Climate Science -- Fifty Years of Getting Everything Right

[RollingThunder]

25 Years Of Predicting The Global Warming 'Tipping Point' | The Daily Caller

An idiotic article by a denier cult reporter on a far right-wing-nut blog.

The Daily Caller is a politically conservative[2][3] news and opinion website based in Washington, D.C., United States. Founded by Tucker Carlson, a libertarian conservative[4][5] political pundit, and Neil Patel, former adviser to former Vice President Dick Cheney

The reporter, "Investigative Researcher of the Daily Caller News Foundation" Michael Bastasch, is a major stooge for the Koch brothers, according to his own LinkedIn profile:

• Koch Internship Program at Charles Koch Institute
• Government Relations Intern at The Heritage Foundation
• Koch Summer Fellow at Institute for Humane Studies
• Research Associate at Cascade Policy Institute
• Public Affairs Intern at ALEC

In fact, Bastasch's online resume makes it look as though his post at the Daily Caller News Foundation since January of 2012 overlaps with a Koch Internship that began in 2012. Are they one and the same? Regardless, this recent college grad has already garnered months of experience nursing at the teat of Koch money through multiple right-wing groups.

The world is facing a very critical situation in regard to human caused global warming and its consequent climate changes. That fact is affirmed by virtually the entire world scientific community. Various people have talked about this accelerating climate change crisis and stressed, in slightly different terms and timeframes, the fact that the world needs to take actions to deal with this crisis really, really soon because there is not much time left before some of the climate changes that mankind has created become unstoppable, so this moronic denier cult reporter fantasizes that his nitpicking the different timeframes for action somehow disproves the very clear need for action. LOL. So retarded!

And the really hilarious thing is that you denier cult bozos somehow imagine that this lame nonsense you've posted is some kind of rebuttal to the four articles I cited that go over the climate science predictions and affirm their accuracy in detail.

Climate science preditions have proved to be quite accurate in the real world, no matter what bullshit your fraudulent denier cult myths try to push.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

The San Jose Mercury News reported on June 30, 1989 that a “senior environmental official at the United Nations, Noel Brown, says entire nations could be wiped off the face of the earth by rising sea levels if global warming is not reversed by the year 2000.”

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2015/05/04/2...e-global-warming-tipping-point/#ixzz3rOsKzGcI

Spot on!

 

[RollingThunder]

The San Jose Mercury News reported on June 30, 1989 that a “senior environmental official at the United Nations, Noel Brown, says entire nations could be wiped off the face of the earth by rising sea levels if global warming is not reversed by the year 2000.”

Read more: 25 Years Of Predicting The Global Warming ‘Tipping Point’

Spot on!

He is quite right about that.

He didn't say that "entire nations could be wiped off the face of the earth by rising sea levels" would happen by the year 2000, BTW you moron, he said that that would happen at some point in the future "if global warming is not reversed by the year 2000". He may have been correct. Dely in dealing with this crisis is very probably dooming those islands because of what may well be at this point an inevitable rise in sea levels because CO2 emissions have continued to increase despite the clear warnings from the world scientific community decades ago.

 

[skookerasbil]

The San Jose Mercury News reported on June 30, 1989 that a “senior environmental official at the United Nations, Noel Brown, says entire nations could be wiped off the face of the earth by rising sea levels if global warming is not reversed by the year 2000.”

Read more: 25 Years Of Predicting The Global Warming ‘Tipping Point’

Spot on!

He is quite right about that.

He didn't say that "entire nations could be wiped off the face of the earth by rising sea levels" would happen by the year 2000, BTW you moron, he said that that would happen at some point in the future "if global warming is not reversed by the year 2000". He may have been correct. Dely in dealing with this crisis is very probably dooming those islands because of what may well be at this point an inevitable rise in sea levels because CO2 emissions have continued to increase despite the clear warnings from the world scientific community decades ago.

Problem is s0n....as Frank astutely points out...........the AGW k00ks have been promising all kinds of calamities for decades and none of the shit ends up happening!!! That's why after 2008, everybody stopped caring about global warming. Progressives always find a way to blast their collective faces off when they start winning ( back in 2005).......they went hard core with a billion future predictions most of which fell flat on their faces.

Almost every single person who ran on the climate change platform in the most recent mid-term election got their clocks cleaned..........and Im still laughing a year later!!!

Climate Change Activists Come Up Short In Midterm Elections



[URL='http://s42.photobucket.com/user/baldaltima/media/Cartman20Kicks20a20Field20Goal.gif.html'][/URL]

 

[RollingThunder]

The San Jose Mercury News reported on June 30, 1989 that a “senior environmental official at the United Nations, Noel Brown, says entire nations could be wiped off the face of the earth by rising sea levels if global warming is not reversed by the year 2000.”

Read more: 25 Years Of Predicting The Global Warming ‘Tipping Point’

Spot on!

He is quite right about that.

He didn't say that "entire nations could be wiped off the face of the earth by rising sea levels" would happen by the year 2000, BTW you moron, he said that that would happen at some point in the future "if global warming is not reversed by the year 2000". He may have been correct. Dely in dealing with this crisis is very probably dooming those islands because of what may well be at this point an inevitable rise in sea levels because CO2 emissions have continued to increase despite the clear warnings from the world scientific community decades ago.

Problem is s0n....as Frank astutely points out...........the AGW k00ks have been promising all kinds of calamities for decades and none of the shit ends up happening!!! That's why after 2008, everybody stopped caring about global warming. Progressives always find a way to blast their collective faces off when they start winning ( back in 2005).......they went hard core with a billion future predictions most of which fell flat on their faces.
Almost every single person who ran on the climate change platform in the most recent mid-term election got their clocks cleaned..........and Im still laughing a year later!!!
Climate Change Activists Come Up Short In Midterm Elections

Your usual insane nonsense....totally meaningless....

In the real world....

SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN SERIES ON EXTREME WEATHER, CLIMATE CHANGE, AND THE RISKS WE FACE

Scientific American published a three-part series authored by award-winning science journalist John Carey and commissioned by the Pew Center on Global Climate Change that reports on the link between extreme weather and climate change.

