Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > California
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 01-14-2014, 01:48 AM
 
25,619 posts, read 36,495,617 times
Reputation: 23291

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by WP77 View Post
I am an alfalfa farmer in the Fresno area myself. I'm the fifth generation in my family to live on this property. The fact that the climate has changed in this valley is not debatable, although the cause may be. Yes we have had droughts in the past. But not this severe. And what about the fact that the high temperatures are consistently well above average here for the last 4 or 5 years? What about the fact that we don't get 1/100th of the fog that we used to get? It used to be that we started getting ground fog in late October after the first small storm passed through. After that, it either rained or was foggy until March. We also used to get the high fog where we wouldn't see the sun for 2 or 3 weeks at a time. It hasn't done that in at least 12 years.

As for your comment about being ripped off on Alfalfa, I'm wondering how many acres of Alfalfa you farm? Do you have any clue of the tremendous cost of production? The fact is that with the decreased acreage and increased production costs, alfalfa should be $400 a ton instead of the current $240.
Completely disagree with you on the climate changy thingy. However with regards to the feed prices just repeating a sentiment shared with me several times these past several months. But you know how you farmers and ranchers are always bitching about something.

As for me a landscaper in the Central Valley this drought has already spiked my xeriscape irrigation/greenscape retrofit contracts significantly in the last six months.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-14-2014, 08:30 AM
 
Location: San Diego, California Republic
16,581 posts, read 27,248,742 times
Reputation: 9001
Quote:
Originally Posted by CarawayDJ View Post
I'm not a climate change skeptic, or at least I believe it enough to agree with limiting it as best we can. That said, there is always another side of the story. We don't argue over whether or not the sun is hot. We don't argue over whether or not gravity makes an apple fall. We do pretty much argue over everything else because not everything is as clear as it is presented. Take your data for example:

1. How do you think average global temps are determined? Do you think they have been using the same weather stations in the same pristine spots since 1880? Of course not. Is it hard to imagine how average temps could vary depending on how many stations are placed where and even their precise positioning? No. Heck, my outside weather station definitely differs based on its placement. There are people who dispute the placement of many weather stations. Considering the small difference in measured temps, it would seem quite logical that placement of the measuring stations, as well as their proximity to any heat sources such as buildings and pavement would be important. Heck, even urban areas are heat sources.

2. Because of #1 above, they don't use raw data to determine average temps. They massage the data and normalize it. While this is done as scientifically as possible, it doesn't take a genius to envision the complexities and potential inaccuracies introduced in this process. We know that not all weather stations pass the accuracy test in that they are poorly placed too close to heat sources. Think about how hard determining average global temps must really be. How many weather stations are used worldwide? Several thousand. Who inspects them and how often for external heat influences? How many are new or have been relocated between 1880 to now? CA is a perfect example of how difficult this is. Everyone in CA knows how small differences in location can result in cooler or hotter temps. If you were to place 1000 weather stations in CA, where you place them would have a significant impact on recorded temps. Can you see how the positioning of the stations would impact temps?

Again, I'm not a climate change skeptic. I believe it enough to take action. I also like the general idea of keeping our world as clean as possible. I'm just pointing out that few things are as black and white as they are made out to be. There is no doubt in my mind that very few people will look at those charts and think about how the data is gathered, massaged and normalized. Most people probably assume there have been the same weather stations in the exact same pristine spots uninfluenced by human activity since 1880. Nothing could be further from the truth. Therein lies the reason why this is argued and the effects of gravity are not.
You are aware that they don't use weather stations to determine climate change right?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-14-2014, 08:34 AM
 
Location: San Diego, California Republic
16,581 posts, read 27,248,742 times
Reputation: 9001
Quote:
Originally Posted by CA4Now View Post
Possibly. However, there are too many other ways climate change is being measured, and so much of the research seems to point to the same results. Wish there was some evidence pointing in another direction.

