The climate change consensus extends beyond climate scientists

[RedDevil]

Originally Posted by oil pan 4

Now the weather channel is blaming "climate change" for this years hurricanes.

But I noticed 3 things about this segment.

They never said "man made climate change" specifically, which is different...

What about all the hurricanes we didn't have between 2008 and 2015?

Then the 1885 to 1930 hurricane anomaly?
We had more hurricanes, stronger making land fall more often in those 45 years than the next 87 or 88 years.
So how's dat work?
The stupid "deniers" would really like to know.

If you take a sample of random values for groups of unusually high or low values on average you will find several of them, especially if you carefully put the boundaries. Random is not average. However, if you determine boundaries without knowledge of (like before generating) the data then you won't have many outlier group averages.

It is the way statistics work. Before observing the data you will have to determine how to measure it, andwhere the boundaries lie to draw conclusions as to avoid bias.

Then, the 2008-2015 period did have several deadly hurricanes, like Irene (2011) and Isaac (2012), but as luck would have it they degraded to tropical storms once they hit American soil.
Haiyan (2013) was one of the worst hurricanes ever, killing more than 5,000 people.
So if there were no hurricanes in 2008-2015 that was just luck and location, or boundary selection if you like. They were there all right, just 'not here'.

Except for 50 billion damage causing Sandy (2012) of course.
Maybe the deniers should watch the news more often?

[oil pan 4]

I would say hurricanes land falling on something the size of the US over 130+ years is a pretty good sample size.

Unlike the data cherry picked by the belivers the hurricanes land fall data going back to 1885 is immune to the "corrections" they like to apply to temperature data.

Super storm sandy was the only major thing to happen over that time. Sandy was a hurricane, but it was more like a storm called a "noreaster" that was supercharged by tropical storm remnants.
Thats why what hit the east coast of the United states is called "super storm sandy" and not hurricane sandy, though strong enough to be a hurricane.

That noreaster was going to hit, it just happened to sweep up tropical storm remnants and the 2 systems fed off each other.

The last one like that was the "perfect storm" in 1991. Every 20 to 30 year the east coast gets something like that.
Then going back further the one before the perfect storm was in the early 1980s.

They said on the weather channel that climate change driven warmer waters will make more hurricanes, make them stronger and change the jet stream to cause them to hit the US more often.
That's why I used the 1885 up land falling hurricanes data, because that's exactly what the weather channel specifically said "major land falling hurricanes".
But we are on a downward trend for major land falling hurricanes since about the 1930s.

The believers / pushers say one thing when the long term data says the opposite.

The weatherchannel people never tried to show that there was any kind of long term increase in major land falling hurricanes either, because there isnt.
They merely stated a hypothesis that historical evidence does not supoort.

[RedDevil]

I think I see something different than you do. But that does not surprise nor bother me.

We had record warm weather today, the 14th of October; 26 Celsius.
Yesterday was 28 Celsius. I have a fresh sunburn, I haven't been out that long even.
Over here we had a record number of warm days this year (way over 100 days over 20 Celsius, and counting. Used to be 99 tops.) , idem hot days (>25 C) , idem tropical days (> 30 C), idem drought (rain deficit of over 35 cm, used to be 30), etcetera. I'm sure we broke more weather records than ever before.

You'd have to long and hard here to find anyone who does not believe the climate is changing. Because we see the evidence every day.

[oil pan 4]

The climate is changing.
No one has recently posted anything trying to say otherwise.

We are on the down trend for major US land fall hurricanes, that's an example of climate change and also an exapmple of the man made climate change believers / pushers being wrong.
Only thing is they are usually good at not being proven wrong so easily.

Maybe climate change isn't going to be more land falling major hurricanes, maybe it means more 1,000 mile wide storms barely barely making cat1. Who knows.

[Xist]

1. Go to the beach at high tide with a shovel.
2. Start moving sand from below the water line uphill.
3. After six hours, take a nap! You deserved it!

Uh... Profit!

If the ocean rose an inch in a century, how far inland would that be? Eighteen inches? Thirty-six?

[freebeard]

Flat pavement needs 1/4" per foot to drain, so 4ft as a maximum. Minimum depends on 'angle of repose'.

[niky]

Originally Posted by Xist

1. Go to the beach at high tide with a shovel.
2. Start moving sand from below the water line uphill.
3. After six hours, take a nap! You deserved it!

Uh... Profit!

If the ocean rose an inch in a century, how far inland would that be? Eighteen inches? Thirty-six?

Depends on the specifics of the coastline.

Rising oceans don't rise uniformly. And in areas where they are rising, this accelerates weathering and erosion, amplifying the inland movement of the shoreline.

Ive been to places that have lost several meters of coastline in the last twenty or thirty years.

I've been to places that have lost nothing.

[Xist]

As I mentioned elsewhere, when Chris Isaac went to refilm portions of "Wicked Game" the beach had washed away.

I once read about a beach that washed away and, decades later, somehow washed back.

Weatherbunnyology is complicated.

[RedDevil]

Ye's bro Ald as finetuned his opinion about climate change, as became clear in an interview with CBS'60 minutes last night.

Trump says climate change not a hoax, not sure of its source

I think something's happening. Something's changing and it'll change back again," he said. "I don't think it's a hoax. I think there's probably a difference. But I don't know that it's manmade. I will say this: I don't want to give trillions and trillions of dollars. I don't want to lose millions and millions of jobs."

Trump called climate change a hoax in November 2012 when he sent a tweet stating, "The concept of global warming was created by and for the Chinese in order to make U.S. manufacturing non-competitive." He later said he was joking about the Chinese connection, but in years since has continued to call global warming a hoax.

"I'm not denying climate change," he said in the interview. "But it could very well go back. You know, we're talking about over a ... millions of years."

Phew! No need to worry.
We just need to wait some million years and all will be fine again.

[niky]

Originally Posted by RedDevil

Ye's bro Ald as finetuned his opinion about climate change, as became clear in an interview with CBS'60 minutes last night.

Trump says climate change not a hoax, not sure of its source


Phew! No need to worry.
We just need to wait some million years and all will be fine again.

The idiocy is underwhelming.

-

Again, the cognitive dissonance...
https://foreignpolicy.com/2017/05/31...nial-in-china/

I have been inundated with idiotic climate change denial for decades from the left and the far left... hearing that it is all a Western plot to bring down developing economies.

Now that the left is on board with it... because Asian countries are more vulnerable to climate change than elsewhere... NOW the American government is saying that it is the exact opposite.

Because America lost the solar race. Because fracking now gives America the ability to be the world's biggest oil producer again.

Huh. Follow the money.