The series details the impacts of extreme weather events, the science behind extreme weather and global warming, and the risks and how to respond to the increase in extreme weather. Through enterprising reporting, this series provides an in-depth and accessible account of extreme weather affecting communities across America, why it’s happening, and what can be done about it.

Part One - Storm Warnings: Extreme Weather Is a Product of Climate Change
More violent and frequent storms, once merely a prediction of climate models, are now a matter of observation.

In North Dakota the waters kept rising. Swollen by more than a month of record rains in Saskatchewan, the Souris River topped its all time record high, set back in 1881. The floodwaters poured into Minot, North Dakota's fourth-largest city, and spread across thousands of acres of farms and forests. More than 12,000 people were forced to evacuate. Many lost their homes to the floodwaters.Read more.

Part Two - Global Warming and the Science of Extreme Weather
How rising temperatures change weather and produce fiercer, more frequent storms.

Extreme floods, prolonged droughts, searing heat waves, massive rainstorms and the like don't just seem like they've become the new normal in the last few years—they have become more common, according to data collected by reinsurance company Munich Re. But has this increase resulted from human-caused climate change or just from natural climatic variations? After all, recorded floods and droughts go back to the earliest days of mankind, before coal, oil and natural gas made the modern industrial world possible. Read more.

Part Three - Our Extreme Future: Predicting and Coping with a Changing Climate
Adapting to extreme weather calls for a combination of restoring wetland and building drains and sewers that can handle the water. But leaders and the public are slow to catch on.

Extreme weather events have become both more common and more intense. And increasingly, scientists have been able to pin at least part of the blame on humankind's alteration of the climate. What's more, the growing success of this nascent science of climate attribution (finding the telltale fingerprints of climate change in extreme events) means that researchers have more confidence in their climate models—which predict that the future will be even more extreme. Read more.

 

[westwall]

The San Jose Mercury News reported on June 30, 1989 that a “senior environmental official at the United Nations, Noel Brown, says entire nations could be wiped off the face of the earth by rising sea levels if global warming is not reversed by the year 2000.”

Read more: 25 Years Of Predicting The Global Warming ‘Tipping Point’

Spot on!

He is quite right about that.

He didn't say that "entire nations could be wiped off the face of the earth by rising sea levels" would happen by the year 2000, BTW you moron, he said that that would happen at some point in the future "if global warming is not reversed by the year 2000". He may have been correct. Dely in dealing with this crisis is very probably dooming those islands because of what may well be at this point an inevitable rise in sea levels because CO2 emissions have continued to increase despite the clear warnings from the world scientific community decades ago.

Problem is s0n....as Frank astutely points out...........the AGW k00ks have been promising all kinds of calamities for decades and none of the shit ends up happening!!! That's why after 2008, everybody stopped caring about global warming. Progressives always find a way to blast their collective faces off when they start winning ( back in 2005).......they went hard core with a billion future predictions most of which fell flat on their faces.
Almost every single person who ran on the climate change platform in the most recent mid-term election got their clocks cleaned..........and Im still laughing a year later!!!
Climate Change Activists Come Up Short In Midterm Elections

Your usual insane nonsense....totally meaningless....

In the real world....

SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN SERIES ON EXTREME WEATHER, CLIMATE CHANGE, AND THE RISKS WE FACE

Scientific American published a three-part series authored by award-winning science journalist John Carey and commissioned by the Pew Center on Global Climate Change that reports on the link between extreme weather and climate change.

The series details the impacts of extreme weather events, the science behind extreme weather and global warming, and the risks and how to respond to the increase in extreme weather. Through enterprising reporting, this series provides an in-depth and accessible account of extreme weather affecting communities across America, why it’s happening, and what can be done about it.

Part One - Storm Warnings: Extreme Weather Is a Product of Climate Change
More violent and frequent storms, once merely a prediction of climate models, are now a matter of observation.

In North Dakota the waters kept rising. Swollen by more than a month of record rains in Saskatchewan, the Souris River topped its all time record high, set back in 1881. The floodwaters poured into Minot, North Dakota's fourth-largest city, and spread across thousands of acres of farms and forests. More than 12,000 people were forced to evacuate. Many lost their homes to the floodwaters.Read more.

Part Two - Global Warming and the Science of Extreme Weather
How rising temperatures change weather and produce fiercer, more frequent storms.

Extreme floods, prolonged droughts, searing heat waves, massive rainstorms and the like don't just seem like they've become the new normal in the last few years—they have become more common, according to data collected by reinsurance company Munich Re. But has this increase resulted from human-caused climate change or just from natural climatic variations? After all, recorded floods and droughts go back to the earliest days of mankind, before coal, oil and natural gas made the modern industrial world possible. Read more.

Part Three - Our Extreme Future: Predicting and Coping with a Changing Climate
Adapting to extreme weather calls for a combination of restoring wetland and building drains and sewers that can handle the water. But leaders and the public are slow to catch on.

Extreme weather events have become both more common and more intense. And increasingly, scientists have been able to pin at least part of the blame on humankind's alteration of the climate. What's more, the growing success of this nascent science of climate attribution (finding the telltale fingerprints of climate change in extreme events) means that researchers have more confidence in their climate models—which predict that the future will be even more extreme. Read more.

That's funny. The claim that storm frequency is increasing is an outright lie. Not a good way to start off a supposed objective look at the "problem".

 

[Crick]

From SA: Storm Warnings: Extreme Weather Is a Product of Climate Change

Extreme signals
There are two key lines of evidence. First, it's not just that we've become more aware of disasters like North Dakota or last year's Nashville flood, which caused $13 billion in damage, or the massive 2010 summer monsoon in Pakistan that killed 1,500 people and left 20 million more homeless. The data show that the number of such events is rising. Munich Re, one of the world's largest reinsurance companies, has compiled the world's most comprehensive database of natural disasters, reaching all the way back to the eruption of Mount Vesuvius in A.D. 79. Researchers at the company, which obviously has a keen financial interest in trends that increase insurance risks, add 700 to 1,000 natural catastrophes to the database each year, explains Mark Bove, senior research meteorologist in Munich Re's catastrophe risk management office in Princeton, N.J. The data indicate a small increase in geologic events like earthquakes since 1980 because of better reporting. But the increase in the number of climate disasters is far larger. "Our figures indicate a trend towards an increase in extreme weather events that can only be fully explained by climate change," says Peter Höppe, head of Munich Re's Geo Risks Research/Corporate Climate Center: "It's as if the weather machine had changed up a gear.

