Don’t Call It Climate Change. Red States Prepare For ‘Extreme Weather’

[Harpy Eagle]

It is a FACT... that in the 1960s - 70s - a coming Ice Age was the rage.

Not really accurate. This got a few magazine covers, but the majority of the science was just the opposite was going to happen.

By the mid 70s - Acid Rain is going to kill all vegetation in the Northern Hemisphere

And it was not made a political issue and people changed, we cleaned up the air by cutting the pollution that was causing the acid rain. Sadly today we would not be able to do that, we would just sit on our sides and throw shit at each other like monkeys.

 

[ding]

The right is waking up to the reality of climate change.

However since they spent a couple of decades saying it was all a hoax and not real, the republican politicians are now having to use the words" extreme weather."

No matter what terminology they use, they are finally waking up to the reality of it and finally taking some steps to combat the effects of climate change.

The sad thing, we never would have had to do this if the right had not spent so much time denying it's happening and actually took steps to combat it we wouldn't be in the situation we're in now.

It's going to cost much more and we will have to take more steps to combat it since it was allowed to get so bad.

I sure wish the right had woken up decades ago to this problem. It wouldn't be as bad as it is now.

That half a billion that DeSantis is going to spend isn't federal tax dollars. It's state tax dollars which means the state of Florida is going to have to raise taxes in some way soon.

They will probably do as they have been doing with taxes for decades.

Hit the guests who go there as tourists. The last time I was in Florida there were FIVE separate taxes on hotels and car rentals. While the taxes on the people who live there are very low.

The last thing a republican is going to do is be responsible and pay their own way.

So don't be surprised if it's much more expensive to visit Florida than it already is.

Don’t call it climate change. Red states prepare for ‘extreme weather’

Bracing for global warming is the rare climate issue that appeals to both Republicans and Democrats, and 34 states have done some sort of climate-adaptation planning.

www.politico.com

When you can tell me why we shouldn't expect increasing temperatures when our present temperature is still 2C below the peak temperature of previous interglacial cycles, let me know.

When you can show me an experiment that quantified the radiative forcing of CO2 increasing from 300 ppm to 420 ppm, let me know.

When you can tell me why the planet transitioned from a greenhouse planet to an icehouse planet, let me know.

When you can tell me why the southern hemisphere has a higher temperature threshold for extensive continental glaciation than the northern hemisphere does, let me know.

When you can tell me why the warmest global temperatures occur when the northern hemisphere receives the most sunshine, let me know.

When you can tell me why the coldest average temperatures occur when the northern hemisphere receives the least sun light, let me know.

When you can tell me why the planet experienced increased climate fluctuations and environmental uncertainty after it transitioned from a greenhouse world to an icehouse world, let me know.

Because until YOU can answer these questions you don't know jack shit about earth's climate. And you will never understand why I question the psuedo-science that is masquerading as science.

 

[rightwinger]

Well then you better nuke Beijing because they aren't listening.

China s making major changes to their energy consumption. They have to.

They are also leading the world on alternate energy R&D
A field we have neglected

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

We need to do both

We don't have any choice but to adapt. That is not an idea. That is a non-idea and is non-action.

 

[justoffal]

Then step out of the nutjob blogosphere for a moment and read the IPCC report.

Oh yes the ipcc. International Profiteering Cackling Crooks!
How are they doing these days?

 

[justoffal]

We don't have any choice but to adapt. That is not an idea. That is a non-idea and is non-action.

You don't have any choice but to accept the China is completing two large coal-fired plants per week every week and have stepped up their coal usage nearly 200% in the past 5 years.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Haha, that's code for "do nothing, then react." You can keep that idea. Which isn't even an idea, really.

Nope, it is code for quit making it political and act now.

One example being...Over the last 20 years the amount of rainfall in the mid-west has not really changed, but how it comes has.

The old climate it fell spread out over 15 to 20 days a month, now it comes in 5 to 7 days with longer in-between.

Thus many operations in the area have added irrigation and tiling to mitigate the changes to the climate.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Oh yes the ipcc. International Profiteering Cackling Crooks!
How are they doing these days?

You embarrass yourself. They make no profit. And you just provided a fine example of the stupidity we were talking about a few minutes ago. Thanks.

 

[justoffal]

You embarrass yourself. They make no profit. And you just provided a fine example of the stupidity we were talking about a few minutes ago. Thanks.

Lol....bullllllshit... There is not a single official agency out there that is not completely corrupted with illegitimate money the ipcc is no exception.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

You don't have any choice but to accept the China is completing two large coal-fired plants per week every week and have stepped up their coal usage nearly 200% in the past 5 years.

