Global warming cannot be stopped, per UN

[thegeneral 2,889]

Just now, IGotWorms said:

Mostly that is true. There are still a few denialists holding on to yesterday’s propaganda, but not many. At this point it’s some variation of it’ll kill jobs, cost too much, inhibit too much freedom, but China and India will do it even more!, etc etc 

This is what I thought without going back through and rereading all this.

 

[MTSkiBum 1,620]

49 minutes ago, IGotWorms said:

Mostly that is true. There are still a few denialists holding on to yesterday’s propaganda, but not many. At this point it’s some variation of it’ll kill jobs, cost too much, inhibit too much freedom, but China and India will do it even more!, etc etc 

Did you read my previous post to you. It took a few attempts due to fftoday's awful forum software. It kept messing up the quotes.  You probably had 10 different alerts from me i messed up so many times

[jerryskids 6,557]

4 hours ago, MTSkiBum said:

 

I think you are being a little hard on gutter.

 

Below is the link to the buoy in question, if you scroll down to July 24, you can see the 38 degrees celsius, ie 101, which caused these news articles. However if you go to the most current reading you can see it is reading 29.85 celsius which is 85 degrees fahrenheit. There are no news articles on how the temperature returned to normal so quickly.

This drop in localized sea temperatures happened even though it is still really hot in the Florida.

The waves, wind, and local weather patterns have a large effect on these localized surface warming trends.

https://www.ndbc.noaa.gov/data/realtime2/MNBF1.ocean

I may be missing your point, but why do you say I'm being hard on Gutter, and then post stuff that seems to support my point? 

[MTSkiBum 1,620]

56 minutes ago, thegeneral said:

My perception was most of the arguments went straight to the economics, that we can’t do this alone, our impact is trivial, etc. Essentially the politics of the issue rather than that fossil fuels are a problem. 

I think that is what they say, but I believe they say that only to placate people. I do not believe most of them actually think MMGW is a thing.

Which to be honest trying to convince someone on the internet about MMGW is about the biggest waste of time in the world.

[MTSkiBum 1,620]

Just now, jerryskids said:

I may be missing your point, but why do you say I'm being hard on Gutter, and then post stuff that seems to support my point? 

I think you are right, just kind of being too mean.

[IGotWorms 4,057]

8 minutes ago, MTSkiBum said:

Did you read my previous post to you. It took a few attempts due to fftoday's awful forum software. It kept messing up the quotes.  You probably had 10 different alerts from me i messed up so many times

Yes I did read it, and I was not referring to you. Meant the usual suspects 

[seafoam1 2,799]

1 minute ago, IGotWorms said:

Yes I did read it, and I was not referring to you. Meant the usual suspects 

How do you dopes keep falling for the whole global warming fear mongering scam?

[GutterBoy 2,898]

9 minutes ago, MTSkiBum said:

I think you are right, just kind of being too mean.

I too think he's right.  I'm glad he googled this and learned something instead of relying on the anecdotal evidence of his pool.  But yeah he's a smug and would never admit to being wrong, so he instead lashes out to protect his masculinity.  It's cool though I get it.

[God Almighty 34]

I'm going to let you mammyfockers cook like a bunch of hard-boiled eggs.

[seafoam1 2,799]

Just now, God Almighty said:

I'm going to let you mammyfockers cook like a bunch of hard-boiled eggs.

settle down pimpledoosh.

[God Almighty 34]

Just now, seafoam1 said:

settle down pimpledoosh.

It takes a village to raise an idiot, but in your case it takes a major metropolitan area. But I don't regret giving you a pecker the size of a grass blade. 

[thegeneral 2,889]

You won’t even have to cook the fish, it will come out of the ocean poached!

God’s will!

[jerryskids 6,557]

4 minutes ago, GutterBoy said:

I too think he's right.  I'm glad he googled this and learned something instead of relying on the anecdotal evidence of his pool.  But yeah he's a smug and would never admit to being wrong, so he instead lashes out to protect his masculinity.  It's cool though I get it.

Yes, I learned that it is a shallow bay and not the open ocean, and that the temperature has varied widely over a few days so any correlation to climate change has nothing to do with science.   

