Rain and Climate

Anyone ever hear about Global Dimming? It is another man-made companion global problem that oddly enough counter-balances Global warming but is equally as harmful to mankind… look it up.

Where there is no rain (forest fires in several states) that is a sure sign of global warming. Where the same rain that did not fall in those states, is falling and causing floods, that, of course, is also a sure sign of global warming.
Anyone with any serious scientific training in stupidology will clearly see that we have a serious global rise in ChickenLittleitis on a global scale. Run for your life! Cluck, cluck!

Computer models huh? Just because you solve a few differential equations on a computer it is supposed to imply that you are getting the TRUTH? Unless you can start predicting the future (as opposed to “predicting” the past) SUCCESSFULLY AND REPEATEDLY it is not science, it is simply religion/politics. I think the wall-street modelers have finally moved over to modeling weather. You get paid no matter whether you are right or wrong because average person thinks sophisticated (i.e., 17th century math) and computers can’t be wrong.
Incidentally, liberals think global warming is man-made and conservatives think it is not man-made. So that is how far this “science” has come. Of course there is no conservative and liberal branches of quantum mechanics or newtons laws. Is there? Because they are SCIENCE not religion or politics.
Just getting irritated by these extreme hippies. And a note against conservatives: Just because we are not causing global warming does not mean we should force ourselves to be energy inefficient or cause other sorts of pollution. Can we get a little balanced thought from the media please?

Isn’t it interesting that the authors
note: –Weather is not climate, so it’s dangerous to say the bad rains today are necessarily connected with global changes.
What are “bad rains” versus “good rains?

I’m not a scientist but I am a thinker; Like humans, the dinosaurs grew into huge numbers during their time and I wonder if they effected their environment too? The great herds of herbivores would have created large amounts of greenhouse gasses. Maybe climate change is an unavoidable part of evolution itself? Creatures with walnuts for brains managed to survive over 300 million years, I can only hope humans can adjust and survive too.

The human cost of global climate change will mostly be borne those poor countries unable to adjust their infrastructure to climate changes, many of whom will suffer more drought. The advanced nations of the West and Asia will be more likely to handle this. Of course, there will be a lot of hardship in the US anyway. I spend a lot of time at the shore and the rates of loss are alarming, even in my short memory.
So it’s a moral imperative that we adopt lower-energy lifestyles, which also happen to be good for the bottom line. If you’re not alarmed by the rise in your utility bills recently, than you are very rich indeed. I’m lucky. Living in NYC I take the subway to work everyday, saving huge amounts of money, plus I get to read.

Ever heard of quantum mechanics? It is all probabilities (not wave functions) that are observed. And of course they have been predicted up to the 10^-19 decimal place using “probabilities” (a la Q.E.D.). Those are PREDICTIONS using statistics. Of course your high school level math is not cutting it anymore.
Btw, which mutual fund company is beating the market every quarter using quantitative analysis? Ever heard of LTCM?? These monte carlo based simulations went from Physics (SCIENCE) to dummies at wall street and now to same caliber people in weather “science”.
Of course, liberals will keep calling random “forecasting” a science without ever bothering to check if they can predict a damn thing in the future correctly (eg trajectory, frequency of hurricanes, El Nino). Have fun selling your idiotic propaganda.

Someone said …
“In science, statistical models are used to FORECAST the likelihood of an event happening”
So, when you are typing your messages were you forecasting that the exact message would be entered the way you typed and then transmitted from your computer over to the server hosting this blog and appear to other users? You don’t believe there are any certainties I take it as in math or computer languages or physics of computer hardware? Should we change newton’s laws to Newton’s Forecasts?

The weather in Arkansas has been cooler than normal and wet….we’ve not seen the rain to the extent that northern Texas and parts of Oklahoma saw, but we had a lot during June/July, the river is just now below flood stage after weeks of being over. We’ve gone over a week now without rain, but the temps are staying in the lower 90′s, as compared to over 100 in past years during July. I think that our weather changes are proof of global warming to an extent, and I also think they are proof of evolution. Our planet is changing…it just doesn’t change “overnight”, which in God’s terms may be 4 or 5 generations in people terms…who knows what His schedule for change is? Anyway, we should conserve, we should preserve, but we cannot change the fact that the world is evolving around us, we will just have to adapt or go like the dinosaurs did.

(I personally remain optimistic. I think there’s plenty of opportunities to slow this down and eventually reverse it. People just have have to adjust their lifestyles. Did our forefathers have air conditioners? Shopping malls? SUVS? Nope….and they did pretty well.)

Hmmm. But even the forecasters get it right once in a while, with or without valid science to back them up. Just because a forecast or prediction based on some scientific understanding may not be correct all the time, is that any justification for ignoring it completely, especially if it is related to the potential death of our species and the entire planet due to global warming? It just doesn’t make sense. I don’t care if you’re liberal or conservative, if the weather report says it’s going to rain buckets tomorrow, you’re going to take an umbrella with you, aren’t you? And when it doesn’t rain, what happens? You sigh in relief and thank the heanevs for another nice day. Why then do people take such a polarized view on global warming when the rationale behind it is exactly the same? Whether you believe the science or not, wouldn’t it be better to err on the side of caution and do something about it now when we still have a chance to correct things instead of waiting until the damage and devastation is potentially irreversible, and we all die? Frankly, anyone who chooses to do nothing about their carbon footprint given all of the SCIENCE regarding our excessive pollution on this planet is just being selfish, greedy and LAZY, which just happens to typify the entire so-called Conservative agenda these days. Expend the least amount of effort possible to make the most amount of money at the expense of others that are less fortunate than ourselves. Come on, people. It’s time to wake up. Stop thinking about yourself for once and do something to contribute to the greater good of humanity, no matter what your political bias is. This kind of change has to come from EVERYONE, not just the poor or the rich, who we’ve seen throughout history don’t like to do anything unless they’re sufficiently motivated, which usually requires the use of guns or guillotines.

