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.
The US has been hit with multiple hurricanes in the last decades. Sandy's destruction is not even close to the destruction that came as a result of hurricane Andrew. Where was the global warming talk back in 1992? I get it. Just because a category 1 storm leaves thousands of people without power in a highly populated city that has a big market, global warming is the cause.
I remember when Florida got hit with a slew of hurricanes in 2004. Climatologists came out and said this continuation of hurricanes is the new normal. The following year, there were no hurricanes that even nicked the continental US. In fact, the state of Florida has not endured a hurricane since 2004.
A myriad of natural disasters take place around the world annualy, yet no one attributes global warming to them. Are we that arrogant to place blame on a science that's not even settled when we are victims?
Listen. Earth is a dangerous place. Mother Earth has a history of showing her lack of regard for her inhabitants. Hence, 70% of species go extinct.
Edit: I forgot about Katrina. However, you get my point.
Thanks. Very thoughtful post.
Although I am firmly convinced that CO2 enrichment can and will affect climate, I don't think this storm "proves" anything. I am much more impressed by rises in global temperatures, including the alltime temperatures records that were destroyed in much of the USA this year. Admittedly, "all time" is only about 100 years, but still it suggests that warming is indeed happening.
In the second article they say that in the first half of 2012 all time high records were being eclipsed 7 times faster than all time low records. That is not likely to occur by chance in a stable climate.
But I will say I also agree with knowledgeiskey. No one ever said the world climate needs to be stable at 20th century levels. It can do whatever the hell it wants, and the best we can do is be prepared.
I'm pretty much like you. I didn't really start worrying about global warming until this year. Mild winter, practically no spring, right to summer with triple digits lasting on and off from June to late August. Now after a brief cool spell from Canada, the forecast is for 82 degrees here. In freaking November! The other thing that bothers me is we never get rainy days anymore. Good soaking all day rain events. It's always 30-60% at most, roll in and out storms.
With that said, I have a hard time trusting scientific findings in general. I'm no scientist, but it seems like they just look for patterns and assume a cause and effect conclusion and package it as fact. For example, they will do a study on eggs where a group of people eat eggs every day and have more heart disease. Pattern there so eggs are bad for you! They cause heart disease! The next year, they say something different.
Something has definitely changed with our climate, but you can't say global warming is absolutely the cause.
As a scientist, I find the bolded saddening. True, people often look at correlations and infer causation more than they should. It is hard to not want to comb through the the massive amounts of data and look for patterns. However, the first principles and physics of anthropogenic climate change, or the "greenhouse gas effect" have been known for 150 years. They are simple. Some gases transmit high energy short wave solar radiation readily, but block long wave (infrared) radiation quite well. The latter is what the earth emits back to space, and it is blocked by CO2, h2o vapor, and a number of other "greenhouse" gases. So the prediction that the world will retain heat with more CO2 is unassailable. For instance, note that Venus has a dense atmosphere of largely CO2, and it is like an oven permanently on clean, with surface temps approaching 900F. And while Mercury with a thin atmosphere of hydrogen and helium bakes in the day (800 F) and cools dramatically at night (-300F!), Venus, with its greenhouse atmosphere shows no day to night temperature range (yes none). It never cools. Note that in the very thin atmosphere of Mercury, intense solar radiation can still dissipate at night, causing temperature declines of hundreds of degrees.
Now, if greenhouse gasses were affecting the ability of Earth to dissipate heat following sunny days and warm, sunny seasons, we would expect to see disproportionate rises in night time and winter temperatures, especially at high latitudes were incoming solar radiation goes to near zero in mid winter. That is exactly what we are seeing.
Bottomline, there are admittedly weaknesses in some of the models and the correlations, but the physics behind anthropogenic climate change are as sound as those behind gravity, and far simpler than the physics occurring in a typical lawn mower engine.
You can't really say that any one disaster was caused by global warming, but it's certainly true that the general uptick in bad weather and changing climate is caused by it, and will continue to get worse. Probably we will see not just change, but accelerated change due to several positive feedback loops (vicious cycles).
The only people who don't believe in global warming are US conservatives. The climate scientists - the climatologists who have spent their adult lives studying this - and ordinary people around the world from other countries know that it is happening.
well woof you need to spend a little more time studying the science of climate change and weather and less time pontificating about what you obviously have no clue about.
FACT
It has been 4 years since the U. S. has been hit by a hurricane as strong as Sandy. Ike 2008.
FACT
It has been 7 years since America has been hit by a Major hurricane (Cat 3 or above) Wilma 2005.
FACT
You have to go back to 1983 to 1988 to find a period of at lest 4 years between major hurricane's (actually Sandy was a Cat1 and not really even a Major Hurricane)
You have to go back to the period between 1972 and 1983 to find a period of at least 7 years between the last MAJOR hurricane to hit the U. S.
FURTHER FACTS.
Global ACE (Accumulated Cyclonic Activity) is a measure that is used by Scientists all over the world and is the gold standard in gaging Hurricane activity on a global scale. Global ACE clearly shows a decline since 1997. Hurricanes are on the DECREASE not on the increase.
