Extreme weather and climate change: a new IPCC report

By: Dr. Jeff Masters , 3:48 PM GMT on November 18, 2011

Share this Blog
35
+

Extreme weather events are already being affected by human-caused climate change, and will increase in destructive power during the coming decades as huge cost, reported the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) today. The IPCC issues reports on the state of the scientific knowledge of climate change every six years, with the next full report due out in 2013. However, concern over the possible impact climate change may already be having on extreme weather events like heat waves, floods, and droughts prompted the IPCC to release their first-ever Special Report on Managing the Risks of Extreme Events and Disasters to Advance Climate Change Adaptation (SREX). The SREX report was divided into two sections: how human-caused climate change has already affected extreme weather events, and predictions on how these events will change during the rest of the century. Here are some highlights on how the climate has already changed, according to the SREX report:

- Globally, cold days and nights have decreased, and warm days and nights have increased (90 - 100% chance).

- In many but not all regions of the globe, the length or number of heat waves has increased.

- Some areas have seen more intense and longer droughts, in particular, southern Europe and West Africa. However, droughts have become less frequent, less intense, or shorter in some areas, such as central North America and northwestern Australia.

- Heavy precipitation events have changed in some regions. There is at least a 2-in-3 probability that more regions have seen increases than decreases in heavy precipitation events.

- The historical data base on hurricanes and tropical cyclones is not good enough to tell if they have changed.

- The jet stream has shifted towards the poles, meaning that the tracks of rain-bearing low pressure systems have also shifted towards the poles.

- Rising sea levels have led to an increase in extreme coastal flooding events (66 - 100% chance).

- Damage from extreme weather events has increased. Increases in population and wealth, and the fact more people are living in vulnerable areas, is a major cause of this increase in damage. It is uncertain if climate change is partially responsible for the increase in damage.


Figure 1. Predicted return periods for 1-day extreme precipitation events that occurred, on average, only once every 20 years between 1981-2000. A decrease in return period implies more frequent extreme precipitation events (i.e., less time between events on average). For Eastern North America, a 1-in-20 year heavy rain event is predicted to become a 1-in-7 to 1-in-9 year event by the end of the century, according to these climate model predictions. The box plots show results for regionally averaged projections for two time horizons, 2046 to 2065 and 2081 to 2100, as compared to the late-20th-century, and for three different emissions scenarios--a scenario where humans emit relatively little CO2 and other heat-trapping gasses (B1, blue bars), and two higher-emission scenarios (A1B and A2, green and red bars). Humanity is currently on a pace to emit more CO2 than the highest emission scenario shown here. Results are based on 14 climate models that contributed to the 2007 IPCC report. The level of agreement among the models is indicated by the size of the colored boxes (in which 50% of the model projections are contained), and the length of the whiskers (indicating the maximum and minimum projections from all models). Values are computed for land points only. The “Globe” inset box displays the values computed using all land grid points. Averaged over all areas of the globe, a 1-in-20 year heavy rain event is predicted to become a 1-in-8 to 1-in-12 year event by the end of the century. Image credit: The IPCC Special Report on Managing the Risks of Extreme Events and Disasters (SREX), 2011.

Here are some highlights of the forecasts for the future from the 2011 SREX report:

- A 1-in-20 year hottest day is at least 66% likely to become a 1-in-2 year event by the end of the 21st century in most regions, except in the high latitudes of the Northern Hemisphere, where it is likely to become a 1-in-5 year event.

- For Eastern North America, a 1-in-20 year heavy rain event is predicted to become a 1-in-7 to 1-in-9 year event by the end of the century.

- For Eastern North America, a maximum high temperature that occurred only once every 20 years during 1980 - 2000 is predicted to occur between once every three years and once per year by 2100.

- Extreme high temperature readings that occur once every 20 years will increase by 1°C to 3°C (1.8°F - 5.4°F) by mid-21st century and by about 2°C to 5°C (3.6°F - 9°F) by late-21st century.