Yes this is great, another scientist who draws a conclusion then finds data to support their argument.
How many times does science have to change their thinking over the years before people stop accepting science at face value. The climate change is nothing new, and doesn’t have anything to do with “our footprint.”

The are only two reasons why anthropogenic global warming is “contentious:” special interest investment in the causes, and a massive public ignorance of science (amply demonstrated in messages posted here… the guy who says, I’m not a scientist but I think really takes the prize).
Many good articles and links on related issues–by real scientists–there is no reason anyone for anyone to remain ignorant on these issues.

holli – At first glance your synopsis seems oversimplified, but I think in fact that you are right on the money. The earth is currently overpopulated and it has gotten to the point where mother nature can no longer counter what we are doing to the planet. Everyone thinks that aids, the bird flu, and other epidemics are a human tragedy, and they definitely are, but they may in fact thin out enough of us to bring us back in balance with what nature intends.

I planned ahead I live in Colorado at 5400 ft. Let the ice melt.

THERE IS NO CONSENSUS. I’ve met climatologists who are very skeptical about the global warming hype but they’re not being heard. Seems the media has no interest in talking to them.
Spare yourselves the embarrassment this will eventually cause and don’t fall for the nonsense. After all, there used to be lots of folks who absolutely insisted that the world was flat.
Man has always had delusions of grandeur. This just one more example.

man’s total impact on global warming and greenhouse gasses contributes less than 3%. Even if man stopped using fossil fuels altogether, the climate would continue to warm at the same rate.

Global warming is happening. It is a natural cyclical event. Man’s impact on this cyclical change is miniscule. Global warming has been hyped by poor countries seeking influence over rich ones. Political hacks like Gore and self important meteorologists use global warming as a tool to line their own pockets and project their influence. Don’t buy into the hype, research things for yourself.

Are we to respect scientists anymore or not? They constantly ascribe to global warming any condition that is not like yesterday. We have had horrific floods and droughts before and they had better soon show real evidence or the world will turn them off because we all know most of them are on the take financially for all their doom forcasts.

==They constantly ascribe to global warming any condition that is not like yesterday.==
That’s a lie pal. Scientists who publish in peer-reviewed journals (unlike, say, Michael Creiton) never do that. They calculate a significance level of a statistical effect, based on volumes of data extending back decades and sometimes centuries.
What the climate models are predicting is the global warming accentuating the DIFFERENCES in regional climates. Coastal areas getting wetter, inland areas drier. That may be way too complicated concept though, judging by the many comments on this blog.
==We have had horrific floods and droughts before and they had better soon show real evidence or the world will turn them off because we all know most of them are on the take financially for all their doom forcasts.==
The ones that are on the take are a couple of “scientists” (out of many hundreds), who have been specifically funded by the oil companies to publish contrary “studies” disputing everything and anything in order to confuse the semi-illiterate public into thinking there is “scientific controversy” over globa warming.

SUB: Necessity-Demand-Curiosity-Sustence – NATURE’S Function
Inadequacy of Perception leads to Ignorance.
Enlightened Spirit Leads the Way for Intellectual Interaction
COSMOLOGY INTERLINKS MANY FIELDS:
Noble Cause : Human-Being, Environment,Divine Nature and Harmony
Sub: Earth under delicate balance.
Appeal to reduce or ban Nuclear Tests that can cause Earth-quake Prone zones further damage.
Links to Magnetic Fields-CMEs and Solar flares to be probed by Scientists.
Save EARTH PLANET and Divine Life Links

Voiceofreason, interesting observation that epidemics and other problems will help even out the status quo and bring about a balance of nature (evolution), in reducing the number of humans on the planet. I disagree that the planet is “overpopulated.” It is merely a matter of managing resources. More on that below.
One article reported by a journalist, almost as ignorant of the facts as the rest of us Americans, does not prove or disprove the cause or extent of global warming. Whether it’s human-caused or not can be argued by most laymen (including many politicians, spinning as much as they want) until everyone is blue in the face. The “causes” only have to be explored to determine what the extent of global warming entails, how much we can accurately predict (which so far, in many ways, has reached beyond scientific predictions in past years), so we can prepare for its repurcussions, prevent it as much as possible, and avoid the results, as much as we can. It’s also impossible to ignore that China and America are the 2 largest contributors to fossil fuel emissions on the planet, both to be blamed for mismanagement of resources, and both “responsible” because of it. And which parts of humanity will suffer the most? The poorest nations that will be unable to defend themselves or prepare for what global warming is and will continue to do. It’s hard to believe that we Americans can brag to be the greatest nation on the planet and be so selfish. As soon as we’re done building the next 600 versions of the iPod, video game systems, buying the next desperately-needed generation of HD devices, and producing 200 more great seasons of quality movie and television entertainment, the common man in America might be ready to help his neighbor, educate himself and his children better, and actively devote more to helping their community, their nation, and the world; that would be a truly “global” community. In many ways, America sits among the flies of its self-created manure pile (at least this is probably how many other nations view us), gluttonous and lazy.
It is possible to manage the resources on this planet much better. It’s starts with every single individual, and Americans have the most resources — time and energy-wise — right in their own hands to do so.

“Computer models huh? Just because you solve a few differential equations on a computer it is supposed to imply that you are getting the TRUTH?” — I hope you have as the same utter distrust in all computer models. The ones used to design aircraft; to develop drugs; to control your investments.