4 ms·

“linked to climate change” https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2022_Pakistan_floods https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2022_Pakistan_floods Are we linking every weat

“linked to climate change” https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2022_Pakistan_floods https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2022_Pakistan_floods Are we linking every weather event to climate change? Can we tighten up our science a little? Somewhere I read that the Pakistan issue was not related to climate change and more to do with where the people lived. More people are living in flood zones, for example.

ChatGTP 3y ago
If you look at the insane rise in global sea surface temperatures lately I don’t think we can just fall back to this old assertion. Weather isn’t climate, this is true, but it’s going to be pretty difficult to find weather that isn’t affected but such a rapid change in the climate. In other words, all weather is now weather like we’ve never seen before because we’ve drifted so far from the mean.
- brutusborn 3y ago
  We’ve barely drifted from the mean. Most design codes have only increased storm loading by ~5% for climate change and that is conservative. The parent is right, most increases in storm damage rates are because humans are building more stuff where storms are, changes due to climate change are negligible in comparison.
momdad420 3y ago
[dead]
dmbche 3y ago
The wiki explains it in the first paragraph - flood liked to heavier monsoons and melting glaciers resulting from climate change. Edit: Removed some phrasing
- peterfirefly 3y ago
  Why do you think people choose to live in places that get flooded? Pakistan's population is a bit over 230 million now (or maybe even 240 million). It was around 45 million in 1960 (not including Bangladesh). It was around 23 million in 1900 (not including the rest of British India). The numbers vary a bit depending on source but the overall trend is unmistakable. This increase is not due to "Climate Change" but to increases in public health (cleaner water, better sewers/latrines, soap, plumbing=easier hand washing, cleaner food, vaccinations) and available food (many, many more calories + vitamins). If the Pakistanis choose to spend that wealth increase on a population growth instead of increase in personal wealth, well, that is not our fault. Perhaps they made the right choice, perhaps not. It's up to them. --- https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/j.2326-4624.2013.tb00005.x#:~:text=The%20modern%20expansion%20of%20the,from%2023%20million%20in%201900 https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/j.2326-4624..... Edit: minor copy editing to tighten up the language.
  - dmbche 3y ago
    Sorry, not to be snarky, here is the "Background" part of the wiki article : "The minister of climate change of Pakistan, Sherry Rehman, said that the provinces of Sindh and Balochistan had received more rainfall than the August average, with 784% and 500% more, respectively.[9][10] Higher than average monsoon rains were also recorded in India and Bangladesh.[11] The Indian Ocean is one of the fastest warming oceans in the world, warming by an average of 1 °C (1.8 °F) (while worldwide temperatures are now at 1.2 °C (2.2 °F) above pre-industrial temperatures, oceans in general are at around 0.7 °C (1.3 °F)).[11] The rise in sea surface temperatures is believed to increase monsoon rainfall.[12][11] In addition, southern Pakistan experienced back-to-back heat waves in May and June, which were record-setting and themselves made more likely by climate change.[13][14] These created a strong thermal low that brought heavier rains than usual.[12][13] The heatwaves also triggered glacial flooding in Gilgit-Baltistan.