- It is at least 66% likely that the frequency of heavy precipitation or the proportion of total rainfall from heavy falls will increase in the 21st century over many areas of the globe. This is particularly the case in the high latitudes and tropical regions, and in winter in the northern mid-latitudes. There is medium confidence that, in some regions, increases in heavy precipitation will occur despite projected decreases of total precipitation in those regions.

- Heavy rainfalls associated with tropical cyclones are at least 66% likely to increase with continued warming, and the maximum winds will increase. The total number of these storms is likely to remain about the same or decrease.

- There is medium confidence that droughts will intensify in the 21st century in some seasons and areas. Southern Europe and the Mediterranean region, central Europe, Central North America, Central America and Mexico, northeast Brazil, and southern Africa are at particular risk.

- In some regions, the main driver for increased damages from extreme weather events will not be climate change, but increases in population and wealth and vulnerability.

Intoducing climatecommunication.org
For those of you seeking detailed information on the research linking extreme weather events to climate change, I recommend a new website dedicated to improving communication of climate change information to the public, media, and policy makers, climatecommunication.org. The group is led by Susan Joy Hassol, a veteran climate change communicator, analyst, and author known for her ability to translate science into English, making complex issues accessible to policymakers and the public. Climatecommunication.org has put together an overview of extreme weather and climate change that I find a helpful resource when I am looking for the latest research results on the subject. I serve on their advisory board, along with a number of leading climate scientists.


Figure 2. Still image of the Bangkok, Thailand floods of October - November, 2011, as seen on the inaugural episode our new bi-monthly Extreme Weather video series.

Wunderground launches new Extreme Weather video series
Wunderground now features a new, twice-monthly Extreme Weather video series from GREEN.TV, with the latest reports and analysis on extreme weather around the world. From droughts to hurricanes to blizzards to flooding, Extreme Weather will cover the story and the science behind the events to try to understand their causes and consequences. The Extreme Weather series is sponsored by Vestas, the world's leading wind turbine manufacturer. The inaugural episode, launched yesterday, features video of the great Thailand flood, destructive floods in Italy, the $3 billion Northeast U.S. snowstorm of October 29 - 30, the massive Bering Sea, Alaska blizzard of November 9, the Texas drought, and the launch of a new polar-orbiting weather satellite. Look for a new video every two weeks on our Climate Change Videos page.

Resources
For those of you who haven't seen it, my top "must-read" post of 2011 is called, 2010 - 2011: Earth's most extreme weather since 1816?. Back in June, I went through the ridiculous barrage of extreme weather events the planet saw in 2010 and early 2011, and concluded: But it is highly improbable that the remarkable extreme weather events of 2010 and 2011 could have all happened in such a short period of time without some powerful climate-altering force at work. The best science we have right now maintains that human-caused emissions of heat-trapping gases like CO2 are the most likely cause of such a climate-altering force.

Wunderground's climate change blogger, Dr. Ricky Rood, has some thoughtful observations on the communication of the extreme weather/climate change link published in earthzine magazine titled, Changing the Media Discussion on Climate Change and Extreme Weather.

Jeff Masters

Reader Comments

Comments will take a few seconds to appear.

Post Your Comments

Please sign in to post comments.

or Join

Not only will you be able to leave comments on this blog, but you'll also have the ability to upload and share your photos in our Wunder Photos section.

Display: 0, 50, 100, 200 Sort: Newest First - Order Posted

Viewing: 62 - 12

Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17Blog Index

Quoting aburttschell:


Or then I suppose it could have said "Global Sea Level much lower than 200,000 years ago."



In other words you can take any sample size and interpret what you will; especially when dealing with relatively short periods of time.
You mean like arctic sea ice,(since 1979 satellite era)?
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Neapolitan:

Yes. As it decreased in 2007, and 2003, and 1999, and 1994...

Climate is about long-term trends, of course, and the blue line on the graph you showed indicates that trend. Month-to-month and year-to-year variations are just noise. So while the title above the chart says, "Global Sea Level Drops 6 mm in 2010", it could have just as correctly state, "Global Sea Level rises 50 mm since 1993" or "Global Sea Level Rises 2.8 mm per year".