[MTSkiBum 1,620]

1 hour ago, IGotWorms said:

Yes I did read it, and I was not referring to you. Meant the usual suspects 

But it is important to notice the difference in certainty between news sites and science journals. The news site said it 100% was going to happen where as the science journals had quotes from leading climatologists from around the globe who expressed uncertainty in the study.

This is all I am really trying to point out and that example was from the last week, but that is how every study that is published.

We need to take action with regards to global warming, and there certainly will be winners and losers with global warming however the path we are on is not going to be the disaster that some news sites proclaim it to be.

[Patented Phil 1,469]

2 hours ago, thegeneral said:

So we agree that man’s action impact the climate right?

Now it’s just various disagreements on if we should do anything, if there is any point, we should adapt, that this is all over blown, etc? 

Nuclear fusion - via another Manhattan Project.

Until then - nuclear power.

We need to deal with this shitt.  Quickly.

[IGotWorms 4,057]

51 minutes ago, MTSkiBum said:

But it is important to notice the difference in certainty between news sites and science journals. The news site said it 100% was going to happen where as the science journals had quotes from leading climatologists from around the globe who expressed uncertainty in the study.

This is all I am really trying to point out and that example was from the last week, but that is how every study that is published.

We need to take action with regards to global warming, and there certainly will be winners and losers with global warming however the path we are on is not going to be the disaster that some news sites proclaim it to be.

NASA says it’s going to be disastrous: https://climate.nasa.gov/effects/#:~:text=Earth Will Continue to Warm,and rainfall from tropical cyclones.

So does the UN: https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/syr/downloads/report/IPCC_AR6_SYR_SPM.pdf

And the EU: https://climate.ec.europa.eu/climate-change/consequences-climate-change_en

Sorry, I’m not buying this is some chicken little thing from the Mainstream Media boogeyman. If anything they’re underplaying it, imo. It’s hard to get your arms around something of this magnitude 

[seafoam1 2,799]

1 minute ago, IGotWorms said:

NASA says it’s going to be disastrous: https://climate.nasa.gov/effects/#:~:text=Earth Will Continue to Warm,and rainfall from tropical cyclones.

So does the UN: https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/syr/downloads/report/IPCC_AR6_SYR_SPM.pdf

And the EU: https://climate.ec.europa.eu/climate-change/consequences-climate-change_en

Sorry, I’m not buying this is some chicken little thing from the Mainstream Media boogeyman. If anything they’re underplaying it, imo. It’s hard to report on something of this magnitude 

 Talk about brainwashed....

[thegeneral 2,889]

44 minutes ago, Patented Phil said:

Nuclear fusion - via another Manhattan Project.

Until then - nuclear power.

We need to deal with this shitt.  Quickly.

100%. A Manhattan Project style endeavor  to figure out renewable energy. You tell me a person could deliver this and I’ll vote for Pol Pot

Seriously though why can’t we figure this out?

[Flipper 60]

2 minutes ago, IGotWorms said:

Sorry, I’m not buying this is some chicken little thing from the Mainstream Media boogeyman. If anything they’re underplaying it, imo. It’s hard to get your arms around something of this magnitude 

That's a perspective that just about everyone ignores when talking UK, vid, climate and anything else.  What the hell if it will be worse and we're crying conspiracy or paying taxes to make it go away.

[MTSkiBum 1,620]

1 hour ago, IGotWorms said:

NASA says it’s going to be disastrous: https://climate.nasa.gov/effects/#:~:text=Earth Will Continue to Warm,and rainfall from tropical cyclones.

So does the UN: https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/syr/downloads/report/IPCC_AR6_SYR_SPM.pdf

And the EU: https://climate.ec.europa.eu/climate-change/consequences-climate-change_en

Sorry, I’m not buying this is some chicken little thing from the Mainstream Media boogeyman. If anything they’re underplaying it, imo. It’s hard to get your arms around something of this magnitude 

Those are excellent links and I am glad you provided them. Lets ignore the EU link for now because I need to go to bed shortly, however if you read it and deem it important I can read it tomorrow. The nasa link references the IPCC study, so this is redundant and I am going to ignore it as well.

