11 ms·

Not only is it possible but the worst heat waves on record were experienced in the 1930s: https://www.weather.gov/arx/heat_jul36 https://www.weather.gov/arx/he

Not only is it possible but the worst heat waves on record were experienced in the 1930s: https://www.weather.gov/arx/heat_jul36 https://www.weather.gov/arx/heat_jul36

jameshart 5y ago
The dust bowl heatwaves are not a good argument against the idea that human activity can have dramatic climate impacts in a short time, though.
- monkeynotes 5y ago
  You should probably give some sort of reasoning behind your comment else it's just the opinion of a random stranger.
  - anothernewdude 5y ago
    Justify yourself.
  - user-the-name 5y ago
    His argument was that the dust bowls themselves were a dramatic climate impact, caused by human activity, in a short time.
- jaz2130 5y ago
  It is, however, a good argument against this article.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
- ipaddr 5y ago
  I don't the parent is attacking global warming. The headline doesn't lineup with past temp records. Is there something in a dust bowl heatwave that could help explain why it is virtually impossible when it clearly isn't? When something like global warming become a religion any comment perceived as attacking itself no matter how innocent and truthful will bring out zealots looking to defend their faith. I think we should keep religion out of science.
  - pseudalopex 5y ago
    The 1936 records were lower. They were in a different region with different climate. And human activity was part of why they happened.
  - iso1631 5y ago
    The parent's link doesn't contradict the headline, indeed it backups up the headline shows that the coastal weather of BC is 10F higher than continental highs in the 30s Portland reached 116F recently https://www.oregonlive.com/weather/2021/06/portland-records-all-time-high-temperature-of-113-setting-new-record-for-third-day-in-a-row.html https://www.oregonlive.com/weather/2021/06/portland-records-... Here's Portland since 1938 https://projects.oregonlive.com/weather/temps/ https://projects.oregonlive.com/weather/temps/ This has Portland yearly records going back to 1875 https://www.currentresults.com/Yearly-Weather/USA/OR/Portland/extreme-annual-portland-high-temperature.php https://www.currentresults.com/Yearly-Weather/USA/OR/Portlan... There's no evidence to say that the 1930s were higher in the Pacific North West (which reached a high of 105 in 1935), or that it's ever been 110, let alone 115
necrotic_comp 5y ago
What I don't understand is what people who argue against climate change stand to gain. The argument for climate change is: "humans are polluting the planet and it's causing a change in the environment and will have a disastrous effect on the climate." The arguments I hear against climate change always seem to concede that humans are polluting the planet, but argue in different ways (natural cycle/not really happening/etc.) that this pollution has no effect. Even if this were true, why would it be a bad idea to reduce the level of pollution in the environment ? We know we're screwing up, why don't we do our best to clean it and make it usable for the next generations ?
- jaywalk 5y ago
  The solution always eventually boils down to paying more in taxes. That's why it gets opposed.
- throwaway894345 5y ago
  > What I don't understand is why people who argue against climate change stand to gain. I suspect it is something like psychological security (“I’ve only known a history of rapid progress and I’m not emotionally prepared to confront the possibility that life will be worse for my children and grandchildren, nor that I was complicit”). At least that’s the average joe climate denier. For the very wealthy it’s simple greed. They’d rather ruin the world irreparably than pay taxes (this characterization doesn’t seem to do justice to the fact that their wealth is derived from cheating society by externalizing costs by way of pollution).
  - Sebb767 5y ago
    > For the very wealthy it’s simple greed. It's greed for basically anyone above the poverty line. There's functionally no difference for wanting a better life for you and your children and to increase your wealth for what is, in the end, the same goal. Unnecessarily driving an SUV, eating far too much meat and running the lines supplying peoples with those meat is morally not that different.
    - 5y ago
monkeynotes 5y ago
The dust bowl looks to have lasted 6 years, I wonder if what we are currently experiencing will differ in terms of longevity. If we are in for multi decade heatwaves this is something entirely different.
nerdponx 5y ago
In a different part of the world with different weather patterns? I'm willing to assume that professional climate researchers are aware of the 1930s heat wave.
csomar 5y ago
Were these extended (in time) heatwaves or just a particular few days with record temperatures? The current heatwave over North America seems like it's going to carry on for all of the next week, and who knows how longer after that. Maybe that's the difference?
milesskorpen 5y ago
Those highs are 105-110 in the Great Plains … seems substantially cooler than 125F in Canada.
- refurb 5y ago
  Look at the temperature records in Canada. Of the 13 provinces and territories, 9 of the 13 records were set in the 1930's or earlier. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_extreme_temperatures_in_Canada https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_extreme_temperatures_i...