Know what I mean? ;-)


Or then I suppose it could have said "Global Sea Level much lower than 200,000 years ago."



In other words you can take any sample size and interpret what you will; especially when dealing with relatively short periods of time.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
60. Skyepony (Mod)
NAIROBI, Kenya — The drought-induced famine crisis in Somalia has eased somewhat, United Nations officials said on Friday, with the number of people facing imminent starvation dropping to nearly 250,000 from 750,000 because of rainfall and increased aid deliveries.

The situation remains bleak, however, and Somalia’s food security is still the worst in the world. But “substantial humanitarian assistance has mitigated the most extreme food deficits and reduced mortality levels,” according to a report issued by the Famine Early Warning Systems Network and the Food Security and Nutrition Analysis Unit, which are partly financed by the American government and the United Nations
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting sar2401:


Me too. :) I'm really on the fence about this. There's no doubt the climate is changing, but it's done that since the globe cooled off. There's also no doubt we've pumped an awful lot of crud into the atmosphere since the Industrial Revolution. I'm still not sure the correlation proves causation. One of my stat professors did an interesting exercise in predicting the future using statistics. He took the total number of horses used for transport in 1880 and did both a straight line and exponential graph of the amount of horse manure we'd be dealing with given a certain rise in the human population. No matter how you worked it, the earth would have been 8 or 10 feet deep in horse manure that needed to be disposed of somehow. Of course, this prediction would have been wrong, if done in 1880, because we completely changed what we used for transport. The IPPC predictions are also based on us not making any changes in what we are doing now, even though many steps are underway to reduce the CO2 footprint of humans. I'd really be interested to see how those numbers change if, for example, we were able to reduce CO2 emissions by 50% by the year 2100.
The problem is not just the U.S. burning fuel,co2 output is increasing on a global scale. China as they become more Industrialized will greatly increase the output(c02)!
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
The problem of predicting climate events due to global carbon: how will governments react? My guess is geoengineering will change global warming into global stagnation. PICTURE YOURSELF LIVING IN A WARM STAGNANT POND FILLED WITH SUCKERS.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting SPLbeater:
the SPC had my area under high risk that fateful saturday..i was tending to a sale fundraiser at my church and didnt have my computer. didnt know SPC existed then either lol.


Indeed. The alarm bells were really rining at the SPC on that weekend. It's one of the few times I've seen such a large area under high risk. The sad part is the SPC was advertising this severe threat for at least three days before the outbreak and we still had so many people die. I don't know what it takes to convince people to do some advance planning when there's a high likelihood of dangerous storms in their area.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting overwash12:
So @ 2.8 mm sealevel rise per year= 1 ft. rise in 100 years. Unless,global warming increases it could accelerate at a much faster pace. I'll take an island in the South Pacific,where do I sign?


Me too. :) I'm really on the fence about this. There's no doubt the climate is changing, but it's done that since the globe cooled off. There's also no doubt we've pumped an awful lot of crud into the atmosphere since the Industrial Revolution. I'm still not sure the correlation proves causation. One of my stat professors did an interesting exercise in predicting the future using statistics. He took the total number of horses used for transport in 1880 and did both a straight line and exponential graph of the amount of horse manure we'd be dealing with given a certain rise in the human population. No matter how you worked it, the earth would have been 8 or 10 feet deep in horse manure that needed to be disposed of somehow. Of course, this prediction would have been wrong, if done in 1880, because we completely changed what we used for transport. The IPPC predictions are also based on us not making any changes in what we are doing now, even though many steps are underway to reduce the CO2 footprint of humans. I'd really be interested to see how those numbers change if, for example, we were able to reduce CO2 emissions by 50% by the year 2100.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Cotillion:
Just heard about the report on a news bulletin from the BBC. It made it sound very dangerous, but when you actually look through the figures, it's a bit scattergun.

They're very confident it's going to get hotter. Okay. They're reasonably confident it's going to get wetter and/or drier everywhere. Right...