I rarely post at the geek club anymore, I am invested in this subject because of our past interactions together. To be honest you are one of my favorite posters here and the amount of effort I am putting into these posts is not something I normally do. The amount of time I have spent on posts responding to you is probably greater than the amount of time I have spent at the geek club in the last year. Welcome back

 

Below, I am copy/pasting the section the results section related to food  and water from the IPCC link, it is on the top of page 6 from your report. The reason I chose this section is because you specifically referenced food/water in one of your previous replies to me.  If you want to discuss a different section I am more than happy to as long as you are willing to discuss in good faith.

:Edit:

My text is included in the quote below. Only the first paragraph is from ipcc. See my next post to understand why.

Quote

Climate change has reduced food security and affected water security, hindering efforts to meet Sustainable Development Goals (high confidence). Although overall agricultural productivity has increased, climate change has slowed this growth over the past 50 years globally (medium confidence), with related negative impacts mainly in mid-and low latitude regions but positive impacts in some high latitude regions (high confidence). Ocean warming and ocean acidification have adversely affected food production from fisheries and shellfish aquaculture in some oceanic regions (high confidence). Roughly half of the world’s population currently experience severe water scarcity for at least part of the year due to a combination of climatic and non-climatic drivers (medium confidence).

First off ocean acidification is a huge problem. H20+Co2 <=> H2C03. The more carbon dioxide in the atmosphere the more carbonic acid in the ocean. This causes many problems unrelated to global warming because the above reaction I linked is an equilibrium reaction.  IPCC recognizes this as a high confidence problem and I agree. We are going to lose many coral reefs over the next 50 years. Nothing we can do about that, better scuba dive while you can.

 

The second point I will address is that climate change has slowed the growth of food production, this is only a medium confidence.  However even if that is the case population growth is slowing and is expected to peak in 2080. The reason I believe IPCC only rates this as a medium confidence is because of the amount of land we waste on producing fuel ethanol. Not just the US, but Brazil specifically is wasting tons of food to make fuel. Furthermore, many countries subsidize the wrong agriculture product and grow the wrong ag product in the wrong region. Who the hell grows almonds, pecan's, and cattle feed in the desert. This is a rhetorical question.

 

Furthermore, they state that global warming will have negative effect on food production in mid-low latitude, but have a positive effect in high latitude regions. This I mostly agree with, although I think they are greatly discounting the Sahara greening. But even if that is the case, there is quite a bit of un-utilized agriculture regions in the most southern and northern regions.  This they rate as high confidence and it makes sense. As the globe warms we are going to need to move food production further away from the equator. I have no problem with IPCC rating this as high confidence.
 

The last section of this document is related to water scarcity. But then they reference non-climatic drivers and only give it a medium confidence. The american west is the perfect example of this.  For that I only provide the link below because it is getting late.

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/in-drought-stricken-arizona-fresh-scrutiny-of-saudi-arabia-owned-farms-water-use

 

The reason I am responding is not to convince you that global warming is not real nor that it is not a major issue.  Because it is both of those things, however I do not want you to believe that humanity is doomed.

[MTSkiBum 1,620]

FOCKING FFTODAY QUOTE SYSTEM

I give up, not fixing the above post and I am sorry it is formatted to look like crap.

[Dizkneelande 1,085]

Decades of fear, 8 pages of posts and still no proof that human emissions of CO2 cause climate events. You would think after getting every single prediction wrong for the past 45 years would have people on the left asking more questions. Instead, they continue to parrot fear porn from the same people who think we need to depopulate to save the planet. These same people also do not believe that we are alone in the universe (neither do I) and somehow, their planets went through the evolutionary process without burning natural resources. 

[League Champion 1,896]

 

[Baker Boy 1,687]

Glacier National Park removes signs predicting glaciers will be gone by 2020

https://nypost.com/2020/01/09/glacier-national-park-removes-signs-predicting-glaciers-will-be-gone-by-2020/

 

I will repeat the green new deal is causing global warming. Look at the data it supports this.