The second line of evidence comes from a nascent branch of science called climate attribution. The idea is to examine individual events like a detective investigating a crime, searching for telltale fingerprints of climate change. Those fingerprints are showing up—in the autumn floods of 2000 in England and Wales that were the worst on record, in the 2003 European heat wave that caused 14,000 deaths in France, in Hurricane Katrina—and, yes, probably even in Nashville. This doesn't mean that the storms or hot spells wouldn't have happened at all without climate change, but as scientists like Trenberth say, they wouldn't have been as severe if humankind hadn't already altered the planet's climate.This new science is still controversial. There's an active debate among researchers about whether the Russian heat wave bears the characteristic signature of climate change or whether it was just natural variability, for instance. Some scientists worry that trying to attribute individual events to climate change is counterproductive in the larger political debate, because it's so easy to dismiss the claim by saying that the planet has always experienced extreme weather. And some researchers who privately are convinced of the link are reluctant to say so publicly, because global warming has become such a target of many in Congress.

But the evidence is growing for a link between the emissions of modern civilization and extreme weather events. And that has the potential to profoundly alter the perception of the threats posed by climate change. No longer is global warming an abstract concept, affecting faraway species, distant lands or generations far in the future. Instead, climate change becomes personal. Its hand can be seen in the corn crop of a Maryland farmer ruined when soaring temperatures shut down pollination or the $13 billion in damage in Nashville, with the Grand Ole Opry flooded and sodden homes reeking of rot. "All of a sudden we're not talking about polar bears or the Maldives any more," says Nashville-based author and environmental journalistAmanda Little. "Climate change translates into mold on my baby's crib. We're talking about homes and schools and churches and all the places that got hit."

 

[westwall]

From SA:

Extreme signals
There are two key lines of evidence. First, it's not just that we've become more aware of disasters like North Dakota or last year's Nashville flood, which caused $13 billion in damage, or the massive 2010 summer monsoon in Pakistan that killed 1,500 people and left 20 million more homeless. The data show that the number of such events is rising. Munich Re, one of the world's largest reinsurance companies, has compiled the world's most comprehensive database of natural disasters, reaching all the way back to the eruption of Mount Vesuvius in A.D. 79. Researchers at the company, which obviously has a keen financial interest in trends that increase insurance risks, add 700 to 1,000 natural catastrophes to the database each year, explains Mark Bove, senior research meteorologist in Munich Re's catastrophe risk management office in Princeton, N.J. The data indicate a small increase in geologic events like earthquakes since 1980 because of better reporting. But the increase in the number of climate disasters is far larger. "Our figures indicate a trend towards an increase in extreme weather events that can only be fully explained by climate change," says Peter Höppe, head of Munich Re's Geo Risks Research/Corporate Climate Center: "It's as if the weather machine had changed up a gear.

The second line of evidence comes from a nascent branch of science called climate attribution. The idea is to examine individual events like a detective investigating a crime, searching for telltale fingerprints of climate change. Those fingerprints are showing up—in the autumn floods of 2000 in England and Wales that were the worst on record, in the 2003 European heat wave that caused 14,000 deaths in France, in Hurricane Katrina—and, yes, probably even in Nashville. This doesn't mean that the storms or hot spells wouldn't have happened at all without climate change, but as scientists like Trenberth say, they wouldn't have been as severe if humankind hadn't already altered the planet's climate.This new science is still controversial. There's an active debate among researchers about whether the Russian heat wave bears the characteristic signature of climate change or whether it was just natural variability, for instance. Some scientists worry that trying to attribute individual events to climate change is counterproductive in the larger political debate, because it's so easy to dismiss the claim by saying that the planet has always experienced extreme weather. And some researchers who privately are convinced of the link are reluctant to say so publicly, because global warming has become such a target of many in Congress.

But the evidence is growing for a link between the emissions of modern civilization and extreme weather events. And that has the potential to profoundly alter the perception of the threats posed by climate change. No longer is global warming an abstract concept, affecting faraway species, distant lands or generations far in the future. Instead, climate change becomes personal. Its hand can be seen in the corn crop of a Maryland farmer ruined when soaring temperatures shut down pollination or the $13 billion in damage in Nashville, with the Grand Ole Opry flooded and sodden homes reeking of rot. "All of a sudden we're not talking about polar bears or the Maldives any more," says Nashville-based author and environmental journalistAmanda Little. "Climate change translates into mold on my baby's crib. We're talking about homes and schools and churches and all the places that got hit."

Number of storms DOWN.
Power of storms DOWN.
Number of tornado's DOWN.
Power of tornado's DOWN.

Everything about the article is total horseshit when it comes to the frequency claims. Everything.

 

[Crick]

From SA:

Extreme signals
There are two key lines of evidence. First, it's not just that we've become more aware of disasters like North Dakota or last year's Nashville flood, which caused $13 billion in damage, or the massive 2010 summer monsoon in Pakistan that killed 1,500 people and left 20 million more homeless. The data show that the number of such events is rising. Munich Re, one of the world's largest reinsurance companies, has compiled the world's most comprehensive database of natural disasters, reaching all the way back to the eruption of Mount Vesuvius in A.D. 79. Researchers at the company, which obviously has a keen financial interest in trends that increase insurance risks, add 700 to 1,000 natural catastrophes to the database each year, explains Mark Bove, senior research meteorologist in Munich Re's catastrophe risk management office in Princeton, N.J. The data indicate a small increase in geologic events like earthquakes since 1980 because of better reporting. But the increase in the number of climate disasters is far larger. "Our figures indicate a trend towards an increase in extreme weather events that can only be fully explained by climate change," says Peter Höppe, head of Munich Re's Geo Risks Research/Corporate Climate Center: "It's as if the weather machine had changed up a gear.