They don't really know a whole lot about anything else. Do we know for sure that the jet stream movement is in relation to warming? Do we know that there's a direct link between increased rainfall and emissions (aside the indirect equation of: emissions will equal warming will equal greater rainfall)?

Not to dismiss the concerns, but it's not as grandiose and important as first thought, really.

On a side note, I always thought the 1-in-x-year floods were a strange way of putting it. Not only can it make people confused (as it refers to amounts as opposed to probability over time) but it is not very descriptive.

I like more description! "That flood was so devastating. It was almost zancleanesque in the sheer colossal amounts of water..." or "C'mon! That storm last week? It hardly caused a storeggan deluge, did it?" ;)

Well if you have all those doubts , just an advice, at least, listen an analize,pay attention in an olistic, open minded way, without taking sides. Because as a non American,but a citezen of this planet, when I listen to the americans talk on this weather pattern or GW issues, is mostly an Ideology that fluorish, no a fair judgment to the scientific investigations and studies on this important matter, that involved the future of humanity. Because something is happening for sure. What is happening?. Who knows? we are all learning,nobody kmows for sure.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
53. Skyepony (Mod)
9,500 evacuated, 20 Reno homes lost in windy fire

Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Just heard about the report on a news bulletin from the BBC. It made it sound very dangerous, but when you actually look through the figures, it's a bit scattergun.

They're very confident it's going to get hotter. Okay. They're reasonably confident it's going to get wetter and/or drier everywhere. Right...

They don't really know a whole lot about anything else. Do we know for sure that the jet stream movement is in relation to warming? Do we know that there's a direct link between increased rainfall and emissions (aside the indirect equation of: emissions will equal warming will equal greater rainfall)?

Not to dismiss the concerns, but it's not as grandiose and important as first thought, really.

On a side note, I always thought the 1-in-x-year floods were a strange way of putting it. Not only can it make people confused (as it refers to amounts as opposed to probability over time) but it is not very descriptive.

I like more description! "That flood was so devastating. It was almost zancleanesque in the sheer colossal amounts of water..." or "C'mon! That storm last week? It hardly caused a storeggan deluge, did it?" ;)

Member Since: August 23, 2008 Posts: 7 Comments: 5300
(saturday meaning april 16th) ^
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
the SPC had my area under high risk that fateful saturday..i was tending to a sale fundraiser at my church and didnt have my computer. didnt know SPC existed then either lol.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting StormTracker2K:
A very dangerous tornado outbreak is looming later next week into next weekend across the South. This could rival the outbreaks we had this past Spring.



This seems to be as bit melodramatic at this point. The Storm Prediction Center states:

"BY DAY-5/22ND-23RD...DIFFERENCES BECOME PRONOUNCED WITH THIS SYSTEM BETWEEN SPECTRAL/ECMWF...AND AMONGST MREF MEMBERS. CONSIDERABLE UNCERTAINTY EXISTS ATTM REGARDING BOTH PHASE SPEED AND AMPLITUDE OF MID-UPPER WAVE...AND RESULTANT POSITIONING/STRENGTH OF FAVORABLE LOW-LEVEL MASS FIELDS. THEREFORE...ALTHOUGH SOME PORTION OF MID-SOUTH/DELTA/TN VALLEY REGIONS PROBABLY WILL NEED AT LEAST15%/SLGT-RISK AREA EVENTUALLY...IT IS TOO SOON TO ASSIGN UNCONDITIONAL 30% D5 LINE ATTM."

There are a whole bunch of things that have to happen at the right time and right place to even get a tornado outbreak, let alone one like we had this spring. It all bears watching, but doomsday speculation doesn't help anyone.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
So @ 2.8 mm sealevel rise per year= 1 ft. rise in 100 years. Unless,global warming increases it could accelerate at a much faster pace. I'll take an island in the South Pacific,where do I sign?
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting aburttschell:


Didn't the sea level actually decrease last year?