[League Champion 1,896]

1 minute ago, Baker Boy said:

Glacier National Park removes signs predicting glaciers will be gone by 2020

https://nypost.com/2020/01/09/glacier-national-park-removes-signs-predicting-glaciers-will-be-gone-by-2020/

Dumb arse Liberals

[Baker Boy 1,687]

Quote

Below are the 41 failed doomsday, eco-pocalyptic predictions (with links):

1. 1967: Dire Famine Forecast By 1975

2. 1969: Everyone Will Disappear In a Cloud Of Blue Steam By 1989 (1969)

3. 1970: Ice Age By 2000

4. 1970: America Subject to Water Rationing By 1974 and Food Rationing By 1980

5. 1971: New Ice Age Coming By 2020 or 2030

6. 1972: New Ice Age By 2070

7. 1974: Space Satellites Show New Ice Age Coming Fast

8. 1974: Another Ice Age?

9. 1974: Ozone Depletion a ‘Great Peril to Life (data and graph)

10. 1976: Scientific Consensus Planet Cooling, Famines imminent

11. 1980: Acid Rain Kills Life In Lakes (additional link)

12. 1978: No End in Sight to 30-Year Cooling Trend (additional link)

13. 1988: Regional Droughts (that never happened) in 1990s

14. 1988: Temperatures in DC Will Hit Record Highs

15. 1988: Maldive Islands will Be Underwater by 2018 (they’re not)

16. 1989: Rising Sea Levels will Obliterate Nations if Nothing Done by 2000

17. 1989: New York City’s West Side Highway Underwater by 2019 (it’s not)

18. 2000: Children Won’t Know what Snow Is

19. 2002: Famine In 10 Years If We Don’t Give Up Eating Fish, Meat, and Dairy

20. 2004: Britain will Be Siberia by 2024

21. 2008: Arctic will Be Ice Free by 2018

22. 2008: Climate Genius Al Gore Predicts Ice-Free Arctic by 2013

23. 2009: Climate Genius Prince Charles Says we Have 96 Months to Save World

24. 2009: UK Prime Minister Says 50 Days to ‘Save The Planet From Catastrophe’

25. 2009: Climate Genius Al Gore Moves 2013 Prediction of Ice-Free Arctic to 2014

26. 2013: Arctic Ice-Free by 2015 (additional link)

27. 2014: Only 500 Days Before ‘Climate Chaos’

28. 1968: Overpopulation Will Spread Worldwide

29. 1970: World Will Use Up All its Natural Resources

30. 1966: Oil Gone in Ten Years

31. 1972: Oil Depleted in 20 Years

32. 1977: Department of Energy Says Oil will Peak in 1990s

33. 1980: Peak Oil In 2000

34. 1996: Peak Oil in 2020

35. 2002: Peak Oil in 2010

36. 2006: Super Hurricanes!

37. 2005 : Manhattan Underwater by 2015

38. 1970: Urban Citizens Will Require Gas Masks by 1985

39. 1970: Nitrogen buildup Will Make All Land Unusable

40. 1970: Decaying Pollution Will Kill all the Fish

41. 1970s: Killer Bees!

Update: I’ve added 9 additional failed predictions (via Real Climate Science) below to make it an even 50 for the number of failed eco-pocalyptic doomsday predictions over the last 50 years.

42. 1975: The Cooling World and a Drastic Decline in Food Production

43. 1969: Worldwide Plague, Overwhelming Pollution, Ecological Catastrophe, Virtual Collapse of UK by End of 20th Century

44. 1972: Pending Depletion and Shortages of Gold, Tin, Oil, Natural Gas, Copper, Aluminum

45. 1970: Oceans Dead in a Decade, US Water Rationing by 1974, Food Rationing by 1980

46. 1988: World’s Leading Climate Expert Predicts Lower Manhattan Underwater by 2018

47. 2005: Fifty Million Climate Refugees by the Year 2020

48. 2000: Snowfalls Are Now a Thing of the Past

49.1989: UN Warns That Entire Nations Wiped Off the Face of the Earth by 2000 From Global Warming

50. 2011: Washington Post Predicted Cherry Blossoms Blooming in Winter

But somehow this time will be different, and the ‘experts’ and 16-year olds of today will suddenly be correct in their new predictions of eco-doom and eco-disaster? Not

https://www.aei.org/publication/50-years-of-failed-doomsday-eco-pocalyptic-predictions-the-so-called-experts-are-0-41/

[Dizkneelande 1,085]

1 hour ago, Baker Boy said:

https://www.aei.org/publication/50-years-of-failed-doomsday-eco-pocalyptic-predictions-the-so-called-experts-are-0-41/

This time it’s really really happening!!

