4 ms·

Isn't the posters point that two years ago when CA was in a drought, scientists were predicting 100 years of droughts thanks to climate change, now they're call

Isn't the posters point that two years ago when CA was in a drought, scientists were predicting 100 years of droughts thanks to climate change, now they're calling for 100 years of floods. It seems like this science may be suspect.

dragonwriter 9y ago
> Isn't the posters point that two years ago when CA was in a drought, scientists were predicting 100 years of droughts thanks to climate change, now they're calling for 100 years of floods. That may be the point, but it's false; before, during, and after the worst of the droughts in CA, scientists were projecting that extreme (relative to past patterns) weather patterns would be more common, that particular regions would see more droughts and others more rain, and they California is geographically positioned so as to be subject to both effects, with an uncertain net effect. The present article, particularly, does not “call for 100 years of floods”.
treehau5 9y ago
We need to get the climate debate away from the ends, and look more at what is actually happening, i.e the facts. The facts are we have more carbon in our atmosphere than ever recorded, and it is a direct relation to human activities. We are losing glaciers at alarming rates. New invasive species that thrive in moist humid environments are now being unleashed. Sea levels are rising. It doesn't take a scientist to understand that the more heat that gets trapped in our atmosphere, and the more glaciers and ice caps that melt, the worse off we are going to be. I don't need a scientist to tell me that California might have 100 years of this, or Sahara Desert might turn into a tropical rainforest. It is enough for me to know that this will have a devastating impact on ecological systems across the globe, and the vast majority of people live near water, and sea levels are rising. I live in a state where the majority of the population is rural and most people are farmers. I ask climate change deniers if they "believe" in greenhouses, and they look at me like I am silly. Then I explain to them that what we are doing is creating a very big green house. This usually does the trick.
- rednerrus 9y ago
  I am not arguing the legitimacy of climate change but this specific instance of the science.
  - KirinDave 9y ago
    Then why did your previous post refer to scientists as a collective and the phenomena in general as opposed to a concrete instance?
- godshatter 9y ago
  >We need to get the climate debate away from the ends, and look more at what is actually happening, i.e the facts. I tend to watch a few websites every day to keep tabs on what's happening. There is so much crap being said on both sides that I've reverted to just watching the numbers to see where we are. My list: http://spaceweather.com/ http://spaceweather.com/ to watch sunspot activity, http://wattsupwiththat.com/reference-pages/sea-ice-page/ http://wattsupwiththat.com/reference-pages/sea-ice-page/ to watch arctic sea ice area and extent and arctic mean temperature, http://www.drroyspencer.com/latest-global-temperatures/ http://www.drroyspencer.com/latest-global-temperatures/ for monthly temperatures, http://www.cpc.noaa.gov/products/analysis_monitoring/ensostuff/ensoyears.shtml http://www.cpc.noaa.gov/products/analysis_monitoring/ensostu... to see where we are in the El Nino/La Nina cycle, http://sealevel.colorado.edu/ http://sealevel.colorado.edu/ to see what the sea level graph is doing.
  - omegaworks 9y ago
    http://www.projectmidas.org/ http://www.projectmidas.org/ is also a great resource for tracking the Antarctic geographic changes.
tedsanders 9y ago
Citation please? I am skeptical that 'scientists' monolithically predicted 100 years of drought due to climate change. I never recall reading such a thing in years of news coverage. As a layperson, I always assumed that most weather we experience is in line with historical variability. Climate change causes (or is) small changes in the bias and variance of this weather. Saying that some of the drought is caused by natural variability and some of drought was exacerbated by GHG-induced warming seems like a perfectly consistent and reasonable position.
- rednerrus 9y ago
  https://www.usatoday.com/story/weather/2014/09/02/california-megadrought/14446195/ https://www.usatoday.com/story/weather/2014/09/02/california... http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2014/02/140213-california-drought-record-agriculture-pdo-climate/ http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2014/02/140213-calif... https://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/14/science/californias-history-of-drought-repeats.html https://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/14/science/californias-histo...

dragonwriter 9y ago

> Isn't the posters point that two years ago when CA was in a drought, scientists were predicting 100 years of droughts thanks to climate change, now they're calling for 100 years of floods. That may be the point, but it's false; before, during, and after the worst of the droughts in CA, scientists were projecting that extreme (relative to past patterns) weather patterns would be more common, that particular regions would see more droughts and others more rain, and they California is geographically positioned so as to be subject to both effects, with an uncertain net effect. The present article, particularly, does not “call for 100 years of floods”.

treehau5 9y ago

We need to get the climate debate away from the ends, and look more at what is actually happening, i.e the facts. The facts are we have more carbon in our atmosphere than ever recorded, and it is a direct relation to human activities. We are losing glaciers at alarming rates. New invasive species that thrive in moist humid environments are now being unleashed. Sea levels are rising. It doesn't take a scientist to understand that the more heat that gets trapped in our atmosphere, and the more glaciers and ice caps that melt, the worse off we are going to be. I don't need a scientist to tell me that California might have 100 years of this, or Sahara Desert might turn into a tropical rainforest. It is enough for me to know that this will have a devastating impact on ecological systems across the globe, and the vast majority of people live near water, and sea levels are rising. I live in a state where the majority of the population is rural and most people are farmers. I ask climate change deniers if they "believe" in greenhouses, and they look at me like I am silly. Then I explain to them that what we are doing is creating a very big green house. This usually does the trick.

rednerrus 9y ago
I am not arguing the legitimacy of climate change but this specific instance of the science.
- KirinDave 9y ago
  Then why did your previous post refer to scientists as a collective and the phenomena in general as opposed to a concrete instance?
godshatter 9y ago
>We need to get the climate debate away from the ends, and look more at what is actually happening, i.e the facts. I tend to watch a few websites every day to keep tabs on what's happening. There is so much crap being said on both sides that I've reverted to just watching the numbers to see where we are. My list: http://spaceweather.com/ http://spaceweather.com/ to watch sunspot activity, http://wattsupwiththat.com/reference-pages/sea-ice-page/ http://wattsupwiththat.com/reference-pages/sea-ice-page/ to watch arctic sea ice area and extent and arctic mean temperature, http://www.drroyspencer.com/latest-global-temperatures/ http://www.drroyspencer.com/latest-global-temperatures/ for monthly temperatures, http://www.cpc.noaa.gov/products/analysis_monitoring/ensostuff/ensoyears.shtml http://www.cpc.noaa.gov/products/analysis_monitoring/ensostu... to see where we are in the El Nino/La Nina cycle, http://sealevel.colorado.edu/ http://sealevel.colorado.edu/ to see what the sea level graph is doing.
- omegaworks 9y ago
  http://www.projectmidas.org/ http://www.projectmidas.org/ is also a great resource for tracking the Antarctic geographic changes.

tedsanders 9y ago

Citation please? I am skeptical that 'scientists' monolithically predicted 100 years of drought due to climate change. I never recall reading such a thing in years of news coverage. As a layperson, I always assumed that most weather we experience is in line with historical variability. Climate change causes (or is) small changes in the bias and variance of this weather. Saying that some of the drought is caused by natural variability and some of drought was exacerbated by GHG-induced warming seems like a perfectly consistent and reasonable position.

rednerrus 9y ago
https://www.usatoday.com/story/weather/2014/09/02/california-megadrought/14446195/ https://www.usatoday.com/story/weather/2014/09/02/california... http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2014/02/140213-california-drought-record-agriculture-pdo-climate/ http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2014/02/140213-calif... https://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/14/science/californias-history-of-drought-repeats.html https://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/14/science/californias-histo...