Nice graphic. I noticed that the past 19 years has shown a strong trend towards rising sea levels, along with its peaks and valleys during this time frame. A one year sampling, up or down, is not indicative of anything. The longer term trend, however, seems to be quite telling. What do you see in the long term trend as compared to any annual sampling?
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Things must be pretty grim in SW Reno this morning. I live in Truckee, about 10-15 miles upwind from the fire, and the gusts are quite strong. some shingles from my neighbor's roof just slammed into my house.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting aburttschell:


Didn't the sea level actually decrease last year?


Yes. As it decreased in 2007, and 2003, and 1999, and 1994...

Climate is about long-term trends, of course, and the blue line on the graph you showed indicates that trend. Month-to-month and year-to-year variations are just noise. So while the title above the chart says, "Global Sea Level Drops 6 mm in 2010", it could have just as correctly state, "Global Sea Level rises 50 mm since 1993" or "Global Sea Level Rises 2.8 mm per year".

Know what I mean? ;-)
Member Since: November 8, 2009 Posts: 4 Comments: 13611
Quoting aburttschell:


Didn't the sea level actually decrease last year?



Deja vu of early 1998?(Look what happened after)
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting chrisale:
I know... lets round up all of the Deniers and stick them on some Atoll in the Pacific that is eventually going to be swamped by rising sea levels due to climate change.

If they choose to accept reality, they can leave the Island. If not, they're left to fend for themselves. If they're right, they get to live on a beautiful Island for the rest of their lives. If they're not right, they eventually have to do the Polynesian thing and build an outrigger to save themselves.

It's sort of a reverse super-slow-motion Survivor.

Meanwhile, the rest of us can finally move on.


Reality being the sea level decreased last year??
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting chrisale:
I know... lets round up all of the Deniers and stick them on some Atoll in the Pacific that is eventually going to be swamped by rising sea levels due to climate change.


How 'bout a whole country? Nauru!
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting SPLbeater:


you mean, the april 14-16th outbreak? geez man...that thing destroyed half my town and crippled the Hardware stores. we had a 0.3 mile wide EF3 with winds estimated at 160mph devastate my county


Could very well be bad next weekend if everything comes together. I can tell you the heat will be there as it's been hiding here in FL all week with highs around 90 so yes the heat should be there and upper dynamics as well to create a mess from eastern TX east to the SE Coast. This heat across FL should come up and meet this next system over the Deep South.

Here's the system moving into TX come Sat.

Member Since: October 26, 2011 Posts: 0 Comments: 2651
I know... lets round up all of the Deniers and stick them on some Atoll in the Pacific that is eventually going to be swamped by rising sea levels due to climate change.

If they choose to accept reality, they can leave the Island. If not, they're left to fend for themselves. If they're right, they get to live on a beautiful Island for the rest of their lives. If they're not right, they eventually have to do the Polynesian thing and build an outrigger to save themselves.

It's sort of a reverse super-slow-motion Survivor.

Meanwhile, the rest of us can finally move on.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
What's funny is you never see an IPCC "expose" (seriously, noting that half a dozen lead authors in the IPCC were merely "recent PhD graduates" is an expose?) about how wrong the IPCC was on the Arctic sea ice extent predictions. Then again it's decreasing faster than IPCC predicted so that doesn't fit the pre-determined narrative of some news agencies.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Reno wildfire destroys homes, residents evacuated

RENO, Nev. (AP) – Police in Reno went house to house in the middle of the night, pounding on doors and telling residents they had to evacuate as a 400-acre blaze raged in rough terrain, destroyed homes and injured people.

Member Since: October 26, 2011 Posts: 0 Comments: 2651
Quoting StormTracker2K:
A very dangerous tornado outbreak is looming later next week into next weekend across the South. This could rival the outbreaks we had this past Spring.



you mean, the april 14-16th outbreak? geez man...that thing destroyed half my town and crippled the Hardware stores. we had a 0.3 mile wide EF3 with winds estimated at 160mph devastate my county
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
We could be talking about large wedge tornadoes if these models verify across the South. Very violent situation being depicted on the models as of late for late next week.

