tomkaz

This can’t be true, can it? Seriously, the experts told us just the opposite.

Rate this topic

96 posts in this topic

1 min ago, JimW said:

Of course it’s cyclical.  Just go ahead and claim global warming isn’t happening because we got cold and snow this winter.  You know you want to. 

One cool night in July and the myth is busted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe all the rich Liberal Hollywood actors that live there should stop watering their lawns and pay a 90% tax rate to fix the problem??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

lol.....  at when folks who don't pay attention to what climate science says criticize it.  if you don't actually take the time to understand the science, its implications and its uncertainties, why are you surprised when your diagnosis of what "they" are saying is wrong?   Same for the folks here who do have some understanding of anthropogenic global warming, just because we all read news articles about the drought, doesn't mean that unending drought is really what global warming implies for california.  C&P-ing an article from nature, google for more info, context etc.  i'm certainly not very smart but i do pay attention i think!

 

tldr: more flooding, more drought, all of the above.  (wet years followed by dry years, or an increase in extremes also happens to make more fires, yay).

More whiplash weather in store for California

Swings from baking drought to extreme downpours will grow more common, scientists warn.
 

In the coming decades, California is likely to shift between dry spells and floods more often than in recorded history.

Previous studies have shown that warming resulting from human activities has raised the risk of drought in California, but climate change’s impact on the risk of extreme rainfall has been less clear. Daniel Swain and his colleagues at the University of California, Los Angeles, analysed historical flood and drought events, as well as climate simulations to predict how often California is likely to shift from drought one year to extreme rainfall the next. The researchers project that by 2085, these dry-to-wet transition events will increase by 25% in northern California and by up to 100% in southern California.

Wild swings between dry and wet conditions will jeopardize the state’s efforts to store water and control flooding, the scientists say.

 

 ---abstract:

 

Mediterranean climate regimes are particularly susceptible to rapid shifts between drought and flood—of which, California’s rapid transition from record multi-year dryness between 2012 and 2016 to extreme wetness during the 2016–2017 winter provides a dramatic example. Projected future changes in such dry-to-wet events, however, remain inadequately quantified, which we investigate here using the Community Earth System Model Large Ensemble of climate model simulations. Anthropogenic forcing is found to yield large twenty-first-century increases in the frequency of wet extremes, including a more than threefold increase in sub-seasonal events comparable to California’s ‘Great Flood of 1862’. Smaller but statistically robust increases in dry extremes are also apparent. As a consequence, a 25% to 100% increase in extreme dry-to-wet precipitation events is projected, despite only modest changes in mean precipitation. Such hydrological cycle intensification would seriously challenge California’s existing water storage, conveyance and flood control infrastructure.

 

 

see:

Swain, D. L., B. Langenbrunner, J. D. Neelin, and A. Hall, “Increasing precipitation volatility in 21st-century-California,” Nature Climate Change, doi:10.1038/s41558-018-0140-y, 2018.

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

right wingers have ZERO interest in understanding climate change,

they just post the stories that their web sites and blogs tell them to.......

 

Global warming was proven yet again to be a hoax,

here is the hack article du jour which proves it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 mins ago, JimW said:

Of course it’s cyclical.  Just go ahead and claim global warming isn’t happening because we got cold and snow this winter.  You know you want to. 

No, that is called “seasons”. And quite frankly, my thinking on this is a bit more nuanced than the caricature that you’d like to wrap me in. 

 

I am a reformed engineer, analytical type and sometime precision shooter, all of which impact my views on the climate debate. What it comes down to is that I do not trust modeling of complex systems over very long periods of time when the future actions of humans is unknowable. 

 

In 2000, the UK Meteorilogical Society (the Met) released a widely publicized report that suggest that children born in that year, 18 years ago, would not see snow in London in their lifetimes. Guess what, it has snowed in London nearly every year since then, including this year. 

 

I don’t deny global temps might be rising due to any of a number of factors. What I object to, which is the point of the OP, is the projection forward of trends based on nothing but hot air (pun intended). Modeling out 50-100+ years, systems as complex as the Earth, with the added complexity of human behavior, is ripe for error.

 

Recall back in the 1970s these same types were talking about the coming age of cooling. How did that work out? 

