So was it hot in San Francisco yesterday or what? (home, living)

[WizardOfRadical]

Originally Posted by NoMoreSnowForMe

Total fluke. Again.

Yes new record highs, after insane mudslide causing winter rains, and a biblical Texas flood are just random total flukes.


LOL, GOTTA LOVE IT!!!!!

[LuvSouthOC]

I know, right. Eleven years without a hurricane definitely is straight up severe 'climate change'.

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2016/06/...u-s-continues/

[WizardOfRadical]

Originally Posted by LuvSouthOC

I know, right. Eleven years without a hurricane definitely is straight up severe 'climate change'.

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2016/06/...u-s-continues/

SF hotter than Phx. Houston under water.

KEEP UP THE DENIAL!!!!

[tstieber]

Remember there is a huge difference between weather and climate. There have been weather extremes since I can remember, long before everyone talked about climate change. And if we look back at our local history, we'll find lots of examples of floods, droughts, heatwaves and cold snaps. We should stop crying climate change everytime we break a weather record, bc the scary truth is that we can't actually perceive climate change. Climate change is happening, of course, but it's warming the planet very slowly. Even a degree or two across the planet will have devastating consequences. That's what makes climate change so scary, bc we can't actually feel it. Maybe without climate change, it would be 105f instead of 106f during this heatwave, but there would still be heatwaves. So this heatwave isn't evidence of climate change. Long term, subtle changes are.

[LuvSouthOC]

Originally Posted by tstieber

Remember there is a huge difference between weather and climate. There have been weather extremes since I can remember, long before everyone talked about climate change. And if we look back at our local history, we'll find lots of examples of floods, droughts, heatwaves and cold snaps. We should stop crying climate change everytime we break a weather record, bc the scary truth is that we can't actually perceive climate change. Climate change is happening, of course, but it's warming the planet very slowly. Even a degree or two across the planet will have devastating consequences. That's what makes climate change so scary, bc we can't actually feel it. Maybe without climate change, it would be 105f instead of 106f during this heatwave, but there would still be heatwaves. So this heatwave isn't evidence of climate change. Long term, subtle changes are.

Agreed. Moreover, although it is clear that some warming has taken place over the course of the last century, and that fact is pretty irrefutable, it is a small increase and it is measuring a period of time when we came out of the Little Ice Age.

There is justifiable concern over the role of fossil fuels, which are, of course, impactful to some degree; however, in the grander scheme of things, these emissions clearly have a much smaller role than alarmists have made the case for.

However one views the danger over fossil fuels, the link between this moderate warming we have had over a century and 'severe weather events' is really tenuous at best.

I accept that some warming took place in the last century, but see no proof that severe weather is caused by this same warming. We are, after all, told that every snow storm, every hurricane, every drought and every heavy rain is evidence of 'climate change'. That is in the realm of science fiction and religion, and I am not a fan of taking either seriously.

In sum, we cannot destroy our economy over psuedo-science, which is what our current "science" is really telling us we must do remedy the situation as they see it. (Their models have been flawed until now.) When we can de-politicize the conversation and agree that there is some danger, we must then do a cost benefit analysis of the real dangers of inaction as opposed to other actions, e.g. carbon capture. That discussion will necessarily have to consider that we are not alone on the planet and thus are not the only emitters.

[Matadora]

Originally Posted by LuvSouthOC

In sum, we cannot destroy our economy over psuedo-science, which is what our current "science" is really telling us we must do remedy the situation as they see it. (Their models have been flawed until now.)

Climate science is not pseudo-science.

Current science and flawed models? Do you have any examples of what you talking about?

[alliance]

Originally Posted by LuvSouthOC

Agreed. Moreover, although it is clear that some warming has taken place over the course of the last century, and that fact is pretty irrefutable, it is a small increase and it is measuring a period of time when we came out of the Little Ice Age.

There is justifiable concern over the role of fossil fuels, which are, of course, impactful to some degree; however, in the grander scheme of things, these emissions clearly have a much smaller role than alarmists have made the case for.

However one views the danger over fossil fuels, the link between this moderate warming we have had over a century and 'severe weather events' is really tenuous at best.

I accept that some warming took place in the last century, but see no proof that severe weather is caused by this same warming. We are, after all, told that every snow storm, every hurricane, every drought and every heavy rain is evidence of 'climate change'. That is in the realm of science fiction and religion, and I am not a fan of taking either seriously.

In sum, we cannot destroy our economy over psuedo-science, which is what our current "science" is really telling us we must do remedy the situation as they see it. (Their models have been flawed until now.) When we can de-politicize the conversation and agree that there is some danger, we must then do a cost benefit analysis of the real dangers of inaction as opposed to other actions, e.g. carbon capture. That discussion will necessarily have to consider that we are not alone on the planet and thus are not the only emitters.

Exactly. If we go another 20 years without extreme weather people would still get up in arms in 21 years if the temp was 107 and there was another cat 4 hurricane pointing at those events as more proof. Heat waves have always happened, even here. Hurricanes have always happened.

In 2 days everything will be exactly as it's been in years past, and people will be anxiously awaiting the next proof of something that cannot actually be accurately linked in correlation. The weather is way more complicated than people realize, and while everything points to a change in climate (which is a normal event on this planet) any scientist who claims that the science is settled should be treated with skepticism. Anyone who claims to be 100% right (on either side) regarding the weather is a fool at best, a politician at worst.

While these extreme events provide more evidence towards a hypothesis they are not actually proof of anything to be used as fact.

[Ruth4Truth]

Originally Posted by LuvSouthOC

However one views the danger over fossil fuels, the link between this moderate warming we have had over a century and 'severe weather events' is really tenuous at best.

I accept that some warming took place in the last century, but see no proof that severe weather is caused by this same warming. We are, after all, told that every snow storm, every hurricane, every drought and every heavy rain is evidence of 'climate change'. That is in the realm of science fiction and religion, and I am not a fan of taking either seriously.

In sum, we cannot destroy our economy over psuedo-science.

"Moderate warming"? Bay Area temps in the 100's is "moderate" to you? These heat anomalies have been increasing in frequency and duration, the last few years. Same in Seattle, btw; suddenly, in the last few years, heat waves in the 90's, and even 100's, have become a thing. Unheard of, previously.

The reason "every hurricane", drought, etc. are being attributed to climate change is that they're much more severe, or prolonged in the case of drought, than before. There's a reason for that, see....

Did someone say something about "destroying the economy over pseudo-science"? Could you clarify what you're referring to?
The fact is, that climate change already is stressing the economy. And we ain't seen nuthin' yet. Brace yourself for chronic "states of emergency" and disasters around the country. We'll be lurching and staggering from hurricane relief to destructive fire relief, to drought relief, to winter storm disaster relief in the upper Mid-West or Northeast, power system outages/rebuilding, to flood/sea level rise relief. That's where the situation is headed. The economy, becoming more and more hobbled by tax cuts, won't be able to cope. We're already way behind just on basic infrastructure maintenance, let alone improvements to keep pace with globalization. Think we'll have money for all the disaster relief that will be needed? Only if financed by increasing debt.

[alliance]

I love all the doom and gloom. Liberals are such pessimists.

[Ruth4Truth]

Originally Posted by alliance

I love all the doom and gloom. Liberals are such pessimists.

Sticking one's head in the sand is so comforting. (Also very advantageous to corporate interests.)

Until.....