You responded to a flood post with a statement that made no mention of floods, at all.
Your response was completely unrelated to what you quoted.
If you disagree, I challenge you to find the word “flood” in your post that responded to Chief Pedant or even any idea in it that relates to floods.
Regarding one of the questions from the OP, it is clear that there has been even less rain and the fire season is starting early. Just like scientists predicted what we would see in the South west.
And now you decide to ignore that I was talking about him resorting to a conspiracy to make a sorry point.
As for floods (and the Chief talked about droughts too, I only replied to that but I have to remind myself that you are not learning anything from previous discussions), you should be aware that just the simple fact that ocean rise is one of the most likely things that climate scientists expect to come leads to logically assume that more floods will take place in coastal areas when hurricanes and more precipitation comes.
Sea levels are most likely to increase thanks to the melting of the ice on the land.
Floods will be just one result of the increase of the ocean rise. So, not good indeed.We aren’t good at predicting 100 year floods.
We arent’ good at predicting this year’s floods.
We aren’t good at predicting frequency or rate of occurrence of floods.
It’s true that AGW Alarmists have predicted pretty much everything you can think of related to weather and climate that is predictable. To wit:
Increased (fill in the blank)
Worsening (fill in the blank)
More extreme (fill in the blank)
It’s a titchy bit early to think these predictions have been successful over a long-term trend, don’t you think?
What is for sure, in my opinion, is that when an event is in the direction of AGW, it’s “Told ya so; expect to see more of these harbingers.”
When it’s not in the right direction, its’ “Hey; can’t you figger out the difference between climate change and weather?”
And we don’t tend to look for reasons why events in the right direction might not be harbingers, but we love to find reasons why AGW predicted this past hideously cold winter for upper North America all along (by “predicted” I mean that after the event we say, “if we had looked harder, we coulda predicted it; turns out it’s an effect of AGW after all.”
This is just human nature.
And no; we are not good at predicting floods or droughts, or when they are going to happen, or with what frequency they will happen.
Well…to be fair, we are good at predicting; we’re just not good at being very right.
The human nature I see here is to press for straw men, or for weather for that matter, it is irrelevant to the matter at hand, as it is the implied idea that scientists at the IPCC have a “stake” or an interest on raising what in reality are common sense and scientifically based warnings to all.
Gb, I solemnly promise you that if more droughts occur anywhere in a reasonably proximate period of time, AGW Alarmists will take credit for having predicted them.
If more floods occur anywhere in a reasonably proximate period of time, AGW Alarmists will take credit for having predicted them.
If both occur anywhere in a reasonably proximate period of time, AGW Alarmists will take credit for having predicted both.
If neither occur anywhere in a reasonably proximate period of time, AGW Alarmists will coninue to sound the alarm that such events are right around the corner.
Read your first sentence above and tell me, exactly, how you find this to be a prediction of any practical value whatsoever.
Talk to me like I’m the reinsurer for flood and drought-induced crop failure insurance for US midwest and persuade me we are good at predicting droughts and floods.
Leave Mr Gore out of this, please.
And this has been pointed many times before:
“Global warming amplifies the risk factors for extreme weather events - and that is all that Climate Science claims.” Making the unrelated point that we are not good at the predictions of when exactly extreme events will take place only produce just a “Duh!” in reply from the ones that are more aware of the problem, and as it is made to confuse the issue it is clear that those sorry points are repeated just for FUD indeed.
This is like when I was young and more poor that I’m now and lived in one of the worst neighbourhoods in San Jose, there was a free way exit that had lots of cars falling of the road because the exit was a very sharp curve with little to no inclination, the eventual solution was to increase the inclination of the curve and small bumps were added early to make the cars to slow down.
What the Chief is insisting here is that since we are so lousy to predict when the next car will come off the free-way that then we do not need to make any changes. *
Point being that not knowing when something will take place is not a reason to dump all the other information available that tells us how we can increase our security and prevent damage in the future.
*(And a result of that we also do not need to pay for the taxes that eventually were used in the real world to make that part of the road safer to drivers and the people living in the neighbourhood)
You did not see the video huh? Science writer Peter Hadfield (AKA Potholer54) is one of my main sources because he showed that he is not shy on taking on the errors coming from Gore, and I’m on the record of not relying on Gore, but you are on the record of using him when you are out of ideas.
Wait…wait…wouldn’t that be weather and not Climate Change?
I get so confused about which is which. I thought short-term was weather, and long term was Climate Change…
For example, I remember hearing that last year’s non-hurricane season for the North Atlantic was weather…but then I heard it was AGW over the Sahara that in fact was preventing hurricanes…but that Sandy was AGW but not over the Sahara…Sandy was regular AGW…but after Sandy there was this warning about the 2013 hurricane season because of AGW but then that didn’t turn out except it turned out that it was still AGW only this time driving worse hurricanes but not as often…
Well one thing’s for sure: If the summer is hot and horrible, it’s gotta be AGW, just like AGW was the cause of an all-time cold winter.
Right?
Irrelevant retort then, I’m not one of those alarmists, and the IPCC is conservative on their estimates.
You need to look at a decade at least (and many make the point that other forces can mask the warming that is taking place for more years than that)
Imagine the fun when malaria-bearing mosquitoes join the party. Well, they may not make it that far north, but its range is expanding northward and the elevations where it occurs are going up.
tl;dr Scientific crap about climate and AGW and winter trends as well as why weather and climate are confusing and shit like that
You got that right. In fact, the trend of colder winters (and as we saw this winter, much colder) is making it very difficult to sell the world’s population on dire predictions of AGW, human caused global warming. The essential problem is that the warnings and basic message of AGW have been firmly cemented in the mind of anyone who lives in the modern world.