 

No climate model put out in the past 40+ years has reasonably predicted the future with accuracy. Saying “it is going to get hotter” is not a prediction that is actionable when the outcomes don’t match the earlier estimates. How many times do we need to hear that deviations from these models “can’t be explained” before we consider that modeling is faulty. How many times do we need to see the modelers change their datasets from the past to make the actual history fit the predictions.

 

The USA has managed to reduce its use of coal, clean up its CO emissions and do it all in a way the models could not have predicted. Was this developement part of the models created 20 years ago? Were electric vehicles taken into consideration in models from that time? 

 

Sorry, the Earth might be getting warmer in places but why? Human activity, maybe. Ocean temps, maybe. Solar activity, maybe. Loooooong cycles, maybe. 

 

Just as the AGW proponents don’t trust anyone affiliated with the energy industry when it comes to climate studies, I don’t trust any academic or other who has a financial (salaries, grants, stipends, trips), professional (positions, tenure, prestige) or personal/ideological reason for promoting AGW. “Follow the money” works both ways. Vested interests and ulterior motives works both ways. And, unfortunately, social virtue signaling works far more on the AGW side than the opposite. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited) · Report post

10 mins ago, fish'nmagician said:

right wingers have ZERO interest in understanding climate change,

they just post the stories that their web sites and blogs tell them to.......

 

Global warming was proven yet again to be a hoax,

here is the hack article du jour which proves it.

^^^ See, Jim, it is idiocy like this for which I have no patience. Not a single thought in what he types, just pure snark, “gotch” attempts and dumbassery. 

 

Frank, if you are so thoughtful about such matters, then explain to me how precision long distance shooting and climate modeling are related to one another. What factors are common in each? And how does expanding the distance (yards and years) create the same concerns? Show us what a big thinker you are. 

 

 

 

Edited by tomkaz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I understand climate science quite well. 

Climate Change as a political issue is not grounded in science. Ed Markey is a shanty-Irish used car salesman.

 

It's rainy and humid today in Miami. That is the weather. Our climate is tropical and has been for a very long time. 

Recently, some politicians that allowed above ground structural development to proceed without expanding and improving drainage tried their darndest to blame the flooding streets on Global Climate Change.

Unfortunately for them, NOAA/AOML is right in Miami. Equipped with data and scientists to explain the data that the sea level did not rise and maybe they should have listened to the engineers that told them the drainage system was outdated.

 

I live on a beach. Every Autumn we get "king-tides", every summer we get milder tides. D

We get hurricanes here too. They are quite common and typical of a tropical climate.

 

So far, none of the scientists in our community have sold their homes and moved to Montana to escape the rising sea level. None of them have moved further inland even though "they were warned" twenty years ago that Miami would be completely submerged.

 

the guys at NOAA suggest that the Gulf stream has brought some warmer water our way, but that appears to be cyclical. 

 

The biggest problem - climate wise - in South Florida is the proliferation of Green Iguanas (because nobody likes to eat green iguanas... cept the nicaraguans) and middle-aged spandex wearing bicycle riders.

 

I blame climate stability on the rapid increase in Iguanas and Cyclists throughout Miami (and wacky liberal politics in North East has fostered the proliferation of both).

 

Glad to be of assistance.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@SallyGrowler - Thank you for a well written contribution. Yes, I prefer to watch the behavior of the AGW concerned types rather than listen to their words. When they start to walk the walk, move to higher ground, give up private jets and SUVs, and otherwise act like they are scared spitless, I might pay attention. Until then, the incongruence between their spoken fears and their “well-being-threatening” actions tells me this is a scam. 

 

Those iguanas make fine quarry for air rifle enthusiasts, except municipalities don’t allow them to be harvested. My son rowed down there for a couple of years and I could not believe the number of them in the trees in every park, etc. We have them up here, but not nearly as many and not the same size. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 mins ago, tomkaz said:

@SallyGrowler - Thank you for a well written contribution. Yes, I prefer to watch the behavior of the AGW concerned types rather than listen to their words. When they start to walk the walk, move to higher ground, give up private jets and SUVs, and otherwise act like they are scared spitless, I might pay attention. Until then, the incongruence between their spoken fears and their “well-being-threatening” actions tells me this is a scam. 

 

Those iguanas make fine quarry for air rifle enthusiasts, except municipalities don’t allow them to be harvested. My son rowed down there for a couple of years and I could not believe the number of them in the trees in every park, etc. We have them up here, but not nearly as many and not the same size. 