The second line of evidence comes from a nascent branch of science called climate attribution. The idea is to examine individual events like a detective investigating a crime, searching for telltale fingerprints of climate change. Those fingerprints are showing up—in the autumn floods of 2000 in England and Wales that were the worst on record, in the 2003 European heat wave that caused 14,000 deaths in France, in Hurricane Katrina—and, yes, probably even in Nashville. This doesn't mean that the storms or hot spells wouldn't have happened at all without climate change, but as scientists like Trenberth say, they wouldn't have been as severe if humankind hadn't already altered the planet's climate.This new science is still controversial. There's an active debate among researchers about whether the Russian heat wave bears the characteristic signature of climate change or whether it was just natural variability, for instance. Some scientists worry that trying to attribute individual events to climate change is counterproductive in the larger political debate, because it's so easy to dismiss the claim by saying that the planet has always experienced extreme weather. And some researchers who privately are convinced of the link are reluctant to say so publicly, because global warming has become such a target of many in Congress.

But the evidence is growing for a link between the emissions of modern civilization and extreme weather events. And that has the potential to profoundly alter the perception of the threats posed by climate change. No longer is global warming an abstract concept, affecting faraway species, distant lands or generations far in the future. Instead, climate change becomes personal. Its hand can be seen in the corn crop of a Maryland farmer ruined when soaring temperatures shut down pollination or the $13 billion in damage in Nashville, with the Grand Ole Opry flooded and sodden homes reeking of rot. "All of a sudden we're not talking about polar bears or the Maldives any more," says Nashville-based author and environmental journalistAmanda Little. "Climate change translates into mold on my baby's crib. We're talking about homes and schools and churches and all the places that got hit."

Number of storms DOWN.
Power of storms DOWN.
Number of tornado's DOWN.
Power of tornado's DOWN.

Everything about the article is total horseshit when it comes to the frequency claims. Everything.

Source?

Here's the database the SA article mentions: NatCatSERVICE | Munich Re

 

[Crick]

http://www.munichre.com/site/corpor...ter-2014-Loss-events-worldwide-percentage.pdf

From their data, 2004 - 2014
Percent overall losses
Climate (temperature extremes):
2004 - 1%
2006 - 15%
2008 - 12%
2010 - 5%
2012 - 16%
2014 - 20%

I am reading further into the SA article

 

[Crick]

From Global Warming and the Science of Extreme Weather

Extreme floods, prolonged droughts, searing heat waves, massive rainstorms and the like don't just seem like they've become the new normal in the last few years—theyhave become more common, according to data collected by reinsurance company Munich Re (see Part 1 of this series). But has this increase resulted from human-caused climate change or just from natural climatic variations? After all, recorded floods and droughts go back to the earliest days of mankind, before coal, oil and natural gas made the modern industrial world possible.

Until recently scientists had only been able to say that more extreme weather is "consistent" with climate change caused by greenhouse gases that humans are emitting into the atmosphere. Now, however, they can begin to say that the odds of having extreme weather have increased because of human-caused atmospheric changes—and that many individual events would not have happened in the same way without global warming. The reason: The signal of climate change is finally emerging from the "noise"—the huge amount of natural variability in weather.

Scientists compare the normal variation in weather with rolls of the dice. Adding greenhouse gases to the atmosphere loads the dice, increasing odds of such extreme weather events. It's not just that the weather dice are altered, however. As Steve Sherwood, co-director of the Climate Change Research Center at the University of New South Wales in Australia, puts it, "it is more like painting an extra spot on each face of one of the dice, so that it goes from 2 to 7 instead of 1 to 6. This increases the odds of rolling 11 or 12, but also makes it possible to roll 13."

Why? Basic physics is at work: The planet has already warmed roughly 1 degree Celsius since preindustrial times, thanks to CO2and other greenhouse gases emitted into the atmosphere. And for every 1-degree C (1.8 degrees Fahrenheit) rise in temperature, the amount of moisture that the atmosphere can contain rises by 7 percent, explains Peter Stott, head of climate monitoring and attribution at the U.K. Met Office's Hadley Center for Climate Change. "That's quite dramatic," he says. In some places, the increase has been much larger. Data gathered by Gene Takle, professor of meteorology at Iowa State University in Ames, show a 13 percent rise in summer moisture over the past 50 years in the state capital, Des Moines.
******************************************************************************************************************************
Because of the large-scale energy balance of the planet, "the upshot is that overall rainfall increases only 2 to 3 percent per degree of warming, whereas extreme rainfall increases 6 to 7 percent," Stott says. The reason again comes from physics. Rain happens when the atmosphere cools enough for water vapor to condense into liquid. "However, because of the increasing amount of greenhouse gases in the troposphere, the radiative cooling is less efficient, as less radiation can escape to space," Stott explains. "Therefore the global precipitation increases less, at about 2 to 3 percent per degree of warming." But because of the extra moisture, when precipitation does occur (in both rain and snow), it's more likely to be in bigger events.
****************************************************************************************************************************

This second article discusses some of the findings of climate attribution. Probably best to read it yourself.

 

[Billy_Bob]

The San Jose Mercury News reported on June 30, 1989 that a “senior environmental official at the United Nations, Noel Brown, says entire nations could be wiped off the face of the earth by rising sea levels if global warming is not reversed by the year 2000.”

Read more: 25 Years Of Predicting The Global Warming ‘Tipping Point’

Spot on!

He is quite right about that.

He didn't say that "entire nations could be wiped off the face of the earth by rising sea levels" would happen by the year 2000, BTW you moron, he said that that would happen at some point in the future "if global warming is not reversed by the year 2000". He may have been correct. Dely in dealing with this crisis is very probably dooming those islands because of what may well be at this point an inevitable rise in sea levels because CO2 emissions have continued to increase despite the clear warnings from the world scientific community decades ago.