[seafoam1 2,799]

1 hour ago, Baker Boy said:

https://www.aei.org/publication/50-years-of-failed-doomsday-eco-pocalyptic-predictions-the-so-called-experts-are-0-41/

Ain't that the truth. And they will always reply with..."but we know more today than we did then. So trust us."

Fear mongering conts. 

[League Champion 1,896]

LIBERALS ARE STUPID. 

 

 

[Dizkneelande 1,085]

 

[seafoam1 2,799]

8 hours ago, Baker Boy said:

https://www.aei.org/publication/50-years-of-failed-doomsday-eco-pocalyptic-predictions-the-so-called-experts-are-0-41/

Keep this alive to continue to show the "sky is falling" idiots that fear mongering has damaged them badly.

Quote

Below are the 41 failed doomsday, eco-pocalyptic predictions (with links):

1. 1967: Dire Famine Forecast By 1975

2. 1969: Everyone Will Disappear In a Cloud Of Blue Steam By 1989 (1969)

3. 1970: Ice Age By 2000

4. 1970: America Subject to Water Rationing By 1974 and Food Rationing By 1980

5. 1971: New Ice Age Coming By 2020 or 2030

6. 1972: New Ice Age By 2070

7. 1974: Space Satellites Show New Ice Age Coming Fast

8. 1974: Another Ice Age?

9. 1974: Ozone Depletion a ‘Great Peril to Life (data and graph)

10. 1976: Scientific Consensus Planet Cooling, Famines imminent

11. 1980: Acid Rain Kills Life In Lakes (additional link)

12. 1978: No End in Sight to 30-Year Cooling Trend (additional link)

13. 1988: Regional Droughts (that never happened) in 1990s

14. 1988: Temperatures in DC Will Hit Record Highs

15. 1988: Maldive Islands will Be Underwater by 2018 (they’re not)

16. 1989: Rising Sea Levels will Obliterate Nations if Nothing Done by 2000

17. 1989: New York City’s West Side Highway Underwater by 2019 (it’s not)

18. 2000: Children Won’t Know what Snow Is

19. 2002: Famine In 10 Years If We Don’t Give Up Eating Fish, Meat, and Dairy

20. 2004: Britain will Be Siberia by 2024

21. 2008: Arctic will Be Ice Free by 2018

22. 2008: Climate Genius Al Gore Predicts Ice-Free Arctic by 2013

23. 2009: Climate Genius Prince Charles Says we Have 96 Months to Save World

24. 2009: UK Prime Minister Says 50 Days to ‘Save The Planet From Catastrophe’

25. 2009: Climate Genius Al Gore Moves 2013 Prediction of Ice-Free Arctic to 2014

26. 2013: Arctic Ice-Free by 2015 (additional link)

27. 2014: Only 500 Days Before ‘Climate Chaos’

28. 1968: Overpopulation Will Spread Worldwide

29. 1970: World Will Use Up All its Natural Resources

30. 1966: Oil Gone in Ten Years

31. 1972: Oil Depleted in 20 Years

32. 1977: Department of Energy Says Oil will Peak in 1990s

33. 1980: Peak Oil In 2000

34. 1996: Peak Oil in 2020

35. 2002: Peak Oil in 2010

36. 2006: Super Hurricanes!

37. 2005 : Manhattan Underwater by 2015

38. 1970: Urban Citizens Will Require Gas Masks by 1985

39. 1970: Nitrogen buildup Will Make All Land Unusable

40. 1970: Decaying Pollution Will Kill all the Fish

41. 1970s: Killer Bees!

