Re:Warm isn't it?
Monday, July 16 2012 @ 04:14 PM CDT

Quote by: bronco Quote by: VicDiesel And I suspect he actually meant EMP. Victor. Right you are. I refer you to my senior moments post.

And for Harold, that is meaning #2 in the list.

Victor.

Re:Warm isn't it?
Monday, July 16 2012 @ 09:29 PM CDT

i wrote to a meteorologist i know

Hi xxxxxxxx

I was recently standing on the sidelines of a very animated debate/argument regarding global climate change.

Near as I can tell, the science says that we are really experiencing changes in our climate, but unfortunately this topic has become highly politicized, with all the usual effects: the deniers (possibly encouraged by people who make money on fossil fuels), those wishing to tax carbon, and a whole range of people with varying ideas on whether it's real or not, or whether there is anything we can or should do about it. When you add the idea that humans are causing this change, even more arguments break out.

The reason I mention all this is because someone brought up a puzzling observation: it seems like the most qualified people to comment on this whole subject are meteorologists, and yet we almost never hear them mention this subject during weather reports and forecasts. I think I heard someone on the Weather Channel broach the subject once.

I don't mean to put you on the spot with this question. I'm just curious about your thoughts on that observation. And if you would rather not speculate, that is fine too.

sincerely
Bill Grundmann

============================================
unauthorized quote of the reply

Hi Bill,

You aren't putting me on the spot at all. In full disclosure, as a Meteorologist, we focus more on the short term but longer term weather issues do overlap. The fact is, there is research to support both sides of the argument which, in my opinion, creates this stalemate between sides. If there were overwhelming evidence for one side, then all scientists and government officials would know and could act on it appropriately.

From what I have seen, there is no doubt that we have been warming over the last century and the rate is somewhat alarming and coincides with the industrial revolution. But, with the analysis of ice cores samples taken from the poles, the warming we have currently achieved isn't even close to the warming that earlier humans saw and pre-humans saw. So, in theory, one could say that humans aren't the cause of the warm up and it's just a natural cycle.

In the end, I think that we as humans could make conscience efforts to do the little things just in case it is us. It certainly wouldn't hurt, right?

Anyways, those are my brief thoughts...

Take Care,

xxxxxxxx

Re:Warm isn't it?
Monday, July 16 2012 @ 09:55 PM CDT

Quote by: SmokeyVW it seems like the most qualified people to comment on this whole subject are meteorologists, and yet we almost never hear them mention this subject during weather reports and forecasts.

Actually, there is a big difference between weather and climate, and there are a couple notorious deniers who have solid weather, but not climate, credentials.

I think the problem is that public tv can not say things that half of the viewers disagree with, even if those viewers are wrong. (A while back someone at the NYT was asking in all seriousness if a newspaper should point out if someone blatantly lies, or if they should simply report what was being said. The current media are weasels.)

Meanwhile, people who have an actual stake in what the climate does are perfectly clear:

http://www.treehugger.com/corporate-responsibility/33-us-generals-admirals-say-climate-change-is-threatening-americas-security.html

http://www.getreallist.com/admirals-generals-worried-about-climate-change.html

http://www.mnn.com/earth-matters/climate-weather/stories/generals-admirals-say-climate-change-a-matter-of-national-secu

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2011/jun/28/climate-change-climate-change-scepticism

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/05/08/activists-insurance-industry%E2%80%99s-flight-from-heartland-a-symptom-of-growing-climate-acceptance/

Victor.

Re:Warm isn't it?
Monday, July 16 2012 @ 09:58 PM CDT

Quote by: VicDiesel

true. they said "we focus more on the short term but longer term weather issues do overlap"

Re:Warm isn't it?
Monday, July 16 2012 @ 10:18 PM CDT

Quote by: SmokeyVW Quote by: VicDiesel true. they said "we focus more on the short term but longer term weather issues do overlap"

That is an answer, a reasonable answer, but it also evades the issue: climate change will likely lead to extreme weather events. Given that we have extreme weather events, what does that mean for our acceptance of the reality of climate change? That is a very tricky argument to make, but it should not be kept silent. So your weather friend was, imo, evading the real issue.

Here's a very well written piece (disclosure: author is a friend of mine) about extreme weather and climate:

http://planet3.org/2012/06/28/a-thousand-bastrops/

Victor.

Re:Warm isn't it?
Monday, July 16 2012 @ 11:25 PM CDT

Quote by: VicDiesel Quote by: SmokeyVW Quote by: VicDiesel true. they said "we focus more on the short term but longer term weather issues do overlap" That is an answer, a reasonable answer, but it also evades the issue: Victor.

I don't think everyone who is not on your side is evading the issue.

I don't have a problem accepting global warming, or making changes to counteract it. But you can read any book on pre-history of human beings and their ancestors, and they will talk about how often the climate drastically changed and how fast. We could have another giant volcano explode. If that were to happen, how much carbon our generation put in the air will be a moot point. This is the exact reason I do not try to force global warming down everyone's throat.

I do, however, agree that we should do something about it anyways, just in case. Being wasteful and ignorant is still a bad thing.

I'd be more concerned about the amount of plastics, chemicals and fertilizers we've put into the environment, those are more dangerous in my opinion than how warm it is. So all the future texans will have to move to Montana, my descendants are going to make a killing on real estate. My big worry is which future generations will be genetically fit enough to deal with the toxicity of the earth.

Re:Warm isn't it?
Monday, July 16 2012 @ 11:41 PM CDT

Quote by: Elevator_Funk We could have another giant volcano explode. If that were to happen, how much carbon our generation put in the air will be a moot point.

You have to be careful when using the work "carbon". Volcanoes release ashes, which is carbon, also known as "black soot". They can affect climate for a short while (couple of years, maybe a few dozen) by blocking out the sun. That's not going to be fun. However, CO2 is carbon-dioxide, which is colourless, works differently, and stays with us for 1000s of years. That's "not fun" of an entirely different order.

So, yes, volcanoes are nasty, climatologically, but what we humans pump into the atmosphere is nastier. (Ok, the chinese have a soot problem in addition to the greenhouse gas problem, so they are doubly motivated to do something.)

Victor.

Re:Warm isn't it?
Monday, July 16 2012 @ 11:55 PM CDT

oops.

Re:Warm isn't it?
Tuesday, July 17 2012 @ 08:35 AM CDT

Re:Warm isn't it?
Tuesday, July 17 2012 @ 08:40 AM CDT

Quote by: bud

that's cool! what's the story behind it?