  - fabbari 5y ago
    Interestingly enough: the highest temperature recorded in the 1930's is 4.6C lower than the current record.
    - refurb 5y ago
      Yet routinely gets into the low 40C range every year.
f_allwein 5y ago
> In their study, the team of researchers says that the deadly heatwave was a one-in-a-1,000-year event. Did you find a flaw in the researchers' reasoning? Or do you have knowledge they do not?
- f_allwein 5y ago
  ... orignal source and link to the study: https://www.worldweatherattribution.org/western-north-american-extreme-heat-virtually-impossible-without-human-caused-climate-change/ https://www.worldweatherattribution.org/western-north-americ...
jazzyjackson 5y ago
A heatwave in Iowa and Wisconsin does not invalidate the statement that this heatwave in the Pacific NW / BC was once unthinkable and will now be common. Relevant quote from the article: "According to the analysis, if the world warms by 2C, which could happen in about 20 years' time, then the chances of having a heatwave similar to last week's drop from around once every 1,000 years to roughly once every 5-10 years. "
- chrisco255 5y ago
  "it will now be common" Apparently you haven't been paying attention to all the failed predictions by alarmists over the past 3 decades including: The End of Snow (2000) https://www.climatedepot.com/2018/01/04/flashback-2000-snowfalls-are-now-just-a-thing-of-the-past-children-just-arent-going-to-know-what-snow-is-uk-independent/ https://www.climatedepot.com/2018/01/04/flashback-2000-snowf... The predictions of Glacier National Park being ice free by 2020: https://www.cnn.com/2020/01/08/us/glaciers-national-park-2020-trnd/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2020/01/08/us/glaciers-national-park-202... Not only is it extremely, extremely unlikely that 2C warming is experienced in the next two decades, it is completely counter to the trend: http://www.drroyspencer.com/2021/07/uah-global-temperature-update-for-june-2021-0-01-deg-c/ http://www.drroyspencer.com/2021/07/uah-global-temperature-u... All of this article is based on flawed computer models of non-linear dynamic systems that become exponentially unpredictable as a function of time. What were the odds of the 1930s heat waves, which were far more drastic, and far more sustained? No answer there.
  - quenix 5y ago
    The first website you cite, Climate Depot, is severely biased toward right-wing anti climate science agendas, and has been classified as "conspiracy-pseudoscience" by Media Bias/Fact Check. They further comment that "Overall, we rate the Climate Depot a strong Pseudoscience source based on the promotion of human-influenced climate denialism propaganda and the use of poor sources who have failed numerous fact checks." I'm not sure how an anecdote of one climate prediction failing (your CNN article) is a rebuttal against decades of climate research and unanimous consensus from the vast majority of scientists. As for Dr. Roy Spencer—his credentials are impressive, but he is just one scientist. The scientific consensus on climate change is established, and "nearly all actively publishing climate scientists (97–98%[3]) support the consensus on anthropogenic climate change"[0]. I don't particularly care for the opinion of one lone man. -- [0]: Anderegg, William R L; Prall, James W.; Harold, Jacob; Schneider, Stephen H. (2010). "Expert credibility in climate change". Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 107 (27): 12107–9. Bibcode:2010PNAS..10712107A. doi:10.1073/pnas.1003187107. PMC 2901439. PMID 20566872. https://doi.org/10.1073%2Fpnas.1003187107 https://doi.org/10.1073%2Fpnas.1003187107
iso1631 5y ago
"Canada broke its temperature record for a third straight day on Tuesday - 49.6C (121.3F) in Lytton, British Columbia." "All across the region, in the US states of Oregon and Washington and in the west of Canada, multiple cities hit new records far above 40C." Not sure how you can point to 1936's records of 111F and say that was "worse" than 121F today.
antiterra 5y ago
The title is referring to a specific heatwave that just occured, not the possibility of any heatwave at all ever happening in North America. That means the specific parameters and temperature variations are part of the discussion. In this case, the temperatures in Canada surpass those numbers both in the absolute and relative to norm.
nickd2001 5y ago
There was a theory, although it may have now been debunked, that the testing of nuclear weapons caused a nuclear winter to some extent, thus offsetting the obvious effects of global warming for some time. So from the 1940s, to whenever it was finally phased out (1980s) , nuclear weapons tests somewhat blocked the possibility of heatwaves being so extreme. This could partly explain the absence of such extremes between 1930s and now. Or it could entirely be a coincidence and randomness. What worries me is simply the extent to which this year's heatwave beats previous records. It does seem to point to an accelerating scenario. Established climate scientists are now saying they may have underestimated how bad its going to be. Previous worst case scenarios for warming were scary enough. I'm concerned about a vicious circle scenario, a positive feedback loop. We really don't want to go there.