Update: I’ve added 9 additional failed predictions (via Real Climate Science) below to make it an even 50 for the number of failed eco-pocalyptic doomsday predictions over the last 50 years.

42. 1975: The Cooling World and a Drastic Decline in Food Production

43. 1969: Worldwide Plague, Overwhelming Pollution, Ecological Catastrophe, Virtual Collapse of UK by End of 20th Century

44. 1972: Pending Depletion and Shortages of Gold, Tin, Oil, Natural Gas, Copper, Aluminum

45. 1970: Oceans Dead in a Decade, US Water Rationing by 1974, Food Rationing by 1980

46. 1988: World’s Leading Climate Expert Predicts Lower Manhattan Underwater by 2018

47. 2005: Fifty Million Climate Refugees by the Year 2020

48. 2000: Snowfalls Are Now a Thing of the Past

49.1989: UN Warns That Entire Nations Wiped Off the Face of the Earth by 2000 From Global Warming

50. 2011: Washington Post Predicted Cherry Blossoms Blooming in Winter

But somehow this time will be different, and the ‘experts’ and 16-year olds of today will suddenly be correct in their new predictions of eco-doom and eco-disaster? Not

 

[League Champion 1,896]

 

[League Champion 1,896]

 

[Dizkneelande 1,085]

Still waiting……….::: 

Lets change it up. Can a sh!tlib explain to us what they mean when the say their goal is “net zero”?

[Baker Boy 1,687]

It's not climate change that's causing heat waves this summer but no one wants to explain why

In the 1930s, the government's Heat Wave Index was four times higher

https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/not-climate-change-causing-heat-waves-this-summer-explain

 

 

[Dizkneelande 1,085]

39 minutes ago, Baker Boy said:

It's not climate change that's causing heat waves this summer but no one wants to explain why

In the 1930s, the government's Heat Wave Index was four times higher

https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/not-climate-change-causing-heat-waves-this-summer-explain

 

 

They can’t even link man-made emissions to climate events even though they say the case is close regarding climate emergencies being caused by humans. 

[Dizkneelande 1,085]

This corrupted pr!ck will still eat dry aged ribeyes

"Agriculture contributes about 33% of all the emissions of the world. And we can’t get to net zero—we don’t get this job done—unless agriculture is front and centre as part of the solution."

"You just can’t continue to both warm the planet, while also expecting to feed it. It doesn’t work. So we have to reduce emissions from the food system."

 

[jerryskids 6,557]

On 7/27/2023 at 8:09 AM, jerryskids said:

Let's get a few things straight.  One, I've forgotten more science than you've ever known.  I was being facetious with the earth boiling in a few weeks, I thought that was obvious, apparently not.  The Maher thing though is real; I'm actually something of a systems expert within the engineering realm, and without a major change to the system inputs you can't turn that ship around on a dime.  We won't get to 100% gay of course, but it will go up before down.  Not real of course, but that's how people will report.

 Two, I believe the earth is warming and that mankind contributes to it.  Where I differ is how much the impact is, and more importantly, how much the powers that be actually believe it.  As I've said here a thousand times, if they did, we'd be pushing nuclear super hard, and we'd embrace natural gas as a stop gap while we improve.

I 100% believe it is a cult of the Left, with dedication which rivals any God-based religious cult.  It is not about solving a climate problem, it is about flagellating humankind.

Case and point.  The climate priests have finally hit on a message that is fact-proof and rallies the congregation:  "extreme weather."  That way they avoid that pesky warm/cold dilemma and can attribute any weather to bad climate change.  Drought?  That's climate change.  Rains and flood down the street?  Also climate change, whee!  Too windy, too still, climate change!  Not el nino or la nina, even though they've been around forever.  It's all your fault$#@!  Now eat some bugs and love it!

As a scientist, I would find their concern more credible if they would work in a few benefits, like increased forestation.  I would also believe their concern if they invested more in ways to adapt to warmer temperatures, which are happening whether we change our behaviors or not.