"Scientists based their findings, in part, on the study of climate history as recorded in tree rings, ocean sediment and ice cores. They found the timeline punctuated by big, sudden changes, including...
Studies warn of abrupt environmental effects of warming - latimes.com
^^This. Thank you. I feel like arguing over climate change is the 21st century version of arguing over whether the earth is flat or round.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-14-2014, 08:36 AM
 
Location: San Diego, California Republic
16,581 posts, read 27,248,742 times
Reputation: 9001
Quote:
Originally Posted by CarawayDJ View Post
This is analogous to a comet with a 10% chance of impact. You do something. You don't obsess over the chance of it not hitting because the cost of being wrong is too great. Saying "I was wrong" isn't going to cut it. If it's all bogus then the worst outcome is that we spent extra money making our world a cleaner place. I'll take that over the alternative.
Exactly!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-14-2014, 09:24 AM
 
Location: Florida
2,011 posts, read 3,536,362 times
Reputation: 2747
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gentoo View Post
You are aware that they don't use weather stations to determine climate change right?
They are used to determine the average global temps referenced by the two articles linked in the post I responded to. While they also use other means now such as satellites, I'm fairly certain they weren't using them since 1880. I was pointing out that when you are reporting an increase of .36 degrees from one decade to the next, it's not hard to imagine how or why there would be any dispute from skeptics. I'm curious as to why you say weather stations aren't used? If you mean to say they are just one of many inputs I'll partly agree. We frequently hear increased average global temps in the climate change discussion. Weather stations are used primarily for this, in conjunction with new sensors and technology. Am I wrong? Here is an article. NOAA - National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration - Monitoring & Understanding Our Changing Planet . I'm aware that the broader climate change argument involves numerous other observations.

I'm not in the camp that thinks we have no problem and should do nothing. It feels awkward arguing on their behalf. However, I seldom accept convenient beliefs such as one side is 100% correct and the other side is 100% incorrect and comprised of neanderthals. A lot of people believe that skeptics have no scientific basis whatsoever for their doubts. That isn't true. Weather stations and the numerous variables surrounding them are an example, especially when we are talking .36 degrees from one decade to the next. I guess once the debate became infused with partisan politics it was inevitable that everything would become so black and white for many. To me the bottom line is that you don't take chances with mother earth. Skeptics can't merely cast doubt on some of the data and expect us to say "false alarm."
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-14-2014, 09:33 AM
 
Location: Fresno, CA
17 posts, read 21,093 times
Reputation: 27
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bulldogdad View Post
Completely disagree with you on the climate changy thingy. However with regards to the feed prices just repeating a sentiment shared with me several times these past several months. But you know how you farmers and ranchers are always bitching about something.

As for me a landscaper in the Central Valley this drought has already spiked my xeriscape irrigation/greenscape retrofit contracts significantly in the last six months.
Do you live in the Fresno area and for how many years? If you have been here for at least 20 years or more, then there is no way that you can say that the weather here hasn't changed significantly. And I'm talking about winter type weather, or lack of it.

Maybe this is a normal process that has happened before over thousands of years. But as a human being with an average life span of like 77, if we are in the beginning of one of these prolonged drought and warm periods, then we are all in trouble. Sure, it might go back in 50 or 100 years or longer, but what good will that do us?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-14-2014, 09:59 AM
 
Location: So Ca
26,573 posts, read 26,433,288 times
Reputation: 24510
Quote:
Originally Posted by WP77 View Post
Maybe this is a normal process that has happened before over thousands of years. But as a human being with an average life span of like 77, if we are in the beginning of one of these prolonged drought and warm periods, then we are all in trouble.
I agree. I grew up in southern CA and often hear from others about how much warmer it is now than it was decades ago. Reading the link "How Hot Will Your Neighborhood Be?" is disturbing, especially to think of what we're leaving our children.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-14-2014, 11:39 AM
 
5,951 posts, read 13,029,891 times
Reputation: 4803
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gentoo View Post
You are aware that they don't use weather stations to determine climate change right?
For the period of recording history since the late 1800s, that is where we get our short term data.

But yes, beyond that, we have to look at proxy data including tree rings, pollen analysis, ice cores, deep sea sediments, etc.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-14-2014, 12:29 PM
 
Location: TOVCCA
8,452 posts, read 14,945,077 times
Reputation: 12528
Hmmm...possible aid to the water shortage in today's news:

In parched Southwest, reclaimed sewage water could be a welcome relief - NBC News.com
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-15-2014, 10:37 AM
 
Location: So Ca
26,573 posts, read 26,433,288 times
Reputation: 24510
"The average global temperature on Earth has increased by about 0.8°Celsius (1.4°Fahrenheit) since 1880. Two-thirds of the warming has occurred since 1975, at a rate of roughly 0.15-0.20°C per decade.

But why should we care about one degree of warming? After all, the temperature fluctuates by many degrees every day where we live..."
World of Change: Global Temperatures : Feature Articles
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Settings
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2020 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > California
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top