Probably not as much as the warm mongers want us to believe.
24 thoughts on ““Extreme” Weather”
“How extreme can it get? Probably not as much as the warm mongers want us to believe.” This kind of thing makes me nervous. I ignore what the warm mongers want me to believe. And yet, I believe that mankind is fully capable of messing up this planet but good, in a number of different ways. Running a massive experiment on the Earth’s atmosphere seems like a poor idea – all other things being equal, which generally aren’t. It’s hard for me to understand a knee-jerk response, mostly based on, If those Green guys say something I’m going to say the opposite.
On the other hand, those Green Guys obviously make it very difficult, as their goal is to cripple Western civilization. Hard to work with.
My argument isn’t from contrarianism, but basic physics.
Well, I think Judith Curry, at least, agrees with me. She has said a number of times that Black Swan climate impacts are very poorly understood, and she doesn’t at all trust the IPCC’s conclusions that they are unlikely, any more than she trusts its conclusions on climate sensitivity. Which doesn’t make them likely, it means that we just don’t have a clue what might happen.
Not that I see much alternative to adapting as best we can. China isn’t going to stop burning coal anytime soon, regardless of what the delusional think.
The list of catastrophes that could conceivably occur from whatever source is endless. It is foolish to worry about hypothetical problems over which we have no control, either because we do not understand the mechanisms or, as you say, we cannot gain broad enough support for action in any event.
There are plenty of other problems we can do something about.
What’s that song by Rush that goes, “If you choose not to choose, you still have made a choice”? If you choose not to “experiment”, you are still carrying out an experiment. That experiment however, of reducing our energy consumption and observing our collective standard of living plunge, has a definite outcome: widespread poverty and death.
The experiment which involves carrying on our current energy path, on the other hand, has no verifiable severe effects (beyond ordinary pollution, which is what our dollars ought to be directed towards abating), and many beneficial ones.
The US has made great strides in reducing pollution. I’m 57 and remember severe pollution from my childhood. The EPA did remarkable work in its first decade towards reducing that pollution. Today, in an effort to remain relevant, the EPA is well past the point of diminishing returns for most of the regulations it issues.
Much of the pollution produced today is outside the US. When I visited Bejing and Saigon, the pollution levels were actually painful. I don’t think it’s the role of US taxpayers to reduce pollution in other countries but we can sell them the technology to reduce their emissions. I read a few years ago that China was bringing online new coal powered powerplants every week. We could cut our CO2 and pollution emissions radically and it still wouldn’t make up for what countries like China and India are producing.
+1
I don’t know about those “Green Guys”, but, the goals of my friends is to make
western civilization a whole lot better. 4o years of the Clean Air Act, and the
skies over most american cities are pretty good. Sure we get the occasional ozone alert
and Denver and LA still get inversions, but, we are at a B- on particulates and CO and Nitrogen oxides.
The hardcore right turns a blind eye to Shanghai and Beijing, where you can go weeks without seeing the sun, let alone the stars.
Yes, it’s going to take work and capital to build Energy storage, Electrical management and learn how to live with noisy power sources like wind and PV, but, PV is getting cheaper every day, Wind is getting cheaper every day and Electric Vehicles are getting cheaper and better.
Conservatives are howling over Incandescent light bulbs while the Techno-hippies have rolled out LED lights.
I happen to really like the LED lights in our living room.
Spend some time hanging around the EV car community, it’s mostly a bunch of techno-geeks who hate oil companies. I can’t speak for every conservative, but, the bulk of them are all goo-goo over coal and Oil which are 19th century fuels. Edison and Tesla wanted to harness the power of the sun, and we are doing it, safely, cleanly and economically.
Hey DN, I have an idea.
Why don’t YOU create a wonderful system that doesn’t rely on coal, instead of bossing other people around?
Guess that’s too hard. Easier to meddle.
The best way to get these innovative products to market is to allow the entrepreneurial spirit to thrive.
Would you high IQ regulation wonks have thought of this?
Did you not read Larry J’s comment above?
Whenever I hear people talk about extreme weather and climate change they’re saying “increase in the number of extreme weather events” not “increase in the intensity of extreme weather events”.
You haven’t heard the insanity about Cat 6 hurricanes?
Nope, maybe I lead a sheltered life, or read less fiction than you?
I contacted Chris Vaccaro, director of the National Weather Service’s office of public affairs, and asked him whether the National Hurricane Center is about to unveil the doomsday Category 6. In less than 10 minutes, he fired back this response:
“No, we’re not pursuing any such change. I’m also not sure who VP Gore means by “they.” I’d also point out that the top rating, Category 5, has no ceiling: it includes hurricanes with top sustained winds of 157mph and higher”
Reality has a well known liberal bias.
What an idiotic statement.
Can I mombo dogface in the banana patch?
Just as useless.
Over the last five years we have seen liberal ideology crash and wreck against the wall of reality.
In 1876 in Bath County Kentucky it rained meat, a lot of meat. Samples were sent off (which turned out to be muscle and lung tissue), and it got reported in the New York Times. Various theories were proposed, ranging from a large flock of puking buzzards to Earth-crossing space meat. I don’t think the statistical probability of meat showers has been looked at sufficiently by the IPCC, but it probably will be included in AR6.