Yes I know. Do you think you make any point, other than shitting on something you don't understand? You do not.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Lol....bullllllshit

See? Delusional fool rigging up a game for himself. Cry about alarmists, then also cry about the base science. You are full of shit on this topic and know nothing about it.

 

[justoffal]

China s making major changes to their energy consumption. They have to.

They are also leading the world on alternate energy R&D
A field we have neglected

China Is doing nothing but laughing at everybody else. They can change anything they want to change they are single-handedly driving the CO2 contributions above and beyond anything that has ever been done before and they are showing absolutely no signs of stopping.

 

[ding]

Yet, strangely, science from around the world concurs that we are suffering from man made climate change and we need to do something about it.

The only ones objecting are conservatives and Big Oil

Scientists come to opposite conclusions about the causes of recent climate change depending on which datasets they consider. For instance, the panels on the left lead to the conclusion that global temperature changes since the mid-19th century have been mostly due to human-caused emissions, especially carbon dioxide (CO2), i.e., the conclusion reached by the UN IPCC reports. In contrast, the panels on the right lead to the exact opposite conclusion, i.e., that the global temperature changes since the mid-19th century have been mostly due to natural cycles, chiefly long-term changes in the energy emitted by the Sun.

Both sets of panels are based on published scientific data, but each uses different datasets and assumptions. On the left, it is assumed that the available temperature records are unaffected by the urban heat island problem, and so all stations are used, whether urban or rural. On the right, only rural stations are used. Meanwhile, on the left, solar output is modeled using the low variability dataset that has been chosen for the IPCC’s upcoming (in 2021/2022) 6th Assessment Reports. This implies zero contribution from natural factors to the long-term warming. On the right, solar output is modeled using a high variability dataset used by the team in charge of NASA’s ACRIM sun-monitoring satellites. This implies that most, if not all, of the long-term temperature changes are due to natural factors.

Here is the link to the full paper.
ShieldSquare Captcha

 

[justoffal]

Yes I know. Do you think you make any point, other than shitting on something you don't understand? You do not.

I understand it perfectly well. You confuse misunderstanding with disagreement. I do not agree with you therefore you assume I do not understand.... that is called arrogance.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

So the question is….How fast?

Whether the effects are catastrophic in 20 years or 100 years, we still need to take action…NOW

But is it?
You are missing the point.
The problem with the alarmist is they have been crying wolf for 70 years. The earth should have ended like 5 times by now.
Even the most recent claims, with all of the modern technology and knowledge - NONE have come true.
That is the problem. You can't blame people for raising their eyebrows over yet - another claim.
There are many environmental problems today. MANY. Most are not "climate change" related. Most are diminishing resources, pollution and misplaced resources. If we concentrated on the real issues that are right in our face - we would solve everything else.

 

[justoffal]

Scientists come to opposite conclusions about the causes of recent climate change depending on which datasets they consider. For instance, the panels on the left lead to the conclusion that global temperature changes since the mid-19th century have been mostly due to human-caused emissions, especially carbon dioxide (CO2), i.e., the conclusion reached by the UN IPCC reports. In contrast, the panels on the right lead to the exact opposite conclusion, i.e., that the global temperature changes since the mid-19th century have been mostly due to natural cycles, chiefly long-term changes in the energy emitted by the Sun.

Both sets of panels are based on published scientific data, but each uses different datasets and assumptions. On the left, it is assumed that the available temperature records are unaffected by the urban heat island problem, and so all stations are used, whether urban or rural. On the right, only rural stations are used. Meanwhile, on the left, solar output is modeled using the low variability dataset that has been chosen for the IPCC’s upcoming (in 2021/2022) 6th Assessment Reports. This implies zero contribution from natural factors to the long-term warming. On the right, solar output is modeled using a high variability dataset used by the team in charge of NASA’s ACRIM sun-monitoring satellites. This implies that most, if not all, of the long-term temperature changes are due to natural factors.

Here is the link to the full paper.
ShieldSquare Captcha

In the meantime everyone continues to ignore the fact that the sun continues to move into higher energy stages with every day that passes. Ultimately the sun will create our death by heat. There is no debate about this.

 

[Flash]

I've lived in Florida most of my life. We prepare for "extreme weather" every year.

My in laws live in Northern Indiana and they prepare for extreme weather every year.

Those are both Red States. Is that what you are talking about?

 

[ding]

I think there is a degree of climate changes that are the result of mankind.

Yes, the urban heat island effect and deforestation. Those are real.

 

[ding]

In the meantime everyone continues to ignore the fact that the sun continues to move into higher energy stages with every day that passes. Ultimately the sun will create our death by heat. There is no debate about this.