Problem is s0n....as Frank astutely points out...........the AGW k00ks have been promising all kinds of calamities for decades and none of the shit ends up happening!!! That's why after 2008, everybody stopped caring about global warming. Progressives always find a way to blast their collective faces off when they start winning ( back in 2005).......they went hard core with a billion future predictions most of which fell flat on their faces.
Almost every single person who ran on the climate change platform in the most recent mid-term election got their clocks cleaned..........and Im still laughing a year later!!!
Climate Change Activists Come Up Short In Midterm Elections

Your usual insane nonsense....totally meaningless....

In the real world....

SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN SERIES ON EXTREME WEATHER, CLIMATE CHANGE, AND THE RISKS WE FACE

Scientific American published a three-part series authored by award-winning science journalist John Carey and commissioned by the Pew Center on Global Climate Change that reports on the link between extreme weather and climate change.

The series details the impacts of extreme weather events, the science behind extreme weather and global warming, and the risks and how to respond to the increase in extreme weather. Through enterprising reporting, this series provides an in-depth and accessible account of extreme weather affecting communities across America, why it’s happening, and what can be done about it.

Part One - Storm Warnings: Extreme Weather Is a Product of Climate Change
More violent and frequent storms, once merely a prediction of climate models, are now a matter of observation.

In North Dakota the waters kept rising. Swollen by more than a month of record rains in Saskatchewan, the Souris River topped its all time record high, set back in 1881. The floodwaters poured into Minot, North Dakota's fourth-largest city, and spread across thousands of acres of farms and forests. More than 12,000 people were forced to evacuate. Many lost their homes to the floodwaters.Read more.

Part Two - Global Warming and the Science of Extreme Weather
How rising temperatures change weather and produce fiercer, more frequent storms.

Extreme floods, prolonged droughts, searing heat waves, massive rainstorms and the like don't just seem like they've become the new normal in the last few years—they have become more common, according to data collected by reinsurance company Munich Re. But has this increase resulted from human-caused climate change or just from natural climatic variations? After all, recorded floods and droughts go back to the earliest days of mankind, before coal, oil and natural gas made the modern industrial world possible. Read more.

Part Three - Our Extreme Future: Predicting and Coping with a Changing Climate
Adapting to extreme weather calls for a combination of restoring wetland and building drains and sewers that can handle the water. But leaders and the public are slow to catch on.

Extreme weather events have become both more common and more intense. And increasingly, scientists have been able to pin at least part of the blame on humankind's alteration of the climate. What's more, the growing success of this nascent science of climate attribution (finding the telltale fingerprints of climate change in extreme events) means that researchers have more confidence in their climate models—which predict that the future will be even more extreme. Read more.

Too Funny;

You start off by citing a paper which uses a blatant lie, that storm frequency is increasing, and then you go on to say your objective...

Touting lies again are we? This is why alarmists can not be trusted in any manner.. they use half truths and blatant lies to support their agenda.

 

[Billy_Bob]

From Global Warming and the Science of Extreme Weather

Extreme floods, prolonged droughts, searing heat waves, massive rainstorms and the like don't just seem like they've become the new normal in the last few years—theyhave become more common, according to data collected by reinsurance company Munich Re (see Part 1 of this series). But has this increase resulted from human-caused climate change or just from natural climatic variations? After all, recorded floods and droughts go back to the earliest days of mankind, before coal, oil and natural gas made the modern industrial world possible.

Until recently scientists had only been able to say that more extreme weather is "consistent" with climate change caused by greenhouse gases that humans are emitting into the atmosphere. Now, however, they can begin to say that the odds of having extreme weather have increased because of human-caused atmospheric changes—and that many individual events would not have happened in the same way without global warming. The reason: The signal of climate change is finally emerging from the "noise"—the huge amount of natural variability in weather.

Scientists compare the normal variation in weather with rolls of the dice. Adding greenhouse gases to the atmosphere loads the dice, increasing odds of such extreme weather events. It's not just that the weather dice are altered, however. As Steve Sherwood, co-director of the Climate Change Research Center at the University of New South Wales in Australia, puts it, "it is more like painting an extra spot on each face of one of the dice, so that it goes from 2 to 7 instead of 1 to 6. This increases the odds of rolling 11 or 12, but also makes it possible to roll 13."

Why? Basic physics is at work: The planet has already warmed roughly 1 degree Celsius since preindustrial times, thanks to CO2and other greenhouse gases emitted into the atmosphere. And for every 1-degree C (1.8 degrees Fahrenheit) rise in temperature, the amount of moisture that the atmosphere can contain rises by 7 percent, explains Peter Stott, head of climate monitoring and attribution at the U.K. Met Office's Hadley Center for Climate Change. "That's quite dramatic," he says. In some places, the increase has been much larger. Data gathered by Gene Takle, professor of meteorology at Iowa State University in Ames, show a 13 percent rise in summer moisture over the past 50 years in the state capital, Des Moines.
******************************************************************************************************************************
Because of the large-scale energy balance of the planet, "the upshot is that overall rainfall increases only 2 to 3 percent per degree of warming, whereas extreme rainfall increases 6 to 7 percent," Stott says. The reason again comes from physics. Rain happens when the atmosphere cools enough for water vapor to condense into liquid. "However, because of the increasing amount of greenhouse gases in the troposphere, the radiative cooling is less efficient, as less radiation can escape to space," Stott explains. "Therefore the global precipitation increases less, at about 2 to 3 percent per degree of warming." But because of the extra moisture, when precipitation does occur (in both rain and snow), it's more likely to be in bigger events.
****************************************************************************************************************************

This second article discusses some of the findings of climate attribution. Probably best to read it yourself.

And not a single fact that supports their supposition!

