Climate Change

6 Years Ago, North Carolina Chose to Ignore Rising Sea Levels. This Week It Braces for Disaster.


In 2012, North Carolina legislators passed a bill that barred policymakers and developers from using up-to-date climate science to plan for rising sea levels on the state’s coast. Now Hurricane Florence threatens to cause a devastating storm surge that could put thousands of lives in danger and cost the state billions of dollars worth of damage.
via 6 Years Ago, North Carolina Chose to Ignore Rising Sea Levels. This Week It Braces for Disaster.
Reality is that which continues to exist even if you cease believing in it.

Emails Show Cooperation Among EPA, Climate-Change Deniers


WASHINGTON (AP) — Newly released emails show senior Environmental Protection Agency officials working closely with a conservative group that dismisses climate change to rally like-minded people for public hearings on science and global warming, counter negative news coverage and promote Administr
via Emails Show Cooperation Among EPA, Climate-Change Deniers
Lysenkoism.

50 World Leaders Will Discuss Climate Change in Paris. Donald Trump Wasn't Invited


Foreign policy experts on both sides of the aisle predicted that President Trump’s decision to take the U.S. out of the world’s most significant agreement to fight climate change would leave the U.S. isolated on the issue. Now they have one of their first examples of that argument.
via 50 World Leaders Will Discuss Climate Change in Paris. Donald Trump Wasn’t Invited
This didn’t get the coverage it should have. This is awful.

As hurricanes and wildfires rage, US climate politics enters the realm of farce - Vox

Refuting the last few scientific arguments for denial is not going to bring conservatives around. Clever new ways of talking about climate action are not going to bring conservatives around.

Research on public opinion shows that conservative opinion is responsive to one thing above all else: the cues of conservative elites. People don’t have strong opinions on political “issues” one way or the other. They believe and do what people like them believe and do, and they take their cues on that from trusted tribal leaders.

To put it more simply, conservatives will tend to believe on climate change whatever people on Fox (or talk radio) tell them about climate change.

It is conservative elites, and only conservative elites, who have the power to end this surreal farce. Judging from Rush Limbaugh’s take on hurricanes, they do not yet feel any pressure to do so.

(via As hurricanes and wildfires rage, US climate politics enters the realm of farce - Vox)

Everything Conservatives Said About the Paris Climate Agreement Is Already Wrong

Everything Conservatives Said About the Paris Climate Agreement Is Already Wrong:

The only reason conservatives hate this agreement is that liberals like it. It’s a non-binding agreement. The sole purpose is to make sure that those who live up to the agreement get a voice in the next phase four years from now. Pulling out serves no US interest other than Trump’s desire to troll the American public.

The ironclad logic of conspiracy theories and how to break it

The ironclad logic of conspiracy theories and how to break it:

to deny the science of climate change is to believe in a conspiracy. It may be thought of as a conspiracy between scientists and “the left”, the UN, or all of them, but it is a necessary part of any such position.

Those in public life who deny climate science have long had a free reign in the media, appealing to the right for alternative views to be heard, claiming that this or that study is flawed, or explicitly claiming that a conspiracy exists.

Worth a read.

Global warming 'hiatus' never happened, Stanford scientists say

An apparent lull in the recent rate of global warming that has been widely accepted as fact is actually an artifact arising from faulty statistical methods, Stanford scientists say.

“By using both datasets, nobody can claim that we made up a new statistical technique in order to get a certain result,” said Rajaratnam, who is also a fellow at the Stanford Woods Institute for the Environment

(via Global warming ‘hiatus’ never happened, Stanford scientists say | EurekAlert! Science News)

You could use a billion data sets and the climate change denial machine would still ignore the findings and claim it’s a hoax.

Climate models are even more accurate than you thought

When accounting for these factors, the study finds that the difference between observed and modeled temperatures since 1975 is smaller than previously believed. The models had projected a 0.226°C per decade global surface air warming trend for 1975–2014 (and 0.212°C per decade over the geographic area covered by the HadCRUT4 record). However, when matching the HadCRUT4 methods for measuring sea surface temperatures, the modeled trend is reduced to 0.196°C per decade. The observed HadCRUT4 trend is 0.170°C per decade.

(via Climate models are even more accurate than you thought)

At this point, the climate change deniers are not going to convinced by models.

John Kerry Bashes Florida's Reported Ban On Term 'Climate Change'

John Kerry Bashes Florida's Reported Ban On Term 'Climate Change':

Numerous former officials from the Florida Department of Environmental Protection told the Florida Center for Investigative Reporting that they were banned from using the terms “climate change,” “global warming” or “sustainability.” They said the unofficial ban was put in place shortly after Gov. Rick Scott (R) took office.