Not only is it possible but the worst heat waves on record were experienced in the 1930s: https://www.weather.gov/arx/heat_jul36 https://www.weather.gov/arx/heat_jul36

jameshart 5y ago

The dust bowl heatwaves are not a good argument against the idea that human activity can have dramatic climate impacts in a short time, though.

monkeynotes 5y ago
You should probably give some sort of reasoning behind your comment else it's just the opinion of a random stranger.
- anothernewdude 5y ago
  Justify yourself.
- user-the-name 5y ago
  His argument was that the dust bowls themselves were a dramatic climate impact, caused by human activity, in a short time.
jaz2130 5y ago
It is, however, a good argument against this article.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
ipaddr 5y ago
I don't the parent is attacking global warming. The headline doesn't lineup with past temp records. Is there something in a dust bowl heatwave that could help explain why it is virtually impossible when it clearly isn't? When something like global warming become a religion any comment perceived as attacking itself no matter how innocent and truthful will bring out zealots looking to defend their faith. I think we should keep religion out of science.
- pseudalopex 5y ago
  The 1936 records were lower. They were in a different region with different climate. And human activity was part of why they happened.
- iso1631 5y ago
  The parent's link doesn't contradict the headline, indeed it backups up the headline shows that the coastal weather of BC is 10F higher than continental highs in the 30s Portland reached 116F recently https://www.oregonlive.com/weather/2021/06/portland-records-all-time-high-temperature-of-113-setting-new-record-for-third-day-in-a-row.html https://www.oregonlive.com/weather/2021/06/portland-records-... Here's Portland since 1938 https://projects.oregonlive.com/weather/temps/ https://projects.oregonlive.com/weather/temps/ This has Portland yearly records going back to 1875 https://www.currentresults.com/Yearly-Weather/USA/OR/Portland/extreme-annual-portland-high-temperature.php https://www.currentresults.com/Yearly-Weather/USA/OR/Portlan... There's no evidence to say that the 1930s were higher in the Pacific North West (which reached a high of 105 in 1935), or that it's ever been 110, let alone 115

necrotic_comp 5y ago

What I don't understand is what people who argue against climate change stand to gain. The argument for climate change is: "humans are polluting the planet and it's causing a change in the environment and will have a disastrous effect on the climate." The arguments I hear against climate change always seem to concede that humans are polluting the planet, but argue in different ways (natural cycle/not really happening/etc.) that this pollution has no effect. Even if this were true, why would it be a bad idea to reduce the level of pollution in the environment ? We know we're screwing up, why don't we do our best to clean it and make it usable for the next generations ?

jaywalk 5y ago
The solution always eventually boils down to paying more in taxes. That's why it gets opposed.
throwaway894345 5y ago
> What I don't understand is why people who argue against climate change stand to gain. I suspect it is something like psychological security (“I’ve only known a history of rapid progress and I’m not emotionally prepared to confront the possibility that life will be worse for my children and grandchildren, nor that I was complicit”). At least that’s the average joe climate denier. For the very wealthy it’s simple greed. They’d rather ruin the world irreparably than pay taxes (this characterization doesn’t seem to do justice to the fact that their wealth is derived from cheating society by externalizing costs by way of pollution).
- Sebb767 5y ago
  > For the very wealthy it’s simple greed. It's greed for basically anyone above the poverty line. There's functionally no difference for wanting a better life for you and your children and to increase your wealth for what is, in the end, the same goal. Unnecessarily driving an SUV, eating far too much meat and running the lines supplying peoples with those meat is morally not that different.
  - 5y ago

monkeynotes 5y ago

The dust bowl looks to have lasted 6 years, I wonder if what we are currently experiencing will differ in terms of longevity. If we are in for multi decade heatwaves this is something entirely different.

nerdponx 5y ago

In a different part of the world with different weather patterns? I'm willing to assume that professional climate researchers are aware of the 1930s heat wave.

csomar 5y ago

Were these extended (in time) heatwaves or just a particular few days with record temperatures? The current heatwave over North America seems like it's going to carry on for all of the next week, and who knows how longer after that. Maybe that's the difference?

milesskorpen 5y ago

Those highs are 105-110 in the Great Plains … seems substantially cooler than 125F in Canada.

refurb 5y ago
Look at the temperature records in Canada. Of the 13 provinces and territories, 9 of the 13 records were set in the 1930's or earlier. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_extreme_temperatures_in_Canada https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_extreme_temperatures_i...
- fabbari 5y ago
  Interestingly enough: the highest temperature recorded in the 1930's is 4.6C lower than the current record.
  - refurb 5y ago
    Yet routinely gets into the low 40C range every year.