“How extreme can it get? Probably not as much as the warm mongers want us to believe.” This kind of thing makes me nervous. I ignore what the warm mongers want me to believe. And yet, I believe that mankind is fully capable of messing up this planet but good, in a number of different ways. Running a massive experiment on the Earth’s atmosphere seems like a poor idea – all other things being equal, which generally aren’t. It’s hard for me to understand a knee-jerk response, mostly based on, If those Green guys say something I’m going to say the opposite.
On the other hand, those Green Guys obviously make it very difficult, as their goal is to cripple Western civilization. Hard to work with.
My argument isn’t from contrarianism, but basic physics.
Well, I think Judith Curry, at least, agrees with me. She has said a number of times that Black Swan climate impacts are very poorly understood, and she doesn’t at all trust the IPCC’s conclusions that they are unlikely, any more than she trusts its conclusions on climate sensitivity. Which doesn’t make them likely, it means that we just don’t have a clue what might happen.
Not that I see much alternative to adapting as best we can. China isn’t going to stop burning coal anytime soon, regardless of what the delusional think.
The list of catastrophes that could conceivably occur from whatever source is endless. It is foolish to worry about hypothetical problems over which we have no control, either because we do not understand the mechanisms or, as you say, we cannot gain broad enough support for action in any event.
There are plenty of other problems we can do something about.
What’s that song by Rush that goes, “If you choose not to choose, you still have made a choice”? If you choose not to “experiment”, you are still carrying out an experiment. That experiment however, of reducing our energy consumption and observing our collective standard of living plunge, has a definite outcome: widespread poverty and death.
The experiment which involves carrying on our current energy path, on the other hand, has no verifiable severe effects (beyond ordinary pollution, which is what our dollars ought to be directed towards abating), and many beneficial ones.
The US has made great strides in reducing pollution. I’m 57 and remember severe pollution from my childhood. The EPA did remarkable work in its first decade towards reducing that pollution. Today, in an effort to remain relevant, the EPA is well past the point of diminishing returns for most of the regulations it issues.
Much of the pollution produced today is outside the US. When I visited Bejing and Saigon, the pollution levels were actually painful. I don’t think it’s the role of US taxpayers to reduce pollution in other countries but we can sell them the technology to reduce their emissions. I read a few years ago that China was bringing online new coal powered powerplants every week. We could cut our CO2 and pollution emissions radically and it still wouldn’t make up for what countries like China and India are producing.
+1
I don’t know about those “Green Guys”, but, the goals of my friends is to make
western civilization a whole lot better. 4o years of the Clean Air Act, and the
skies over most american cities are pretty good. Sure we get the occasional ozone alert
and Denver and LA still get inversions, but, we are at a B- on particulates and CO and Nitrogen oxides.
The hardcore right turns a blind eye to Shanghai and Beijing, where you can go weeks without seeing the sun, let alone the stars.
Yes, it’s going to take work and capital to build Energy storage, Electrical management and learn how to live with noisy power sources like wind and PV, but, PV is getting cheaper every day, Wind is getting cheaper every day and Electric Vehicles are getting cheaper and better.
Conservatives are howling over Incandescent light bulbs while the Techno-hippies have rolled out LED lights.
I happen to really like the LED lights in our living room.
Spend some time hanging around the EV car community, it’s mostly a bunch of techno-geeks who hate oil companies. I can’t speak for every conservative, but, the bulk of them are all goo-goo over coal and Oil which are 19th century fuels. Edison and Tesla wanted to harness the power of the sun, and we are doing it, safely, cleanly and economically.
Hey DN, I have an idea.
Why don’t YOU create a wonderful system that doesn’t rely on coal, instead of bossing other people around?
Guess that’s too hard. Easier to meddle.
The best way to get these innovative products to market is to allow the entrepreneurial spirit to thrive.
Your side is killing it.
http://www.amazon.com/Best-Sellers-Home-Improvement-LED-Bulbs/zgbs/hi/2314207011
all these appear to be innovative and on the market.
If they’re so wonderful, then why do we need laws to get people to produce or buy them, Mister Moron?
Have you noticed the new regulations that are killing small businesses?
Here ya go, regulatory genius:
Tesla releasing patents
Would you high IQ regulation wonks have thought of this?
Did you not read Larry J’s comment above?
Whenever I hear people talk about extreme weather and climate change they’re saying “increase in the number of extreme weather events” not “increase in the intensity of extreme weather events”.
You haven’t heard the insanity about Cat 6 hurricanes?
Nope, maybe I lead a sheltered life, or read less fiction than you?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/capital-weather-gang/wp/2013/08/22/the-category-6-hurricane-al-gores-science-fiction/
I contacted Chris Vaccaro, director of the National Weather Service’s office of public affairs, and asked him whether the National Hurricane Center is about to unveil the doomsday Category 6. In less than 10 minutes, he fired back this response:
“No, we’re not pursuing any such change. I’m also not sure who VP Gore means by “they.” I’d also point out that the top rating, Category 5, has no ceiling: it includes hurricanes with top sustained winds of 157mph and higher”
Reality has a well known liberal bias.
What an idiotic statement.
Can I mombo dogface in the banana patch?
Just as useless.
Over the last five years we have seen liberal ideology crash and wreck against the wall of reality.
In 1876 in Bath County Kentucky it rained meat, a lot of meat. Samples were sent off (which turned out to be muscle and lung tissue), and it got reported in the New York Times. Various theories were proposed, ranging from a large flock of puking buzzards to Earth-crossing space meat. I don’t think the statistical probability of meat showers has been looked at sufficiently by the IPCC, but it probably will be included in AR6.