Member Since: October 26, 2011 Posts: 0 Comments: 2651
Here's the GFS below. This could be ugly!

Member Since: October 26, 2011 Posts: 0 Comments: 2651
The Caughlin Ranch Fire in Reno, fed by 70 mph wind gusts, has consumed at least 20 homes since last night, and several counties have declared a state of emergency. The high wind warning is in effect until late this afternoon. Reno Gazette Journal

Reno

Reno
Member Since: November 8, 2009 Posts: 4 Comments: 13611
Quoting calder:
American global warming deniers are absolutely hilarious. Real shame that your insular society brainwashes people.


then go ahead and laugh at me. 0.5 degrees in 50 years, will not change anything. that is an average. some areas go up in temp, others go down. yet MOST have seen a + in AVERAGE, which still doesnt mean much over that timespan
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
A very dangerous tornado outbreak is looming later next week into next weekend across the South. This could rival the outbreaks we had this past Spring.

Member Since: October 26, 2011 Posts: 0 Comments: 2651
Quoting Neapolitan:

It's already rising, of course. How deep does it have to get?

You certainly got that right.


Didn't the sea level actually decrease last year?

Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting JupiterKen:
16 - What? Your "fact" the IPCC was not backing down does not negate the "fact" that there were articles that said they were.
hey selective jabber... 'all of the articles' is the phrase post#16 has specifically cited in the initial fact/opinion finger wagging.. so if you are going to nitpick on this pointless semantic argument, perhaps you ought pay attention with a nitpickers eye.. and realize you fail to comprehend that indeed, "all of the articles" do not state a backing down.
-but these are just semantics... the Facts exists for the public to freely access and digest (or ignore)
Member Since: July 31, 2008 Posts: 0 Comments: 1320
Quoting Neapolitan:

It's already rising, of course. How deep does it have to get?



...and at the upper end of the range of predictions. I guess the earth is in on Gore's conspiracy, too.

Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting theamoeba:
I work at a place where people know all this (it's, to a big extent, our business) and still fill the parking lot every day. And pat me on the head when I walk, bike, or use the electric buggy (when it deigns to work). These same people wonder aloud how the AGW deniers can be so strong and persistent. If those in the know won't change their behavior to fit the facts ... ?!


I certainly share you sentiment. There does seem to be a cultural force behind this as well, however. We are such a road/commute-intensive society, it takes much effort to get mass transit going. Sidewalks in some communities do not connect enough for the natural form of transportation to be viable. The spending on infrastructure almost always favors highways/freeways. To get support to build light rail systems, it is always suggested that demand must be high enough such that ticket prices cover operating costs, while on the other hand highway maintenance is usually financed through tax dollars and not tolls.

It is quite interesting to watch the resistance to spending money on bringing back the New Orleans streetcars while in the back of my head knowing that the original streetcar system was orders of magnitude larger than the current one. Because of lowered demand for mass transit (and other potential corporate factors) in the 1930s, most of the tracks were destroyed.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting RitaEvac:
UN is weak, incompetent, and want one world government


That's snark, right?
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting surferjoe5899:
Yeah Ill be laughing in 40 years when all the GoreBull Warming believers are waiting for the water to rise with their foil hats on.

It's already rising, of course. How deep does it have to get?
Quoting surferjoe5899:
It's all about money and power.

You certainly got that right.
Member Since: November 8, 2009 Posts: 4 Comments: 13611
Quoting captainktainer:
On the one side: most of the scientific community, all but maybe four climatologists (and all of the actively publishing ones), the leaders of the world, and - most importantly of all - all of the available data.

On the other side: some guy named "surferjoe5899" who uses words like "GoreBull warming."

I wonder who has a more convincing argument?


The price of petrol/gasoline. :(
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
On the one side: most of the scientific community, all but maybe four climatologists (and all of the actively publishing ones), the leaders of the world, and - most importantly of all - all of the available data.

On the other side: some guy named "surferjoe5899" who uses words like "GoreBull warming."