 

[CrusaderFrank]

insurance companies are trying to use climate change to get government to subsidies their losses

 

[westwall]

From SA:

Extreme signals
There are two key lines of evidence. First, it's not just that we've become more aware of disasters like North Dakota or last year's Nashville flood, which caused $13 billion in damage, or the massive 2010 summer monsoon in Pakistan that killed 1,500 people and left 20 million more homeless. The data show that the number of such events is rising. Munich Re, one of the world's largest reinsurance companies, has compiled the world's most comprehensive database of natural disasters, reaching all the way back to the eruption of Mount Vesuvius in A.D. 79. Researchers at the company, which obviously has a keen financial interest in trends that increase insurance risks, add 700 to 1,000 natural catastrophes to the database each year, explains Mark Bove, senior research meteorologist in Munich Re's catastrophe risk management office in Princeton, N.J. The data indicate a small increase in geologic events like earthquakes since 1980 because of better reporting. But the increase in the number of climate disasters is far larger. "Our figures indicate a trend towards an increase in extreme weather events that can only be fully explained by climate change," says Peter Höppe, head of Munich Re's Geo Risks Research/Corporate Climate Center: "It's as if the weather machine had changed up a gear.

The second line of evidence comes from a nascent branch of science called climate attribution. The idea is to examine individual events like a detective investigating a crime, searching for telltale fingerprints of climate change. Those fingerprints are showing up—in the autumn floods of 2000 in England and Wales that were the worst on record, in the 2003 European heat wave that caused 14,000 deaths in France, in Hurricane Katrina—and, yes, probably even in Nashville. This doesn't mean that the storms or hot spells wouldn't have happened at all without climate change, but as scientists like Trenberth say, they wouldn't have been as severe if humankind hadn't already altered the planet's climate.This new science is still controversial. There's an active debate among researchers about whether the Russian heat wave bears the characteristic signature of climate change or whether it was just natural variability, for instance. Some scientists worry that trying to attribute individual events to climate change is counterproductive in the larger political debate, because it's so easy to dismiss the claim by saying that the planet has always experienced extreme weather. And some researchers who privately are convinced of the link are reluctant to say so publicly, because global warming has become such a target of many in Congress.

But the evidence is growing for a link between the emissions of modern civilization and extreme weather events. And that has the potential to profoundly alter the perception of the threats posed by climate change. No longer is global warming an abstract concept, affecting faraway species, distant lands or generations far in the future. Instead, climate change becomes personal. Its hand can be seen in the corn crop of a Maryland farmer ruined when soaring temperatures shut down pollination or the $13 billion in damage in Nashville, with the Grand Ole Opry flooded and sodden homes reeking of rot. "All of a sudden we're not talking about polar bears or the Maldives any more," says Nashville-based author and environmental journalistAmanda Little. "Climate change translates into mold on my baby's crib. We're talking about homes and schools and churches and all the places that got hit."

Number of storms DOWN.
Power of storms DOWN.
Number of tornado's DOWN.
Power of tornado's DOWN.

Everything about the article is total horseshit when it comes to the frequency claims. Everything.

Source?

Here's the database the SA article mentions: NatCatSERVICE | Munich Re

Here's NOAA's report on it....

"During a month when severe weather typically strikes, this March has been unusually quiet, with no tornado or severe thunderstorm watches issued by NOAA's Storm Prediction Center so far. And, National Weather Service forecasters see no sign of dramatic change for the next week at least. "We are in uncharted territory with respect to lack of severe weather", said Greg Carbin, SPC's warning coordination meteorologist. "This has never happened in the record of SPC watches dating back to 1970."

Read more: NOAA: 'Unprecedented' lack of tornadoes and storms - 'We are in uncharted territory with respect to lack of severe weather'


Storm Prediction Center WCM Page

 

[CrusaderFrank]

From Global Warming and the Science of Extreme Weather

Extreme floods, prolonged droughts, searing heat waves, massive rainstorms and the like don't just seem like they've become the new normal in the last few years—theyhave become more common, according to data collected by reinsurance company Munich Re (see Part 1 of this series). But has this increase resulted from human-caused climate change or just from natural climatic variations? After all, recorded floods and droughts go back to the earliest days of mankind, before coal, oil and natural gas made the modern industrial world possible.

Until recently scientists had only been able to say that more extreme weather is "consistent" with climate change caused by greenhouse gases that humans are emitting into the atmosphere. Now, however, they can begin to say that the odds of having extreme weather have increased because of human-caused atmospheric changes—and that many individual events would not have happened in the same way without global warming. The reason: The signal of climate change is finally emerging from the "noise"—the huge amount of natural variability in weather.

Scientists compare the normal variation in weather with rolls of the dice. Adding greenhouse gases to the atmosphere loads the dice, increasing odds of such extreme weather events. It's not just that the weather dice are altered, however. As Steve Sherwood, co-director of the Climate Change Research Center at the University of New South Wales in Australia, puts it, "it is more like painting an extra spot on each face of one of the dice, so that it goes from 2 to 7 instead of 1 to 6. This increases the odds of rolling 11 or 12, but also makes it possible to roll 13."

Why? Basic physics is at work: The planet has already warmed roughly 1 degree Celsius since preindustrial times, thanks to CO2and other greenhouse gases emitted into the atmosphere. And for every 1-degree C (1.8 degrees Fahrenheit) rise in temperature, the amount of moisture that the atmosphere can contain rises by 7 percent, explains Peter Stott, head of climate monitoring and attribution at the U.K. Met Office's Hadley Center for Climate Change. "That's quite dramatic," he says. In some places, the increase has been much larger. Data gathered by Gene Takle, professor of meteorology at Iowa State University in Ames, show a 13 percent rise in summer moisture over the past 50 years in the state capital, Des Moines.
******************************************************************************************************************************
Because of the large-scale energy balance of the planet, "the upshot is that overall rainfall increases only 2 to 3 percent per degree of warming, whereas extreme rainfall increases 6 to 7 percent," Stott says. The reason again comes from physics. Rain happens when the atmosphere cools enough for water vapor to condense into liquid. "However, because of the increasing amount of greenhouse gases in the troposphere, the radiative cooling is less efficient, as less radiation can escape to space," Stott explains. "Therefore the global precipitation increases less, at about 2 to 3 percent per degree of warming." But because of the extra moisture, when precipitation does occur (in both rain and snow), it's more likely to be in bigger events.
****************************************************************************************************************************

This second article discusses some of the findings of climate attribution. Probably best to read it yourself.