f_allwein 5y ago

> In their study, the team of researchers says that the deadly heatwave was a one-in-a-1,000-year event. Did you find a flaw in the researchers' reasoning? Or do you have knowledge they do not?

f_allwein 5y ago
... orignal source and link to the study: https://www.worldweatherattribution.org/western-north-american-extreme-heat-virtually-impossible-without-human-caused-climate-change/ https://www.worldweatherattribution.org/western-north-americ...

jazzyjackson 5y ago

A heatwave in Iowa and Wisconsin does not invalidate the statement that this heatwave in the Pacific NW / BC was once unthinkable and will now be common. Relevant quote from the article: "According to the analysis, if the world warms by 2C, which could happen in about 20 years' time, then the chances of having a heatwave similar to last week's drop from around once every 1,000 years to roughly once every 5-10 years. "

chrisco255 5y ago
"it will now be common" Apparently you haven't been paying attention to all the failed predictions by alarmists over the past 3 decades including: The End of Snow (2000) https://www.climatedepot.com/2018/01/04/flashback-2000-snowfalls-are-now-just-a-thing-of-the-past-children-just-arent-going-to-know-what-snow-is-uk-independent/ https://www.climatedepot.com/2018/01/04/flashback-2000-snowf... The predictions of Glacier National Park being ice free by 2020: https://www.cnn.com/2020/01/08/us/glaciers-national-park-2020-trnd/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2020/01/08/us/glaciers-national-park-202... Not only is it extremely, extremely unlikely that 2C warming is experienced in the next two decades, it is completely counter to the trend: http://www.drroyspencer.com/2021/07/uah-global-temperature-update-for-june-2021-0-01-deg-c/ http://www.drroyspencer.com/2021/07/uah-global-temperature-u... All of this article is based on flawed computer models of non-linear dynamic systems that become exponentially unpredictable as a function of time. What were the odds of the 1930s heat waves, which were far more drastic, and far more sustained? No answer there.
- quenix 5y ago
  The first website you cite, Climate Depot, is severely biased toward right-wing anti climate science agendas, and has been classified as "conspiracy-pseudoscience" by Media Bias/Fact Check. They further comment that "Overall, we rate the Climate Depot a strong Pseudoscience source based on the promotion of human-influenced climate denialism propaganda and the use of poor sources who have failed numerous fact checks." I'm not sure how an anecdote of one climate prediction failing (your CNN article) is a rebuttal against decades of climate research and unanimous consensus from the vast majority of scientists. As for Dr. Roy Spencer—his credentials are impressive, but he is just one scientist. The scientific consensus on climate change is established, and "nearly all actively publishing climate scientists (97–98%[3]) support the consensus on anthropogenic climate change"[0]. I don't particularly care for the opinion of one lone man. -- [0]: Anderegg, William R L; Prall, James W.; Harold, Jacob; Schneider, Stephen H. (2010). "Expert credibility in climate change". Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 107 (27): 12107–9. Bibcode:2010PNAS..10712107A. doi:10.1073/pnas.1003187107. PMC 2901439. PMID 20566872. https://doi.org/10.1073%2Fpnas.1003187107 https://doi.org/10.1073%2Fpnas.1003187107

iso1631 5y ago

"Canada broke its temperature record for a third straight day on Tuesday - 49.6C (121.3F) in Lytton, British Columbia." "All across the region, in the US states of Oregon and Washington and in the west of Canada, multiple cities hit new records far above 40C." Not sure how you can point to 1936's records of 111F and say that was "worse" than 121F today.

antiterra 5y ago

The title is referring to a specific heatwave that just occured, not the possibility of any heatwave at all ever happening in North America. That means the specific parameters and temperature variations are part of the discussion. In this case, the temperatures in Canada surpass those numbers both in the absolute and relative to norm.

nickd2001 5y ago

There was a theory, although it may have now been debunked, that the testing of nuclear weapons caused a nuclear winter to some extent, thus offsetting the obvious effects of global warming for some time. So from the 1940s, to whenever it was finally phased out (1980s) , nuclear weapons tests somewhat blocked the possibility of heatwaves being so extreme. This could partly explain the absence of such extremes between 1930s and now. Or it could entirely be a coincidence and randomness. What worries me is simply the extent to which this year's heatwave beats previous records. It does seem to point to an accelerating scenario. Established climate scientists are now saying they may have underestimated how bad its going to be. Previous worst case scenarios for warming were scary enough. I'm concerned about a vicious circle scenario, a positive feedback loop. We really don't want to go there.