click for full size interactive site
Source: Bloomberg Visual Data

Category: Digital Media, Research, Science

Please use the comments to demonstrate your own ignorance, unfamiliarity with empirical data and lack of respect for scientific knowledge. Be sure to create straw men and argue against things I have neither said nor implied. If you could repeat previously discredited memes or steer the conversation into irrelevant, off topic discussions, it would be appreciated. Lastly, kindly forgo all civility in your discourse . . . you are, after all, anonymous.

5 Responses to “Living With Extreme Weather”

  1. xynz says:

    Global warming denialists have been insisting that the recent spate of droughts and record high temperatures are simply due to natural Solar variance. Unfortunately for them (and the rest of us), the most recent “Solar Maximum” has been unusually quiet:

    “I’ve been a solar physicist for 30 years, and I’ve never seen anything quite like this,” says Richard Harrison, head of space physics at the Rutherford Appleton Laboratory in Oxfordshire.

    “If you want to go back to see when the Sun was this inactive… you’ve got to go back about 100 years,”

    The drop off in activity is happening surprisingly quickly, and scientists are now watching closely to see if it will continue to plummet. …..

    An analysis of ice-cores, which hold a long-term record of solar activity, suggests the decline in activity is the fastest that has been seen in 10,000 years.


  2. Francois says:

    In climate science and policy circles, this is what we call stating the obvious.

    For those who would not be aware of the obvious, here is a short refresher, courtesy of 15 US military top ranked officers and defense officials:

    Thomas Fingar, former chairman of President Bush’s National Intelligence Council: “We judge global climate change will have wide-ranging implications for US national security interests over the next 20 years … We judge that the most significant impact for the United States will be indirect and result from climate-driven effects on many other countries and their potential to seriously affect US national security interests.”

    Brig. General Steven Anderson, USA (Ret.), former Chief of Logistics under General Petraeus and a self-described “conservative Republican”: “Our oil addiction, I believe, is our greatest threat to our national security. Not just foreign oil but oil in general. Because I believe that in CO2 emissions and climate change and the instability that that all drives, I think that that increases the likelihood there will be conflicts in which American soldiers are going to have to fight and die somewhere.”

    Leon Panetta, Secretary of Defense: “[T]he area of climate change has a dramatic impact on national security: rising sea levels, to severe droughts, to the melting of the polar caps, to more frequent and devastating natural disasters all raise demand for humanitarian assistance and disaster relief.”

    Robert Gates, former Secretary of Defense: “Over the next 20 years and more, certain pressures-population, energy, climate, economic, environmental-could combine with rapid cultural, social, and technological change to produce new sources of deprivation, rage, and instability.”

    General Gordon Sullivan, USA (Ret.), former Army chief of staff: “Climate change is a national security issue. We found that climate instability will lead to instability in geopolitics and impact American military operations around the world.”

    Vice Admiral Dennis McGinn, USN (Ret.): “If the destabilizing effects of climate change go unchecked, we can expect more frequent, widespread, and intense failed state scenarios creating large scale humanitarian disasters and higher potential for conflict and terrorism … The Department of Defense and national intelligence communities recognize this clear link between climate change, national security, and instability and have begun strategic plans and programs to both mitigate and adapt to the most likely and serious effects in key areas around the globe.”

    General Anthony Zinni, USMC (Ret.), former Commander-in-Chief of U.S. Central Command and special envoy to Israel and Palestine under President George W. Bush: “It’s not hard to make the connection between climate change and instability, or climate change and terrorism.”
    Admiral Joseph Lopez, USN (Ret.): “Climate change will provide the conditions that will extend the war on terror.”

    General Chuck Wald, USAF (Ret.), former Deputy Commander of U.S. European Command under President George W. Bush: “People can say what they want to about whether they think climate change is manmade or not, but there’s a problem there and the military is going to be a part of the solution. It’s a national security issue because it affects the stability of certain places in the world.”