No wonder we've had so many Cat 5 hurricanes make landfall after Katrina

No wonder

 

[CrusaderFrank]

From SA:

Extreme signals
There are two key lines of evidence. First, it's not just that we've become more aware of disasters like North Dakota or last year's Nashville flood, which caused $13 billion in damage, or the massive 2010 summer monsoon in Pakistan that killed 1,500 people and left 20 million more homeless. The data show that the number of such events is rising. Munich Re, one of the world's largest reinsurance companies, has compiled the world's most comprehensive database of natural disasters, reaching all the way back to the eruption of Mount Vesuvius in A.D. 79. Researchers at the company, which obviously has a keen financial interest in trends that increase insurance risks, add 700 to 1,000 natural catastrophes to the database each year, explains Mark Bove, senior research meteorologist in Munich Re's catastrophe risk management office in Princeton, N.J. The data indicate a small increase in geologic events like earthquakes since 1980 because of better reporting. But the increase in the number of climate disasters is far larger. "Our figures indicate a trend towards an increase in extreme weather events that can only be fully explained by climate change," says Peter Höppe, head of Munich Re's Geo Risks Research/Corporate Climate Center: "It's as if the weather machine had changed up a gear.

The second line of evidence comes from a nascent branch of science called climate attribution. The idea is to examine individual events like a detective investigating a crime, searching for telltale fingerprints of climate change. Those fingerprints are showing up—in the autumn floods of 2000 in England and Wales that were the worst on record, in the 2003 European heat wave that caused 14,000 deaths in France, in Hurricane Katrina—and, yes, probably even in Nashville. This doesn't mean that the storms or hot spells wouldn't have happened at all without climate change, but as scientists like Trenberth say, they wouldn't have been as severe if humankind hadn't already altered the planet's climate.This new science is still controversial. There's an active debate among researchers about whether the Russian heat wave bears the characteristic signature of climate change or whether it was just natural variability, for instance. Some scientists worry that trying to attribute individual events to climate change is counterproductive in the larger political debate, because it's so easy to dismiss the claim by saying that the planet has always experienced extreme weather. And some researchers who privately are convinced of the link are reluctant to say so publicly, because global warming has become such a target of many in Congress.

But the evidence is growing for a link between the emissions of modern civilization and extreme weather events. And that has the potential to profoundly alter the perception of the threats posed by climate change. No longer is global warming an abstract concept, affecting faraway species, distant lands or generations far in the future. Instead, climate change becomes personal. Its hand can be seen in the corn crop of a Maryland farmer ruined when soaring temperatures shut down pollination or the $13 billion in damage in Nashville, with the Grand Ole Opry flooded and sodden homes reeking of rot. "All of a sudden we're not talking about polar bears or the Maldives any more," says Nashville-based author and environmental journalistAmanda Little. "Climate change translates into mold on my baby's crib. We're talking about homes and schools and churches and all the places that got hit."

Number of storms DOWN.
Power of storms DOWN.
Number of tornado's DOWN.
Power of tornado's DOWN.

Everything about the article is total horseshit when it comes to the frequency claims. Everything.

Source?

Here's the database the SA article mentions: NatCatSERVICE | Munich Re

Here's NOAA's report on it....

"During a month when severe weather typically strikes, this March has been unusually quiet, with no tornado or severe thunderstorm watches issued by NOAA's Storm Prediction Center so far. And, National Weather Service forecasters see no sign of dramatic change for the next week at least. "We are in uncharted territory with respect to lack of severe weather", said Greg Carbin, SPC's warning coordination meteorologist. "This has never happened in the record of SPC watches dating back to 1970."

Read more: NOAA: 'Unprecedented' lack of tornadoes and storms - 'We are in uncharted territory with respect to lack of severe weather'


Storm Prediction Center WCM Page

"unusually quiet" .....because of manmade climate warming change!

 

[RollingThunder]

From SA:

Extreme signals
There are two key lines of evidence. First, it's not just that we've become more aware of disasters like North Dakota or last year's Nashville flood, which caused $13 billion in damage, or the massive 2010 summer monsoon in Pakistan that killed 1,500 people and left 20 million more homeless. The data show that the number of such events is rising. Munich Re, one of the world's largest reinsurance companies, has compiled the world's most comprehensive database of natural disasters, reaching all the way back to the eruption of Mount Vesuvius in A.D. 79. Researchers at the company, which obviously has a keen financial interest in trends that increase insurance risks, add 700 to 1,000 natural catastrophes to the database each year, explains Mark Bove, senior research meteorologist in Munich Re's catastrophe risk management office in Princeton, N.J. The data indicate a small increase in geologic events like earthquakes since 1980 because of better reporting. But the increase in the number of climate disasters is far larger. "Our figures indicate a trend towards an increase in extreme weather events that can only be fully explained by climate change," says Peter Höppe, head of Munich Re's Geo Risks Research/Corporate Climate Center: "It's as if the weather machine had changed up a gear.

The second line of evidence comes from a nascent branch of science called climate attribution. The idea is to examine individual events like a detective investigating a crime, searching for telltale fingerprints of climate change. Those fingerprints are showing up—in the autumn floods of 2000 in England and Wales that were the worst on record, in the 2003 European heat wave that caused 14,000 deaths in France, in Hurricane Katrina—and, yes, probably even in Nashville. This doesn't mean that the storms or hot spells wouldn't have happened at all without climate change, but as scientists like Trenberth say, they wouldn't have been as severe if humankind hadn't already altered the planet's climate.This new science is still controversial. There's an active debate among researchers about whether the Russian heat wave bears the characteristic signature of climate change or whether it was just natural variability, for instance. Some scientists worry that trying to attribute individual events to climate change is counterproductive in the larger political debate, because it's so easy to dismiss the claim by saying that the planet has always experienced extreme weather. And some researchers who privately are convinced of the link are reluctant to say so publicly, because global warming has become such a target of many in Congress.

But the evidence is growing for a link between the emissions of modern civilization and extreme weather events. And that has the potential to profoundly alter the perception of the threats posed by climate change. No longer is global warming an abstract concept, affecting faraway species, distant lands or generations far in the future. Instead, climate change becomes personal. Its hand can be seen in the corn crop of a Maryland farmer ruined when soaring temperatures shut down pollination or the $13 billion in damage in Nashville, with the Grand Ole Opry flooded and sodden homes reeking of rot. "All of a sudden we're not talking about polar bears or the Maldives any more," says Nashville-based author and environmental journalistAmanda Little. "Climate change translates into mold on my baby's crib. We're talking about homes and schools and churches and all the places that got hit."