Recent Yahoo article:  climate change causes more droughts, and more rain!  Regarding rain, oh by the way we are in an El Nino which is directly correlated to more rain:

Quote

Yes, it's raining more than usual — and climate change and El Niño are 2 reasons why

More than 120 million people from Atlanta to Philadelphia found themselves at risk of severe thunderstorms, including strong wind gusts, hail and heavy rain, on Monday. Some areas may even experience tornadoes, while the southern U.S. from Florida to Arizona continues to swelter under extreme heat.

Monday’s storms were the latest in a series of extreme rainfall events that have recently hit the eastern United States. Last month, Connecticut, Vermont and New York’s Hudson Valley endured dramatic flash floods caused by “1,000-year rains.” A week later, flash floods killed five people in Pennsylvania.

In the first half of the year, ending June 30, the precipitation total in the continental states was 15.70 inches, which is 0.39 of an inch above average.

Nationwide statistics aren’t yet available for July, but New England got drenched, with New Hampshire’s Mount Washington receiving 16.91 inches of precipitation — its wettest July ever. Last month, Boston got more than three times its usual rainfall, making it the city’s second-wettest July on record. Providence, R.I., and Worcester, Mass., also had their second-rainiest July on record.

Besides natural variability, the main factors contributing to this year’s wet weather are El Niño, a band of warm ocean water that develops in the Pacific Ocean, and climate change. Here’s how.

Climate change

As with the ongoing record-setting heat waves, heavier rainfall is a byproduct of climate change.

Warmer temperatures cause more water to evaporate, which dries out soil and exacerbates droughts, but also leads to more total rain and heavier individual rain events.

Studies have found that climate change is pushing the water cycle to extremes on both ends, with higher total rainfall.

“Since 1901, global precipitation has increased at an average rate of 0.04 inches per decade, while precipitation in the contiguous 48 states has increased at a rate of 0.20 inches per decade,” according to the Environmental Protection Agency.

These changes are not evenly distributed. While the dry Southwest has been locked in a multidecade megadrought, the already wet Northeast and Upper Midwest have gotten wetter. Between 1951 and 2017, the Great Lakes region’s average temperature increased 2.3 degrees Fahrenheit, its annual rainfall rose 17% and its heavy rain events went up by a whopping 35%.

Even in drought-stricken areas, rains can become more extreme when they do come. After its driest two decades in 1,200 years, California got inundated with near-record rain and snow this winter.

Studies have shown that climate change is weakening the jet stream, a current of eastward-blowing strong winds, causing storms like the one that recently dumped record amounts of rain on Vermont to stall out. The temperature difference between the Arctic and the tropics powers the jet stream, but the Arctic is warming faster than other regions, disrupting the flow of the jet stream.

“Human-caused warming from fossil fuel burning is impacting these events in several ways,” Michael Mann, a climate scientist at the University of Pennsylvania, told Yahoo News last month in an email. “A warmer atmosphere holds more moisture, so when it rains there’s potential for much more of it. And the pattern of warming is impacting the jet stream in such a way that we get more of these very stagnant or ‘stuck,’ wavy patterns which are associated with persistent weather extremes (both heat/drought/wildfire and flooding, depending on your location).”

El Niño

While El Niño generally increases temperatures across North America, its relationship to rain varies by region.

“The warmer waters cause the Pacific jet stream to move south of its neutral position,” the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration explains. “With this shift, areas in the northern U.S. and Canada are dryer and warmer than usual. But in the U.S. Gulf Coast and Southeast, these periods are wetter than usual and have increased flooding.”

But the overall effect of an El Niño year in the U.S. is more total rain, because, according to NASA, “the warm ocean surface warms the atmosphere, which allows moisture-rich air to rise and develop into rainstorms.”

The wettest three years on record — 1973, 1983 and 2015 — were all years that featured El Niño, according to the Fourth National Climate Assessment.

If you’re looking for relief from the high heat and heavy rain, don’t expect it to arrive very soon. The latest projections from the European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts show that El Niño is expected to reach peak strength in September and last until January.

https://news.yahoo.com/yes-its-raining-more-than-usual--and-climate-change-and-el-nino-are-2-reasons-why-212126644.html?.tsrc=1013

Extreme weather!   

[League Champion 1,896]