[14] Pakistan contributes less than 1% of global greenhouse gas emissions, but is one of the places most vulnerable to climate change.[15][16] A study by an international team of climate scientists says that global heating made the flooding up to 50% worse and future floods more likely.[17] However, some of the contributors to the severity of the flooding are local to the country. Deforestation in Pakistan has also been a factor worsening the floods" So much larger than usual rainfall is the problem - they had record flooding - meaning bigger than ever recorded, right? I don't understand why you are talking about public health like that had an impact in the amount of water that was covering more land than ever?
    - peterfirefly 3y ago
      > I don't understand why you are talking about public health like that had an impact in the amount of water that was covering more land than ever? Why do people live where they do? Surely you understand that that is relevant?
      - dmbche 3y ago
        It not relevant to the comment we're replying to, which is arguing that this problem is not related to climate change and quoted this wikipedia article - is it?
roenxi 3y ago
And, in recent times, we also need to account for the effect of the COVID lockdowns. A lot of wealthy countries decided to seriously damage the global economy - it isn't a stretch to think that might have effected the number of displaced people. There were certainly some discussions of high potential for famines during COVID that seemed linked to the sudden shutdown of trade. Frankly, I think it could probably have cause a couple of the wars too. It seems a bit suspicious that on the one side of COVID the world was more or less peaceful and then on the other side we're seeing what seems to be an escalation [0] up to WWIII. Before COVID people were complaining that the US executive was too chummy with Russia. That is just one example, but there are a lot of suddenly tense areas and I think the economic stresses from the general lockdowns are serious contributors. [0] I see the UK is now giving Ukraine cruise missiles - https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/5/12/russia-denies-ukraine-push-in-bakhmut-uk-to-send-cruise-missiles https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/5/12/russia-denies-ukrai....
- _kbh_ 3y ago
  > It seems a bit suspicious that on the one side of COVID the world was more or less peaceful and then on the other side we're seeing what seems to be an escalation [0] up to WWIII. Giving a country the weapons it needs to defend itself is not escalatory, whats escalatory is invading a country and trying eradicate its population. If Russia cares so much about escalation they should leave Ukraine.
206lol 3y ago
[dead]
botanical 3y ago
That flood created an inland sea that could be seen from space. And you think the reason is because people were in the vicinity of a river? It was one of the costliest and deadliest floods ever. > In addition, southern Pakistan experienced back-to-back heat waves in May and June, which were record-setting and themselves made more likely by climate change.[13][14] These created a strong thermal low that brought heavier rains than usual.[12][13] The heatwaves also triggered glacial flooding in Gilgit-Baltistan.[14] I can't believe your comment is up top. How is climate change in this instance not the main cause?
- melling 3y ago
  Science requires that you supply the facts not make up a story and say “what else can it be” What will it take to purge this sort of ignorance from HN? https://theconversation.com/pakistan-floods-what-role-did-climate-change-play-189833 https://theconversation.com/pakistan-floods-what-role-did-cl...
Vindicis 3y ago
Your comment makes it seem like you're commenting on the article, but you're not. I'll admit to being rather confused as to why a top level comment has nothing to do with the article at all.