Number of storms DOWN.
Power of storms DOWN.
Number of tornado's DOWN.
Power of tornado's DOWN.

Everything about the article is total horseshit when it comes to the frequency claims. Everything.

"Total horseshit" is your specialty, as well as reality denial.

In the real world....

Heavy precipitation
Dr. Jeff Masters - WeatherUnderground
Are heavy rain events becoming more frequent due to climate change? That is a difficult question to answer, since reliable records are not available at all in many parts of the world, and extend back only a few decades elsewhere. However, we do have a fairly good set of precipitation records for many parts of the globe, and those records show that the heaviest types of rains--those likely to cause flooding--have increased in recent years. According to the United Nations' Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) 2007 report, "The frequency of heavy precipitation events has increased over most land areas". Indeed, global warming theory has long predicted an increase in heavy precipitation events. As the climate warms, evaporation of moisture from the oceans increases, resulting in more water vapor in the air. According to the 2007 IPCC report, water vapor in the global atmosphere has increased by about 5% over the 20th century, and 4% since 1970. Satellite measurements (Trenberth et al., 2005) have shown a 1.3% per decade increase in water vapor over the global oceans since 1988. Santer et al. (2007) used a climate model to study the relative contribution of natural and human-caused effects on increasing water vapor, and concluded that this increase was "primarily due to human-caused increases in greenhouse gases". This was also the conclusion of Willet et al. (2007).

More water vapor equals more precipitation
This increase in water vapor has very likely led to an increase in global precipitation. For instance, over the U.S., where we have very good precipitation records, annual average precipitation has increased 7% over the past century (Groisman et al., 2004). The same study also found a 14% increase in heavy (top 5%) and 20% increase in very heavy (top 1%) precipitation events over the U.S. in the past century. Kunkel et al. (2003) also found an increase in heavy precipitation events over the U.S. in recent decades, but noted that heavy precipitation events were nearly as frequent at the end of the 19th century and beginning of the 20th century, though the data is not as reliable back then. Thus, there is a large natural variation in extreme precipitation events.

The future of flooding
It is difficult to say if the increase in heavy precipitation events in recent years has led to more flooding, since flooding is critically dependent on how much the landscape has been altered by development, upstream deforestation, and what kind of flood control devices are present. One of the few studies that did attempt to quantify flooding (Milly et al., 2002) found that the incidence of great floods has increased in recent decades. In the past century, the world's 29 largest river basins experienced a total of 21 "100-year floods"--the type of flood one would expect only once per 100 years in a given river basin. Of these 21 floods, 16 occurred in the last half of the century (after 1953). With the IPCC predicting that heavy precipitation events are very likely to continue to increase, it would be no surprise to see flooding worsen globally in the coming decades.

 

[skookerasbil]

Well.....lets face it. Before last night, global warming was barely on the radars of most Americans. Today.......nobody is giving a rats ass.......unless of course, you are an AGW OCD k00k.

 

[Crick]

From Global Warming and the Science of Extreme Weather

Extreme floods, prolonged droughts, searing heat waves, massive rainstorms and the like don't just seem like they've become the new normal in the last few years—theyhave become more common, according to data collected by reinsurance company Munich Re (see Part 1 of this series). But has this increase resulted from human-caused climate change or just from natural climatic variations? After all, recorded floods and droughts go back to the earliest days of mankind, before coal, oil and natural gas made the modern industrial world possible.

Until recently scientists had only been able to say that more extreme weather is "consistent" with climate change caused by greenhouse gases that humans are emitting into the atmosphere. Now, however, they can begin to say that the odds of having extreme weather have increased because of human-caused atmospheric changes—and that many individual events would not have happened in the same way without global warming. The reason: The signal of climate change is finally emerging from the "noise"—the huge amount of natural variability in weather.

Scientists compare the normal variation in weather with rolls of the dice. Adding greenhouse gases to the atmosphere loads the dice, increasing odds of such extreme weather events. It's not just that the weather dice are altered, however. As Steve Sherwood, co-director of the Climate Change Research Center at the University of New South Wales in Australia, puts it, "it is more like painting an extra spot on each face of one of the dice, so that it goes from 2 to 7 instead of 1 to 6. This increases the odds of rolling 11 or 12, but also makes it possible to roll 13."

Why? Basic physics is at work: The planet has already warmed roughly 1 degree Celsius since preindustrial times, thanks to CO2and other greenhouse gases emitted into the atmosphere. And for every 1-degree C (1.8 degrees Fahrenheit) rise in temperature, the amount of moisture that the atmosphere can contain rises by 7 percent, explains Peter Stott, head of climate monitoring and attribution at the U.K. Met Office's Hadley Center for Climate Change. "That's quite dramatic," he says. In some places, the increase has been much larger. Data gathered by Gene Takle, professor of meteorology at Iowa State University in Ames, show a 13 percent rise in summer moisture over the past 50 years in the state capital, Des Moines.
******************************************************************************************************************************
Because of the large-scale energy balance of the planet, "the upshot is that overall rainfall increases only 2 to 3 percent per degree of warming, whereas extreme rainfall increases 6 to 7 percent," Stott says. The reason again comes from physics. Rain happens when the atmosphere cools enough for water vapor to condense into liquid. "However, because of the increasing amount of greenhouse gases in the troposphere, the radiative cooling is less efficient, as less radiation can escape to space," Stott explains. "Therefore the global precipitation increases less, at about 2 to 3 percent per degree of warming." But because of the extra moisture, when precipitation does occur (in both rain and snow), it's more likely to be in bigger events.
****************************************************************************************************************************

This second article discusses some of the findings of climate attribution. Probably best to read it yourself.

And not a single fact that supports their supposition!

The Munich RE data analysis is a fact and it fully supports these comments. The frequency of intense weather HAS increased.