash floods.
This is just one of four so-called 1 in 1,000 year events in four states this past weekend. They can no longer be called that given their recent frequency, but no one can yet predict just how often they will start occurring due to climate change.
Dallas and other areas in Texas are experiencing weather disasters regularly, far beyond anyone’s experience. Are the cumulative effect of these finally beginning to have an effect on residents’ opinions on the reality of climate change and the urgent need to start doing large numbers of things on a massive scale?
We must stop trying to convince people who will never be convinced and elect people who believe in Science, can see the future, and want to keep the planet habitable for our great-great-great-grandchildren.
People who don’t believe in climate change either think it’s a leftist hoax, believe Science is fake, don’t care what happens after they die, or just don’t want to think about a dystopian future.
It’s time to unite with the rest of the world, try to improve the future, and move on without the non-believers. It’s not about saving a few Pandas, it’s about preparing to live in a world humans have never experienced before.
This is God’s punishment for ignoring His definition of life: “The Lord God formed the man from the soil of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being.”
I’m surprised more believers haven’t come out and said: “This is literally God slapping us in the face. How many more plagues do we need before we get the message?”
Anybody who knows statistics knows that sometimes seemingly-significant clusters of events happen through sheer happenstance. The onus is upon the people claiming the significance to show that there is actual statistical significance above and beyond what we would expect to see based on randomness.
The fact that many people do not understand this basic mathematical fact is responsible for many dubious claims. Two of the most prominent dubious claims are that power lines cause cancer, and that climate change causes natural disasters.
Republicans who experience extreme weather do seem more likely to believe in the science of it. We just have to wait until the whole country is on fire.
Didn’t Houson have one of these recently? Perhaps urban planning and infradtructure design should start accounting for the possibility for extreme weather events driven by climate change.
I wonder if the whole “urban heat island” idea, where retained heat from pavement and buildings can affect weather, is playing a role here, by wringing more moisture from storms (and generating better headlines). Both Dallas and Houston are known for massive sprawl.
Maybe it’s just coincidence these events are occurring in areas with a lot of doubters/deniers, but if it helps nudge the needle on accepting climate change, I guess that’s a silver lining.
I know part of it is the “pavement” effect, where so much of the ground is covered or blocked by impermeable surfaces, that water is forced to run off instead of being absorbed into the ground.
The problem is that the only way to elect enough people who believe in science to make a difference is by trying to convince those people who are in denial.
Note that the 24-hour rainfall measured at DFW airport for August 21-22 (9.19 inches) was the second-highest ever recorded, behind 1932’s record of 9.57 inches. My math skills are poor, but that doesn’t seem to be 1000 years ago.
Climate change warnings are more accurate and have greater effect when they focus on trends over time which are indisputable, like warming temperatures.
One recent occurrence that was questionably linked with climate change was the D.C. lightning strike that killed three people. There have been predictions of more frequent lightning hits due to warming global temperatures but data has been spotty so far. The rate of lightning-related deaths has decreased steadily in the U.S. over the past century or more (one cited reason is country to urban migration) and was unusually low in 2020 and 2021 (due to Covid??). So numerous factors are in play.
Those two things are not at all similar, unless you’re talking about claims that climate change causes any particular individual natural disaster.
AFAIK there is zero scientific evidence that electromagnetic fields from power lines have any effect at all on cancer incidence. Not on individual cancer cases, and not on general patterns of cancer occurrence. Nor is there any scientifically plausible physical mechanism currently known which would enable EMFs to affect cancer incidence.
The relationship between climate change and natural disasters, on the other hand, is much more scientifically credible. There are well-understood physical mechanisms by which a warmer climate, with more water vapor in the atmosphere and higher ocean surface temperatures, is more conducive to extreme weather events. And current trends in the increasing frequency and severity of extreme weather events are consistent with what’s predicted from the effects of warming climate.
But if all you’re trying to say is that there’s no scientific justification for claims that a particular extreme weather event was directly caused by climate change, then yes, you’re right about that.
You know who do understand this basic mathematical fact?
Actual, real-life, working scientists.
Any amount of research into non-right-wing media sources will show hundreds of easily accessible articles saying that weather extremes have been becoming more frequent and every indication is that they will continue to do so. The curve of extremes is rising so rapidly that computer models need to be rewritten because the the low-chance events that were once ignored for upcoming models now happen so much more frequently that they have to accounted for. A signal that an event with a 0.1% chance was eliminated as an outlier. No longer. This is statistically meaningful.
DFW is west of Dallas, where the rainfall was lower. The 1 in 1,000 year reference was to locations east of Dallas where more than 14 inches of rain was recorded.
And Bootb was right in one claim. Statistical clusters do happen. A 1 in 1000 year event do not mean that events must be 1000 years apart. Just that they have an average known occurrence of 0.1% a year. I agree with him that this should be basic mathematical knowledge, but it is still most certainly known to anyone with scientific training.
Apparently you’re not familiar with the thousands of scientific papers that have been published on exactly this subject, or the fact that climate scientists do, in fact, know how statistics works. Ten years ago the IPCC published a special report on extreme weather events related to rapid climate change citing in total literally thousands of peer-reviewed journal articles; this information has since been updated in the Sixth Assessment Report issued last year.
The increased frequency and severity of extreme weather events has long been predicted by theory, demonstrated in climate models, and empirically observed throughout the world. To call this incontrovertible fact “dubious” is the kind of fundamental denial of facts and science that has become embarrassing even for Republicans.
Could we please not hijack this thread with arguments about whether climate change is real? For the purposes of this thread, please stick to the subject of whether or not public attitudes are changing.
The problem is that when it’s described as a “1 in 1000 year flood”, it’s easy for a certain segment of the population to merely consider it something that happens every thousand years on average in a very specific area.
Nothing we’ve seen recently is out of the bounds of “normal” when taken in isolation- every decade or so we get a serious cold snap. We get severe rains periodically. We get heat waves.
It’ll take several of the same kind of event over a fairly short period of time for them to finally realize that something’s up. One severe heat wave, one crazy flood, one super cold snap isn’t going to convince a whole lot of people that this is definitely climate change related.
And FWIW, it’s very dependent on WHERE you live. I got 8" of rain at my house , but nothing actually flooded anywhere near me. My buddy up north (Frisco) got about 2", which is not particularly unusual.