I wonder who has a more convincing argument?
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
That's a pretty large circle...

1. A LARGE AREA OF CLOUDINESS AND SHOWERS OVER THE CENTRAL ATLANTIC
OCEAN ROUGHLY 900 MILES EAST AND NORTHEAST OF THE LEEWARD ISLANDS
IS ASSOCIATED WITH THE INTERACTION BETWEEN A SURFACE TROUGH...A
TROPICAL WAVE...AND AN UPPER-LEVEL LOW. SOME SLOW DEVELOPMENT IS
POSSIBLE AS THIS SYSTEM MOVES LITTLE OVER THE NEXT COUPLE OF
DAYS...AND IT HAS A LOW CHANCE...10 PERCENT...OF BECOMING A
SUBTROPICAL OR TROPICAL CYCLONE DURING THE NEXT 48 HOURS.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting SPLbeater:
Irene was surely extreme, dont care what noone say. i mean washing out a highway on NC outerbanks isnt normal
It happens throughout the history of the Outer Banks,the inlets open and close naturally . The only reason Oregon inlet stays open is because we dredge it.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
16 - What? Your "fact" the IPCC was not backing down does not negate the "fact" that there were articles that said they were.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
The growth of recycling, carbon reduction schemes etc. has been massive in the UK - perhaps the US should follow suit?
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
I work at a place where people know all this (it's, to a big extent, our business) and still fill the parking lot every day. And pat me on the head when I walk, bike, or use the electric buggy (when it deigns to work). These same people wonder aloud how the AGW deniers can be so strong and persistent. If those in the know won't change their behavior to fit the facts ... ?!
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
i really hated dirt soup when i was growing up.. maybe i might get stone soup soon,, if the power stays on,, and , just maybe , it might snow here
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting JupiterKen:


Why would one need to go through "thousands" of articles. The statement said IPCC "news". I also saw many such articles. Try to stick to facts and not opinions; not very "scientific".


The fact is that the IPCC has not backed down on climate change. It is still occurring, it is still very likely due to human activities, and most of the changes have occurred as fast or faster than predicted. This is not an opinion, this is the state of the science today.

If you are going to claim that "all of the articles say..." but didn't read all of the articles, then you have made an incorrect statement.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
American global warming deniers are absolutely hilarious. Real shame that your insular society brainwashes people.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Neapolitan:

Tucson Citizen isn't a news outlet, but rather "a compendium of personal blogs", so there's not much credibility there.


And even reading the article on the Tuscon Citizen it is clear that the author did not ask any actual scientist from the IPCC about the new report, let alone ask any scientist for an opinion about what it means.

He clearly doesn't understand the topic. He puts in bold the statement about climate variability overpowering the warming trend on short time-scales, as if this is some ground-breaking "released" data that let's the cat out of the bag. If he did understand the topic he was covering, he would know that this is in no way new... scientists have long discussed how climate variability (noise) is on top of the long term trend and analysis must be done to discern a trend from such data. This is also why you cannot discern the climate change trend from less than roughly 15yrs of data.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting ScottLincoln:


As an environmental scientist and someone who generally follows the developments of climate change and the IPCC reports, I can tell you that your suggestions have very little basis in reality. You even decided to claim "all the articles" - did you really go through the thousands of articles that likely arose from googling "IPCC?"


Why would one need to go through "thousands" of articles. The statement said IPCC "news". I also saw many such articles. Try to stick to facts and not opinions; not very "scientific".
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting SPLbeater:
Irene was surely extreme, dont care what noone say. i mean washing out a highway on NC outerbanks isnt normal


Roads being washed out is not exactly unusual for a hurricane, regardless of where it strikes. One cannot conclude much about extreme weather on a global scale by damage caused from one hurricane.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:

Viewing: 62 - 12

Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17Blog Index

Top of Page

About

Jeff co-founded the Weather Underground in 1995 while working on his Ph.D. He flew with the NOAA Hurricane Hunters from 1986-1990.

Local Weather

Scattered Clouds
54 °F
Scattered Clouds