I use a wrist rocket. 

 

One of my neighbors is a big climate change enthusiast. I can't call him an expert, but he is enthusiastic that all of us "dee-nye-ers" are gonna drown. He lives in an ocean front condo. Moved from the 5th floor to the 12th floor saying that it will buy him more time when the sea level rises. 

My climate scientist friends are split. the ones that work for .gov say the world is ending ... but not for another 100 or so years. The ones that work for .com are 'meh', whatcha bbqing?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited) · Report post

Al Gore has  Montecito real estate,he bought ocean view, not ocean front,he knows it will be ocean front soon...increasing it's value.

al-gore4-e1272634795906.jpg

Edited by Jetty Jumper

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, tomkaz said:

No, that is called “seasons”. And quite frankly, my thinking on this is a bit more nuanced than the caricature that you’d like to wrap me in. 

 

I am a reformed engineer, analytical type and sometime precision shooter, all of which impact my views on the climate debate. What it comes down to is that I do not trust modeling of complex systems over very long periods of time when the future actions of humans is unknowable. 

 

In 2000, the UK Meteorilogical Society (the Met) released a widely publicized report that suggest that children born in that year, 18 years ago, would not see snow in London in their lifetimes. Guess what, it has snowed in London nearly every year since then, including this year. 

 

I don’t deny global temps might be rising due to any of a number of factors. What I object to, which is the point of the OP, is the projection forward of trends based on nothing but hot air (pun intended). Modeling out 50-100+ years, systems as complex as the Earth, with the added complexity of human behavior, is ripe for error.

 

Recall back in the 1970s these same types were talking about the coming age of cooling. How did that work out? 

 

No climate model put out in the past 40+ years has reasonably predicted the future with accuracy. Saying “it is going to get hotter” is not a prediction that is actionable when the outcomes don’t match the earlier estimates. How many times do we need to hear that deviations from these models “can’t be explained” before we consider that modeling is faulty. How many times do we need to see the modelers change their datasets from the past to make the actual history fit the predictions.

 

The USA has managed to reduce its use of coal, clean up its CO emissions and do it all in a way the models could not have predicted. Was this developement part of the models created 20 years ago? Were electric vehicles taken into consideration in models from that time? 

 

Sorry, the Earth might be getting warmer in places but why? Human activity, maybe. Ocean temps, maybe. Solar activity, maybe. Loooooong cycles, maybe. 

 

Just as the AGW proponents don’t trust anyone affiliated with the energy industry when it comes to climate studies, I don’t trust any academic or other who has a financial (salaries, grants, stipends, trips), professional (positions, tenure, prestige) or personal/ideological reason for promoting AGW. “Follow the money” works both ways. Vested interests and ulterior motives works both ways. And, unfortunately, social virtue signaling works far more on the AGW side than the opposite. 

Long post to say you were trolling.  Modeling and prediction is hard business but constantly improving.  I’m not the hysterical fringe and get where many skeptics are at to some extent.  The elite are building bunkers or have places to bug out to so I don’t know if looking to them for a sign is going to mean much.  As mentioned, they aren’t giving up nothin. 

 

Yes, drought and rain are cyclical in CA but over decades droughts and deluges are becoming more extreme.  What ended this drought was several atmospheric rivers.  I think normal has been more like one per season. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is the drought really over because of more rain  or are all the liberal Californians complying with the aoc  green new  deal and recycling their pee leaving water for the rest of the population?  

 

And how come the GND doesnt address the wasted water used on the lawns of those megastar homes behind those mega size fences and walls?   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I want to see team genius capture the rain runoff from the streets of.....San Fransicco. Capture that and I’ll be impressed watching them drink it.

 

 

 

These Gullible Warming believers sound much like the appolcolyptic preachers of the past. The ones that promised and promised God’s imminent return. Then when nothing happens, they recalculate and come forth with a brand new compilation of proclamations. Skeptics rightly get labeled deniers and assumed stupid and blind for their rejections of this settled science. Nothing much else in science has ever achieved the lofty platform of being settled, but this science sure managed the climb rather quickly I noticed.

 

Bunk.....the whole lot of it. I am free to worship my God, and they theirs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to register here in order to participate.

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.