Speaking of the sun....

Nicola Scafetta, Professor of Oceanography and Atmospheric Physics at the University of Naples Federico II (Italy): “The possible contribution of the sun to the 20th-century global warming greatly depends on the specific solar and climatic records that are adopted for the analysis. The issue is crucial because the current claim of the IPCC that the sun has had a negligible effect on the post-industrial climate warming is only based on global circulation model predictions that are compared against climatic records, which are likely affected by non-climatic warming biases (such as those related to the urbanization), and that are produced using solar forcing functions, which are obtained with total solar irradiance records that present the smallest secular variability (while ignoring the solar studies pointing to a much larger solar variability that show also a different modulation that better correlates with the climatic ones). The consequence of such an approach is that the natural component of climate change is minimized, while the anthropogenic one is maximized."

Gregory Henry, Senior Research Scientist in Astronomy, from Tennessee State University’s Center of Excellence in Information Systems (U.S.A.): “During the past three decades, I have acquired highly precise measurements of brightness changes in over 300 Sun-like stars with a fleet of robotic telescopes developed for this purpose. The data show that, as Sun-like stars age, their rotation slows, and thus their magnetic activity and brightness variability decrease. Stars similar in age and mass to our Sun show brightness changes comparable to the Sun’s and would be expected to affect climate change in their own planetary systems.”

Valery M. Fedorov, at the Faculty of Geography in Lomonosov Moscow State University, Russia: “The study of global climate change critically needs an analytical review of scientific studies of solar radiation variations associated with the Earth's orbital motion that could help to determine the role and contributions of solar radiation variations of different physical natures to long-term climate changes.

Richard C. Willson, Principal Investigator in charge of NASA’s ACRIM series of Sun-monitoring Total Solar Irradiance satellite experiments (U.S.A.):
“Contrary to the findings of the IPCC, scientific observations in recent decades have demonstrated that there is no ‘climate change crisis’. The concept that’s devolved into the failed CO2 anthropogenic global warming (CAGW) hypothesis is based on the flawed predictions of imprecise 1980’s vintage global circulation models that have failed to match observational data both since and prior to their fabrication. The Earth’s climate is determined primarily by the radiation it receives from the Sun. The amount of solar radiation the Earth receives has natural variabilities caused by both variations in the intrinsic amount of radiation emitted by the Sun and by variations in the Earth-Sun geometry caused by planetary rotational and orbital variations. Together these natural variations cause the Total Solar Irradiance (TSI) at the Earth to vary cyclically on a number of known periodicities that are synchronized with known past climatic changes.”

Willie Soon, at the Center for Environmental Research and Earth Sciences (CERES), who also has been researching sun/climate relationships at the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics (U.S.A.) since 1991: “We know that the Sun is the primary source of energy for the Earth’s atmosphere. So, it always was an obvious potential contributor to recent climate change. My own research over the last 31 years into the behavior of stars that are similar to our Sun, shows that solar variability is the norm, not the exception. For this reason, the Sun’s role in recent climate change should never have been as systematically undermined as it was by the IPCC’s reports.

 

[Dekster]

The right is waking up to the reality of climate change.

However since they spent a couple of decades saying it was all a hoax and not real, the republican politicians are now having to use the words" extreme weather."

No matter what terminology they use, they are finally waking up to the reality of it and finally taking some steps to combat the effects of climate change.

The sad thing, we never would have had to do this if the right had not spent so much time denying it's happening and actually took steps to combat it we wouldn't be in the situation we're in now.

It's going to cost much more and we will have to take more steps to combat it since it was allowed to get so bad.

I sure wish the right had woken up decades ago to this problem. It wouldn't be as bad as it is now.

That half a billion that DeSantis is going to spend isn't federal tax dollars. It's state tax dollars which means the state of Florida is going to have to raise taxes in some way soon.

They will probably do as they have been doing with taxes for decades.

Hit the guests who go there as tourists. The last time I was in Florida there were FIVE separate taxes on hotels and car rentals. While the taxes on the people who live there are very low.

The last thing a republican is going to do is be responsible and pay their own way.

So don't be surprised if it's much more expensive to visit Florida than it already is.

Don’t call it climate change. Red states prepare for ‘extreme weather’

Bracing for global warming is the rare climate issue that appeals to both Republicans and Democrats, and 34 states have done some sort of climate-adaptation planning.

www.politico.com

I like that it hasn't been triple digits in forever here in my corner of the midatlantic. When I was a kid, we could have days of it. If global warming is making it less extreme, I am all fer it.