More Climate Change 101
Feb 10th, 2010 | 55 responses
Perhaps folks who are having trouble understanding how record-breaking snowstorms on the East Coast could be happening if global climate change is real, would find this piece at The New Republic, written by Bradford Plumer, helpful. Brad quotes meteorologist Jeff Masters (emphasis in original):
There are two requirements for a record snow storm:
1) A near-record amount of moisture in the air (or a very slow moving storm).
2) Temperatures cold enough for snow.It’s not hard at all to get temperatures cold enough for snow in a world experiencing global warming. According to the 2007 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report, the globe warmed 0.74°C (1.3°F) over the past 100 years. There will still be colder than average winters in a world that is experiencing warming, with plenty of opportunities for snow.
The more difficult ingredient for producing a record snowstorm is the requirement of near-record levels of moisture. Global warming theory predicts that global precipitation will increase, and that heavy precipitation events–the ones most likely to cause flash flooding–will also increase. This occurs because as the climate warms, evaporation of moisture from the oceans increases, resulting in more water vapor in the air.
Brad adds:
Now, that doesn’t mean we can definitively blame this snow monstrosity on global warming—again, it’s hard to attribute any single weather event to long-term climate shifts. (For instance, El Niño may be playing a large role in feeding these storms.) At most, we can say that a warming climate is expected to create the conditions that make fierce winter storms in the Northeast and mid-Atlantic more likely. Or at least it will for awhile: If the planet keeps heating up, then at some point freezing conditions in the Northeast will become very rare, at which point snowstorms will, too But we’re not at that point—the Earth hasn’t warmed that much yet.
There is also a Time article by Bryan Walsh which makes much the same points.
Anyone who still needs help can simply consider Rachel Maddow’s explanation on her show tonight for why climate change is not disproved because it snowed in D.C.: The Mojave Desert in California (and parts of Utah, Nevada, and Arizona) has a very dry climate. Deserts usually do. But it does sometimes rain in the Mojave. But when it does, the Mojave is still a desert.
Weather is not climate. But global climate change does affect local weather patterns.
Thank you for attending my lecture. You can leave your donation on the way out.
55 Responses to “More Climate Change 101”
“Simply, non-lab, experiments can be run to prove theories. AGW can not.”'¨
No, but the theory can be modeled very well. It also has much more pressing implications.
“And you explain the Medieval Warm Period how?
http://www.skepticalscience.com/climate-change-…
http://www.skepticalscience.com/medieval-warm-p…
Next time, try to be skeptical and investigative before you take up my time. What you just brought up was something basic curiosity can show is a red herring.
“The earth is getting warmer, iot's been doing so since the last ice age. You wish to looik at the last ten-20 years and say you KNOW that this variation is abnormal in the ten thousand year record.”
http://www.skepticalscience.com/climate-change-…
The onus is back on you. Get to work.
“If you have another one that shows why the temperature changes on earth correlate with what's measurable of temperature change on Mars, let's hear it. Temperature on Mars is harder to measure, but they don't have heat island effects.”
http://www.skepticalscience.com/global-warming-…
http://www.skepticalscience.com/global-warming-…
I am a skeptic, you are obviously not.
“the burden of proof is on those calling for trillions in [expenditure] [and crippling industry and imposing control and even command over the economy and society].”
Of course it is. And this is where the “precautionary principle” and other reasonable behavior falsely demanded and hyped by the Left is not only absent, but fact is hypocritically inverted in this case, with the alarmism and hype that is associated with this political movement seeking old ambitious goals.
Not everyone is emotional or irrational and willing to act in blind faith.
Again –
Nobody denies this and what it may do to us,
http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/ccgg/trends/
or even this — still the best work by far (at the end of 1980), by a legendary earlier authority on climate,
http://www.iiasa.ac.at/Admin/PUB/Documents/RR-80-030.pdf
but that's no excuse for what the Left is saying or doing.
There's no substantial intellectual challenge to grasping what's obviously (really) happening here.
Or in the Queen's English:
ac.matra.free.fr/FB/NLawson1.pdf
[dusting hands]
The biggest problem the climate change lobbyist are having is the scandals that are popping up all over the place regarding their “science”. Its what happens when they become political activist first, and scientists second.
you know ax
your links were tyo great graphs. too bad that were uncited. i liked the one showing temps in US from 1000 ad, real zinger that. Check your proxies at the door abnd color as you wish.
“eighteen 2000-year-long series were obtained that were not based on tree ring data. Data in each series were smoothed with a 30-year running mean. All data were then converted to anomalies by subtracting the mean of each series from that series. The overall mean series was then computed by simple averaging. The mean time series shows quite coherent structure. The mean series shows the Medieval Warm Period (MWP) and Little Ice Age (LIA) quite clearly, with the MWP being approximately 0.3°C warmer than 20th century values at these eighteen sites.”
i take it these guys are lying denialists.
If you want to come across as sanctimonious, keep it up, you doing great.
your one size fits all website needs to provide a lit5tle more than denial.