10 ms·
> Known as a “triple-dip,” a three-year La Niña stint has only occurred three times since record keeping began: from 1954 to 1957, 1973 to 1976, and from 1998 t
by cstejerean 4y ago
> Known as a “triple-dip,” a three-year La Niña stint has only occurred three times since record keeping began: from 1954 to 1957, 1973 to 1976, and from 1998 to 2001.
So basically every 20 or so years and the last one was about 20 years ago.
- kelnos 4y agoIt might be interesting to compare the severity of the three prior triple-dips with the current one. My zero-research guess would be that this current one is worse than the last.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- 2muchcoffeeman 4y agoI was around for the last one in Sydney. Anecdotally, this seems like the worst floods. But that could also be because we’ve had 3 major events in a row: massive forest fires, pandemic, multiple bad floods.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- hammock 4y agoIs this due to global warming?
- labster 4y agoPossibly, but in isolation it’s impossible to tell. Weather is a series of events; climate is a statistical phenomenon. But basically yes, all bad and exceptional weather is caused by climate change, at least in terms of moral equivalence. Many people somewhere is suffering from climate change, and you should pretend that it’s you, because you want to have the mindset that it has hurt people most everywhere.
- bequanna 4y agoSetting aside how silly it is to think about weather in this way, you’re also just plain wrong. Despite the doom and gloom marketing from those seeking to put their hand in your wallet, most people will definitely NOT be negatively impacted by climate change.
- irrational 4y agoMost people won’t be negatively affected? How do you justify that? How many people in the USA southwest are affected by the mega drought? How many people in China are affected by their mega drought? How many people in Europe are affected by the heat waves? How many people on islands and coastal areas are affected by sea levels rising? How many peoples are affected by glaciers melting and less snowpacks (such as villages in the Himalayas)?
- bequanna 4y agoPlenty of questions there. Do you have any of the answers? Ah, right. This problem is so terrible and sneaky that we (quite conveniently) can't even measure its effect! Just to be safe, we should just assume everything bad is caused by this spectre. Luckily, some very smart people who are not at all self-interested have told us that if we make great sacrifices and spend enough money that will help us avoid this impossible to measure problem.
- russelg 4y agoHow is anything the poster stated not measurable? We can measure the rise of ocean levels, the rise of global temperature, the number of people on said coasts etc... Take off your tinfoil hat for a quick second.
- junofan 4y agoIt makes for great agitprop: play as cardboard characters of perfect virtue or absolute evil.
- marcosdumay 4y agoYou mean things happening on the same frequency that they always happened?
- johnchristopher 4y agos/y\ always/last\ three\ times\ it\
- blowski 4y agoMight be clearer if you just write in English.
- lucb1e 4y agoI mean it's quite clear, but yeah a direct question would be easier for everyone to understand at a glance
- thrown_22 4y agos/\/\/\//\\\\\\g
- quickthrower2 4y agoAnd to keep it snarky there is “ftfy”
- marcosdumay 4y agoEver since we started keeping track of it.
- renewiltord 4y agoDon't have to escape the slashes, non?
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- 4y ago
- colechristensen 4y agoThese la nina/el nino cycles seem to be long period climate patterns which already existed, because they’re measured in decades and we don’t have records for all that long n is very small and quite hard to determine if there are anthropogenic effects to them. Things people forget with climate is that there are indeed long cyclical patterns not all of which are well understood which have significant weather effects. You can’t just yell global warming every time there is an apparent change or bad weather. If you are interested in truth and not just a political narrative you have to be curious, open, and ready to acknowledge not everything is going to fit the popular doom stories.
- jliptzin 4y agoI agree with you but in a situation like this it’s a lot better to overreact than to underreact. If we do more than we need to, we get cheap solar panels, long lasting batteries, and maybe a lot of time and money wasted on ideas that didn’t work out. If we do less than we have to, we get a possibly irreversible feedback loop of global warming that leads to the collapse of most habitats (including ours) on this planet.
- colechristensen 4y agoIt’s not though. There are a large volume of people who question the validity of climate change at all, exaggerating only causes more doubt and recruits for the opposition. The doom scenario of “irreversible collapse” is also quite unlikely but some people really like scary stories. And to be blunt any practical imaginable progress is not going to be a very big change, if it’s going to happen the damage is already likely done.
- jliptzin 4y agoYou said yourself it’s not well understood, don’t you think it’s wise to err on the side of caution? What’s the downside of getting off fossil fuels anyway, besides some people needing to switch careers from coal mining to solar panel installation, for example?
- kortilla 4y agoYes, everything that happens now is because of it.
- scaramanga 4y agoNot likely, but it does lead to cooler global temperatures which provides a temporary respite from global warming. The last couple of years would have been way hotter if we were not experiencing la niña conditions.
- kergonath 4y ago> Not likely, but it does lead to cooler global temperatures which provides a temporary respite from global warming. Indeed. The Niña episodes after 1998 were a big part of the denialists’ talking points about the end of global warming for the next decade. > The last couple of years would have been way hotter if we were not experiencing la niña conditions. Considering how 2022 is going, this is actually frightening because it means that the next couple of years are likely to be way worse.
- Earendil137 4y ago> Is this due to global warming? Global warming was the old narrative... You mean "climate change".
- loxias 4y agoInteresting! The '97 & '98 ones were intense, I remember. I think ever since then it's had higher awareness in the larger population but I have no way of knowing. It was a significant enough event to even be represented in entertainment[1]. ;-) [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F5tttyTWXzU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F5tttyTWXzU
- mylons 4y agothat’s not la niña though..?
- davidbanham 4y agoAnd correlated with some pretty horrific fire events: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/1974%E2%80%9375_Australian_bushfire_season https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/1974%E2%80%9375_Australian_b... https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Christmas_bushfires https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Christmas_bushfires