US leads the world in weather catastrophes

Definately the US geography is more prone to severe weather, particularly tornadoes and hurricanes. It is much less certain how climate change will make it worse. Fore example, there has been no trend in severe tornadoes or landfalling hurricanes to date. Also, regarding heat: Half of all US State record high temperatures were set during the 1930s.

Fred

3 Likes

An explanation from WAPO last summer…

"…the Dust Bowl remains a favorite anecdote for some who deny climate science.

Steve Milloy, an outspoken opponent of climate scientists and a former member of President Donald Trump’s Environmental Protection Agency transition team, frequently cites Dust Bowl-era observations in efforts to undermine recent climate warming.

“July 20, 2022 was hot in the US for sure. But not nearly as hot as July 20, 1934,” he tweeted on Tuesday, the day that both Mangum, Okla., and Wichita Falls, Tex., hit 115 degrees.

Atmospheric scientists, including many PhD researchers who have published peer-reviewed studies, assert that comparing the events is like comparing apples to oranges.

“For me, the main issue with the ‘1930s were hot’ meme is that a global perspective shows that the very hot part of the planet was quite small,” wrote Andrew Dessler, a professor of atmospheric sciences at Texas A&M, in an email. He shared a plot of temperature anomalies during 1936, noting the greatest departure from average was localized only to the Plains and the Canadian Prairie.

“I think the warmth of the very small region in the middle of the U.S. in the 1930s (mainly 1936) is mainly just random climate variability, but enhanced by farming practices that aridified the region,” he wrote.

There are other studies that attempt to link Dust Bowl-era heat to ocean temperature anomalies.

The Earth’s atmosphere is irrefutably warming; all seven of the top-seven hottest years on record have occurred since 2015, though reliable global records date back to the 1880s. Last year was the warmest on record for a fifth of Earth’s land surface.

2 Likes

Global warming isn’t about some warm days, or even years, in the Mid-West, or anywhere else in the US. It is about the average temperatures, day and night, year around on the entire planet earth.

Yes there have been warm periodes and cold periods and higher or lower sea level through the millennials. Even as close to our time as around year 1000 there was a warm period that last for at least 3-4 centuries.

The “little ice age” around year 1500, also lasting more than two centuries (suspected to be the reason the Norse settlers in Greenland disappeared)

Where the changes are most noticeable today in the Arctic and it is not all for the good. Growing seasons are longer, but the melting permafrost is causing problems for construction etc.,
But the problems are not only for the people living there.
The methane released from the melting permafrost increases global warming.
No amount of effort to capture the methane will help, only reducing other GHG emission will slow down the melting, thus make a difference to global warming.

Same in OZ, flood heights drought etc all higher bigger 100 years ago
Average temp and highs and lows basically never changed in recorded history

Rainfall has changed in 100 years, the top half of OZ has had bigger rain than the bottom half on an annual basis but its slightly masked by annual floods and drought but they have the data nobody disputes that.
The CSIRO and farmers working on crops to use more water and less water or just move the effected crops.
As the commodity traders will tell you, for every where its hotter somewhere its colder, crops dont disappear they just get moved.
OZ being unique in the world as the bottom is temperate and the top tropical, so can grow anything

One more time; it’s GLOBAL WARMING, not what happens (or don’t happen) “somewhere in OZ”, or USA.
Much as you want to believe that it is not happening, or IF it is happening “it is not man made”.
Even if it is man made it is not our fault, blame China. They burn coal from Oz to make junk that they force gullible people in the rest of the world to buy. Make total sense. :nauseated_face:

If its not happening everywhere why do you call it global warming?

Because it is GLOBAL, not a LOCAL happening.
Your famous place that nobody has heard of somewhere in the outback of Oz, with a broken termometer, IS NOT THE WORLD.

There are few good weather records outside of the US that go back far enough to confirm any global trend. In the US, the majority of state record high temperatures occured prior to 1940. As for the 1930s, it was not limited to the Dust Bowl Region.

Global average temperature change since 1880:

Although it was hot in the US Mid-West in the 1930s the global trend was cooler.
The trend since 1980 is obviously steeply upward.

PS> NOAA should be more reliable than Wired, Fox News and even Forbes, al least when it comes to climate

Record high highs and lows are NOT climate, as you well know, nor does USA constitute THE GLOBE.

PS> USA is NOT the only place with reliable temperature recordings from 1880:

Source: https://climate.nasa.gov/faq/21/why-does-the-temperature-record-shown-on-your-vital-signs-page-begin-at-1880

Yes, the UK has good records back into the 17th century. As far as the Dust Bowl States go, only Kansas and Oklahoma recorded there state record highs during the 1930s.

I’ve got to agree with our EU friends here. The US is not the world, and nobody who wants to remain credible would put much trust in our climate science. You know the real shame at least in the US, is that our relevant .gov agency, NOAA, has manipulated and toyed with atmospheric data, via non -uniform ‘adjustments’ and publishing sample site selection standards and then ignoring them, so frequently and so thoroughly that whether or not raw data is improved by manipulation, its credibility can be reasonably questioned.
This is a separate issue from data pooled from other sources; simply put, it’s infuriating that it is MUCH too easy to fairly poke holes in NOAA data treatments, and it’s their own damn fault for making an utter cock of it. It comes down to being awful at their jobs.

And before the nursing home mafia here starts wetting their Depends and throwing feces, this is not an argument for or against AGW. It’s an argument against poor science, because NOAA’s data has more holes than a colander.

3 Likes

The major question is not if the world is warming or cooling but the WHY? Four glacial periods, three previous interglacial periods and the 4th? we are now in. How warm did it get in past ones, why did the earth become a near ice ball, and if other interglacial periods were warmer than now why should we not expect that as well regardless of man’s activities because in the previous ones man was NOT at all a factor. Clean environment is one thing stopping planetary actions are something totally different and maybe far beyond our control.

1 Like

I keep things simple. I don’t have a degree in physics, or chemistry, or biology, just like I don’t have a medical degree or a legal degree. When it comes it big, complicated questions outside my expertise I turn to experts that I trust.

Does NOAA/NASA/ESA say anthropogenic climate change is a dangerous thing? Yes. I’ve looked at the evidence on the other side of argument. I don’t find it compelling. In fact, when I look at some of contrary evidence/arguments, it is obviously baloney. So I go with what the experts tell me.

Other people think differently and that’s OK.

When five doctors tell me I need chemo, and one tells me that drinking vinegar will cure me, I take the chemo. I scream at the $100,000 bill for the chemo. I realize the chemo has side-effects. But I still take the chemo.

2 Likes

Human activities have influenced climate, otherwise, we would already be on a slow cooling trend towards the next glaciation. Humans have changed land use through agriculture, building cities and roads in addition to industrialization increasing the atmospheric CO2 levels (currently 45-50% above pre-industrial levels). All these factors have contributed to the warming we are seeing now plus or minus some uncertain amount of natural variation.

The questions are how fast is the temperature responding to CO2 vs. other human created factors; how fast will temperatures and sea level rise, and what significant weather changes are likely moving forward?

2 Likes

The US which has made drastic cuts in emissions and great strides in protecting the environment also still remains the punching bag for climate “activists” while other countries, like China and India, who are putting more emissions out than ever get ignored.

Strange.

1 Like

image

Yes China emits abt. twice as much CO2 as #2, the US, but has 4 times more people.
India is #3 at about half as much total emission as the US, but also with a lot more people.
If it is any consolation the Gulf States and Australia has higher per capita emission figures than USA.

Source: CO2 Emissions per Capita - Worldometer

In historic perspective the figures looks like this:

1 Like