Two of the main points of the alarmist warmer have been 1) It’s happening now, and 2) The warmer winters is a sure sign of global warming
This was hammered home by dire predictions of tropical diseases spreading northward, mosquitoes heading north, winter wheat in danger from lack of cold, children not knowing what snow was, ski resorts going out of business, glaciers and ice caps melting, sea level rise increasing from the melting, trees suffering, the Maple syrup industry collapsing, permafrost melting, tundra turning into forest, lack of snow for water supplies, leading to a winter warming feedback effect that would cause even more winter warming. Of course it was/is all conjecture, but the public doesn’t just forget thirty years of hearing about something. And the world heard about both winter warming and arctic warming a lot.
Bolding is mine, I suggest reading the entire thing. It is educational, and will help with understanding why it is that the current reality, which you are asking about, is important in regards to both climate, as well as molding public opinion.
In essence, the warming that was being observed couldn’t be explained by any climate models. especially the arctic warming, which was happening far faster than any model could predict. Same for the incredible winter warming trend, no models predicted as much warming as was observed.
Following up that 1999 page, we see Apr. 23, 2001
Of course those are just examples of the predictions, and the fear mongering that came from them. In 2009 the Scientists and officials working with the U.S. Global Change Research Program released on June 16 2009 a climate-change assessment. Which is a good example of what the public was told, over and over and over.
Climate-Change Report: From Bad to Worse | TIME
What sort of facts were we told couldn’t be debated in the report?
Like I started off trying to explain, the public was told, as fact, that AGW was causing warmer winters, and it would just get worse with time.
Greenhouse gases were the cause of a stronger polar vortex, leading to warming winters. Of course a year later, with the facts impossible to hand wave away, we started hearing the exact opposite, so that by now it’s a familiar story to here that the colder winters are actually being caused by AGW. Which of course leads to the topic at hand, are the winters getting colder? or warmer? Obviously either way it’s AGW to blame, which doesn’t seem to bother some people a bit.
As for the questions
It of course depends on where you are. Most of the CONUS as well as Alaska is showing a clear trend of colder winters. A lot of the US is also showing hotter summers.
The changes usually are only labeled bad or good depending on the person deciding. But certainly the much colder, and longer winters are considered bad by most. From an economic view, disastrous at times.
A cool thing about such questions, is that if you live in the CONUS you can simply check to see what is happening with your winters, and summers. It’s no mystery.
For example, Kansas shows a clear trend of colder winters. Going back 30 years. As well as a clear trend of warmer summers in the last 30 years.
But what does colder even mean? Certainly not colder than the extreme winters of the seventies.
If you look at the annual trend, starting in 1930, Kansas has a zero trend. No change at all. Of course that is as unfair as starting with 1970. The thirties were much warmer in Kansas than any current summer.
If you take 1940-1970, you get - .5F a decade cooling.
If you start in 1970 (the coldest period) you can show warming of +.4F a decade.
But if you look at summer temperatures, since 1930 Kansas shows a clear trend of - .1 F a decade.
It’s exactly why our perceptions of weather are not considered climate. Still reading? You are probably awesome, and actually interested in this shit. Cool. Here comes the good part.
An old farmer in Kansas might tell you the climate changes, but things are a lot better now than the dust bowl, and way better than the terrible seventies.
Of course he might be talking about the more important part of the climate.
In any case, in south Florida it’s actually a different story than in Kansas.
Same old cherry picked cites from FXMastermind.
What is silly is that even the Polar Vortex was described early. As the latest video from Peter Hadfield showed models also point at things like the vortex causing cold condition in some areas of the northern hemisphere but the poles are warming a lot as predicted.
But we know that even Dyson was tossed by FX under the bus for predicting that warming at the poles.
Florida, or rather south Florida, is showing a trend for warmer winters, but it’s not easy to show, the CAG software is buggy. You have to select the trends, I can’t link you to them at present. (it’s being worked on)
South east Florida in general shows a clear warming trend.
But, and this is why trends are of limited value at times, the Florida winter trend from 1990-2011 was negative. Mostly because of 2010 and 2011, with December 2010 being the coldest damn December EVER in history.
That’s no joke. It was horrific. The fish kills and coral bleaching was huge. The winter of 09-10 killed almost every Coconut palm all the way down to the treasure coast. There it was damage and heartache. It was a disaster for all the tropical plants that had been growing during the warmer decades prior.
But that’s another story.
So check your climate data and let us know if your winters are warmer. It’s fun AND educational.
And it’s also completely ON TOPIC to check your climate records. Some would say scientific.
How cool is that?
Now if you really want to know if winter is colder, there is this really cool thing called heating degree days, it calculates the temperature based on if you need to run the heat to stay warm.
You can easily see the horror of 2010 for Florida by looking at it. This also clearly shows that the higher the amount, the colder it was. So the higher the heating degree days value, the colder it was.
It shouldn’t surprise Chicago dopers to look at this last winter period.
It’s an easy way to see if winters were actually cold.
Cooling degree days is the other end of the story. Is New Mexico getting hotter?
Not very useful when the topic is about if the warming observed and if the one coming will be good. Just by taking the ocean rise into account the answer is no.
Look, we really, really, don’t want the polar ice caps to melt, especially the Antarctic; that might make new lands available for mining and drilling, but it might also disturb . . . certain things.