    Brig. General Bob Barnes, USA (Ret.): “While most people associate global warming with droughts, rising sea levels, declining food production, species extinction and habitat destruction, fewer connect these impacts to increasing instability around the globe and the resulting threats to our national security. But the connection – and the threat it poses – is real and growing.”

    Vice Admiral Richard Truly, USN (Ret.), former NASA administrator: “The stresses that climate change will put on our national security will be different than any we’ve dealt with in the past.”

    General Paul Kern, USA (Ret.), Commander of the United States Army Materiel Command under President George W. Bush: “Military planning should view climate change as a threat to the balance of energy access, water supplies, and a healthy environment, and it should require a response.’

    Lt. General Lawrence Farrell, USAF (Ret.): “The planning we do that goes into organizing, training, and equipping our military considers all the risks that we may face. And one of the risks we see right now is climate change.”

    Admiral John Nathman, USN (Ret.), former Commander of the U.S. Fleet Forces Command under President George W. Bush: “There are serious risks to doing nothing about climate change. We can pay now or we’re going to pay a whole lot later. The U.S. has a unique opportunity to become energy independent, protect our national security and boost our economy while reducing our carbon footprint. We’ve been a model of success for the rest of the world in the past and now we must lead the way on climate change.”

    Vice Admiral Lee Gunn, USN (Ret.): “The national security community is rightly worried about climate change because of the magnitude of its expected impacts around the globe, even in our own country … Climate change poses a clear and present danger to the United States of America. But if we respond appropriately, I believe we will enhance our security, not simply by averting the worst climate change impacts, but by spurring a new energy revolution.”

    • theexpertisin says:

      Maybe we need a George Patton shouting “Screw this. I don’t give a rat’s ass about problems out of my realm. My job is to kill the enemy and win wars, – which we have fucked up for the most part since WW2, not pansy-ass on sunspots and carbon dioxide with you over paid, group think lemmings.”

      Eccentric contrary thinkers have won wars and saved nations from themselves, at great personal cost. They should not be outcast as a freak show.

  3. Lyle says:

    The issue of what is extreme weather somewhat depends on the time frame one uses to measure. For example from 1950 to 1972 I lived in the north and some of the reports today remind me of that time. In addition a report from Fort Wayne In, said the recent cold snap was comparable to one in 1978. (Also at that time in MI they had to get the national guard out to get the streets clear). Now if I recall some of the stories my Grandfather told about winters in the 1890-1910 period in Iowa where he said they had to dig snow tunnels to get out things are not that bad).
    But more generally and in more things that the weather the question is what is a long enough period to observe things, is 30 years (the weather definition of normals) enough?
    Of course the same is also true of economics, since on of the causes of the recent troubles was thinking that events that happened in the 1930s could never happen again with respect to house prices.
    In the financial case at least the troubles started when those who had directly experienced or heard first hand about the events (Greatest Generation and earlier) left the scene, and knowledge of the events was second hand at best.

  4. Mr.-Vix-It says:

    I believe global warming is happening and that it will get worse. Down the road a few years, everyone will talk about “climate departure” which is being used now by those closest to the issue. That said, I always question everything as it is in my nature. Are those living through extreme weather today biased and is that bias amplified by the pervasive media? For those that lived in past centuries when measurement was less accurate or non-existent along with media being non-existent in relation to today, would they have experienced extreme weather events comparable to today at about the same rate and intensity? Finally, the contrarian in me always considers the opposite of whatever the masses believe which would be global cooling? Is the world getting colder and is this why the solar maximum was the lowest in a long time and most of the country froze?

    I have lived in California almost my entire life and have experienced droughts here before but have never experienced a January where almost every day was 70 degrees or warmer. Very strange while the rest of the country freezes. Ultimately, the answer to the question of global warming will be known within a few decades and perhaps sooner based on an exponential progression rather than a linear progression. This is why if global warming is true, the sea level rise will be much more drastic and quicker than the average estimates you see for the end of this century. People always underestimate the power of negative/positive feedback loops…