According to Dr. Roger Pielke Jr. (a world renowned climate scientist who is considered a lukewarmer)
said the following about Sandy:
"To put things into even starker perspective, consider that from August 1954 through August 1955, the East Coast saw three different storms make landfall—Carol, Hazel and Diane—that in 2012 each would have caused about twice as much damage as Sandy."
So my question to all you warmists is, if those you listen to are telling you Sandy is from Global warming are lying about this (and the hard science says they are) what else are they lying about?
Flood data Bouziotas et al. (2011) Long-term properties of annual maximum daily river discharge worldwide http://itia.ntua.gr/getfile/1128/2/documents/2011EGU_DailyDischargeMaxima_Pres.pdf
Conclusion:
Despite common perception, in general, the detected trends are more negative (less intense floods in most recent years) than positive. Similarly, Svensson et al. (2005) and Di Baldassarre et al. (2010) did not find systematical change neither in flood increasing or decreasing numbers nor change in flood magnitudes in their analysis.
Location: On the "Left Coast", somewhere in "the Land of Fruits & Nuts"
8,852 posts, read 10,460,349 times
Reputation: 6670
I luv how the internet has created all these self-styled "climatologists"! Hey, what the heck do we need trained professionals for anymore, like scientists, doctors, lawyers, engineers, etc., when all ya gotta do is spout stuff you found on the internet and act like an "expert"?!
Which reminds me, I might have a bit of surgery coming up. Maybe I should just Google the procedure and try doing it myself!
I luv how the internet has created all these self-styled "climatologists"! Hey, what the heck do we need trained professionals for anymore, like scientists, doctors, lawyers, engineers, etc., when all ya gotta do is spout stuff you found on the internet and act like an "expert"?!
Which reminds me, I might have a bit of surgery coming up. Maybe I should just Google the procedure and try doing it myself!
well mateo, there is good stuff on the internet and really stupid stuff.
the things I have quoted come from 3 catagories.
1. NOAA That would be the United States government scientists.
2. Recognized Climate Scientists (PhD's who have published peer reviewed work readily available
3. Actual Peer reviewed and published papers.
You cant get better than that. I dont need to be an expert to be able to read these things and show simple facts.
the FACT is CAGW people including "scientists" like Jim Hansen and Michel Mann say climate is causing more severe weather. BUT The SCIENCE says they are lying.
hurricanes occur naturally every year, but warming ocean water and air temperature causes them to be more severe, and more frequent. when you heat up water the water level of the ocean rises, which can create bigger monster waves during storms and more flood damage. warmer temperatures causes the polar ice sheets to melt, raising water level even more.
I used to be in the "I don't know" camp, but its getting harder and harder to ignore these simple cause and effects. this July has also been the hottest on record in the US, and its not getting any cooler. as Bloomberg said, there's only so many times you can write it off it as a freak incident that could never happen again.
with all these constant record-breaking heating trends in the oceans and the air every year, there's simply no way these storms aren't going to repeat themselves, and get worse.
A few years ago, Tim Flannery came out with a book titled "The Weathermakers". I read it, and it did present some compelling arguments. Recommend this book.
The science of this all, isn't my forte but I do remember parts of the book which detailed how climate change will have a result being, wetter summers, drier winters, storms outside of normal times at to when they should happen, and I think violent storms occurring more frequently.
I am in the camp of "Don't know, just don't treat the Earth like **** "
Your quote is mainly saying that the particular methods chosen to help the (real) problem of APG may not work. That's a completely different matter from whether APG is happening - I have some doubts myself that the methods will do anything significant.
If you don't think that climatologists (the scientists who study climate) believe in AGW, you might want to contact some of them and ask - of course I mean employees of reputable universities.
What facts unequivocally show that there is a direct link between CO2 increase and temperature increase?
From what I've seen, the CO2 increase FOLLOWS the increase in temperature. That's the cause following the effect, not vice versa.
But, please, do not let me upset your beliefs with mundane facts.
Location: where you sip the tea of the breasts of the spinsters of Utica
8,297 posts, read 14,168,495 times
Reputation: 8105
You seem to have an interest in NOAA's opinion, Ferd, so lets see what they actually have to say.
Quote:
Human activity has been increasing the concentration of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere (mostly carbon dioxide from combustion of coal, oil, and gas; plus a few other trace gases......
....Global surface temperatures have increased about 0.74°C (plus or minus 0.18°C) since the late–19th century, and the linear trend for the past 50 years of 0.13°C (plus or minus 0.03°C) per decade is nearly twice that for the past 100 years. ). There is no scientific debate on this point.
Oh, and what about Pielke? It turns out that he DOES believe in AGW, even though he doesn't link it at this time to hurricanes and tornadoes:
Quote:
.....Humans do affect the climate system, and it is indeed important to take action on energy policy—but to connect energy policy and disasters makes little scientific or policy sense. There are no signs that human-caused climate change has increased the toll of recent disasters, http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...googlenews_wsj
But there's ONE GLARING PROBLEM with "carbon counters"...
THE #1 Greenhouse gas is - wait for it - WATER VAPOR.
Why aren't they attacking all the hot air and steam emitting politicians with a steam tax?
Sigh.
Which university do you teach climate science at?
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.
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.