ChatGTP 3y ago

If you look at the insane rise in global sea surface temperatures lately I don’t think we can just fall back to this old assertion. Weather isn’t climate, this is true, but it’s going to be pretty difficult to find weather that isn’t affected but such a rapid change in the climate. In other words, all weather is now weather like we’ve never seen before because we’ve drifted so far from the mean.

brutusborn 3y ago
We’ve barely drifted from the mean. Most design codes have only increased storm loading by ~5% for climate change and that is conservative. The parent is right, most increases in storm damage rates are because humans are building more stuff where storms are, changes due to climate change are negligible in comparison.

momdad420 3y ago

[dead]

dmbche 3y ago

The wiki explains it in the first paragraph - flood liked to heavier monsoons and melting glaciers resulting from climate change. Edit: Removed some phrasing

peterfirefly 3y ago
Why do you think people choose to live in places that get flooded? Pakistan's population is a bit over 230 million now (or maybe even 240 million). It was around 45 million in 1960 (not including Bangladesh). It was around 23 million in 1900 (not including the rest of British India). The numbers vary a bit depending on source but the overall trend is unmistakable. This increase is not due to "Climate Change" but to increases in public health (cleaner water, better sewers/latrines, soap, plumbing=easier hand washing, cleaner food, vaccinations) and available food (many, many more calories + vitamins). If the Pakistanis choose to spend that wealth increase on a population growth instead of increase in personal wealth, well, that is not our fault. Perhaps they made the right choice, perhaps not. It's up to them. --- https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/j.2326-4624.2013.tb00005.x#:~:text=The%20modern%20expansion%20of%20the,from%2023%20million%20in%201900 https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/j.2326-4624..... Edit: minor copy editing to tighten up the language.
- dmbche 3y ago
  Sorry, not to be snarky, here is the "Background" part of the wiki article : "The minister of climate change of Pakistan, Sherry Rehman, said that the provinces of Sindh and Balochistan had received more rainfall than the August average, with 784% and 500% more, respectively.[9][10] Higher than average monsoon rains were also recorded in India and Bangladesh.[11] The Indian Ocean is one of the fastest warming oceans in the world, warming by an average of 1 °C (1.8 °F) (while worldwide temperatures are now at 1.2 °C (2.2 °F) above pre-industrial temperatures, oceans in general are at around 0.7 °C (1.3 °F)).[11] The rise in sea surface temperatures is believed to increase monsoon rainfall.[12][11] In addition, southern Pakistan experienced back-to-back heat waves in May and June, which were record-setting and themselves made more likely by climate change.[13][14] These created a strong thermal low that brought heavier rains than usual.[12][13] The heatwaves also triggered glacial flooding in Gilgit-Baltistan.[14] Pakistan contributes less than 1% of global greenhouse gas emissions, but is one of the places most vulnerable to climate change.[15][16] A study by an international team of climate scientists says that global heating made the flooding up to 50% worse and future floods more likely.[17] However, some of the contributors to the severity of the flooding are local to the country. Deforestation in Pakistan has also been a factor worsening the floods" So much larger than usual rainfall is the problem - they had record flooding - meaning bigger than ever recorded, right? I don't understand why you are talking about public health like that had an impact in the amount of water that was covering more land than ever?
  - peterfirefly 3y ago
    > I don't understand why you are talking about public health like that had an impact in the amount of water that was covering more land than ever? Why do people live where they do? Surely you understand that that is relevant?
    - dmbche 3y ago
      It not relevant to the comment we're replying to, which is arguing that this problem is not related to climate change and quoted this wikipedia article - is it?

roenxi 3y ago

And, in recent times, we also need to account for the effect of the COVID lockdowns. A lot of wealthy countries decided to seriously damage the global economy - it isn't a stretch to think that might have effected the number of displaced people. There were certainly some discussions of high potential for famines during COVID that seemed linked to the sudden shutdown of trade. Frankly, I think it could probably have cause a couple of the wars too. It seems a bit suspicious that on the one side of COVID the world was more or less peaceful and then on the other side we're seeing what seems to be an escalation [0] up to WWIII. Before COVID people were complaining that the US executive was too chummy with Russia. That is just one example, but there are a lot of suddenly tense areas and I think the economic stresses from the general lockdowns are serious contributors. [0] I see the UK is now giving Ukraine cruise missiles - https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/5/12/russia-denies-ukraine-push-in-bakhmut-uk-to-send-cruise-missiles https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/5/12/russia-denies-ukrai....

_kbh_ 3y ago
> It seems a bit suspicious that on the one side of COVID the world was more or less peaceful and then on the other side we're seeing what seems to be an escalation [0] up to WWIII. Giving a country the weapons it needs to defend itself is not escalatory, whats escalatory is invading a country and trying eradicate its population. If Russia cares so much about escalation they should leave Ukraine.

206lol 3y ago

[dead]

botanical 3y ago

That flood created an inland sea that could be seen from space. And you think the reason is because people were in the vicinity of a river? It was one of the costliest and deadliest floods ever. > In addition, southern Pakistan experienced back-to-back heat waves in May and June, which were record-setting and themselves made more likely by climate change.[13][14] These created a strong thermal low that brought heavier rains than usual.[12][13] The heatwaves also triggered glacial flooding in Gilgit-Baltistan.[14] I can't believe your comment is up top. How is climate change in this instance not the main cause?

melling 3y ago
Science requires that you supply the facts not make up a story and say “what else can it be” What will it take to purge this sort of ignorance from HN? https://theconversation.com/pakistan-floods-what-role-did-climate-change-play-189833 https://theconversation.com/pakistan-floods-what-role-did-cl...

Vindicis 3y ago

Your comment makes it seem like you're commenting on the article, but you're not. I'll admit to being rather confused as to why a top level comment has nothing to do with the article at all.