The correct description for this is political correctness. I’m guessing its only a matter of time before discussion of climate change requires trigger warnings.

Red means it’s hotter than usual while blue means...



Red means it’s hotter than usual while blue means it’s colder than unusual. The Rocky Mountains and the US Southwest are actually enjoying an unusual warm spell, as are large swathes of Siberia. So while the eastern seaboard freezes, smug Russians are enjoying a relatively warm climate.

Climate change deniers are not skeptics.

Climate change deniers are not skeptics.:

Skepticism is all about critical examination, evidence-based scientific inquiry, and the use of reason in examining controversial claims. Those who flatly deny the results of climate science do not partake in any of the above. They base their conclusions on a priori convictions. Theirs is an ideological conviction—the opposite of skepticism.

The key words being flatly deny. Its fine to be critical of climate science where there are gaps or issues with the models. That’s skepticism. But to conflate weather and climate. Or argue that it isn’t happening because something-something, that’s denial.

Denying Climate Change 'Will Cost Us Billions Of Dollars, ' U.S. Budget Director Warns

Denying Climate Change 'Will Cost Us Billions Of Dollars,' U.S. Budget Director Warns:

“From where I sit, climate action is a must do; climate inaction is a can’t do; and climate denial scores – and I don’t mean scoring points on the board,” Donovan said. “I mean that it scores in the budget. Climate denial will cost us billions of dollars.”

The Carbon Tax:Economists Have A One-Page Solution To Climate Change

The Carbon Tax:Economists Have A One-Page Solution To Climate Change

This is why economists love a carbon tax: One change to the tax code and the entire economy shifts to reduce carbon emissions. No complicated regulations. No rules for what kind of gas mileage cars have to get or what specific fraction of electricity has to come from wind or solar or renewables. That’s by and large the way we do it now. Reilly says the current web of rules is a more complicated and more expensive way of getting the same outcome as a carbon tax. … Reilly says, you can reduce, say, income tax to balance out the new taxes people are paying for carbon emissions. People pay more for gas, but they get to keep more of their income. I called around and talked to a bunch of economists about this, and they said the basic idea was sound: If you give the carbon-tax money back by cutting income taxes, you can probably offset a lot of the pain.

My problem with the carbon tax, versus Cap-and-Trade is that with a carbon tax, it goes directly to consumers. Who are just as likely to vote for people who promise the cut the carbon tax without offsets as they are to vote for people who promise to cut income taxes without offsets.

Climate Change Deniers Write Another Fact-Free Op-Ed

Climate Change Deniers Write Another Fact-Free Op-Ed

The letter itself is based on a single claim. So let's be clear: If that claim is wrong, so is the rest of the letter. Guess what? That claim is wrong. So blatantly wrong, in fact, it's hard to imagine anyone could write it with a straight face. It says: "The U.K. Met Office recently released data showing that there has been no statistically significant global warming for almost 16 years." This is simply, completely, and utterly false.

Worth a read.

A paper published in the journal Science in August 1981 made several projections regarding future climate change and anthropogenic global warming based on manmade CO2 emissions. As it turns out, the authors' projections have proven to be rather accurate - and their future is now our present.

A paper published in the journal Science in August 1981 made several projections regarding future climate change and anthropogenic global warming based on manmade CO2 emissions. As it turns out, the authors’ projections have proven to be rather accurate - and their future is now our present.
1981 climate change predictions were eerily accurate

The first person to make a global warming comment about the slushy snow in October without acknowledging it was tee shirt weather last weekend can please STFU.

Climate study, funded in part by conservative group, confirms global warming

Climate study, funded in part by conservative group, confirms global warming

"Money for the new study, dubbed the Berkeley Earth Surface Temperature project, came from five foundations, including one established by Microsoft founder Bill Gates and another from the Charles Koch Charitable Foundation, widely seen as a source of money for conservative organizations and initiatives that have fought efforts to curb greenhouse-gas emissions."

Too funny.

Global Warming Critics Replicate Disputed Climate Change Findings

Gee. Imagine that. That’s supposed to be the test of scientific theory: when the same experiments produce the same results. A team of UC Berkeley physicists and statisticians that set out to challenge the scientific consensus on global ...


From Global Warming Critics Replicate Disputed Climate Change Findings


So they are going to change their minds, right? Those opinions are fact-based not ideological in nature, right?

Gradual Trends and Extreme Events

I've spent a lot of the last several days reading about climate change, extreme weather events, food prices, and so on. And one thing that became clear to me is that there's widespread misunderstanding of the relationship between the gradual trend of rising temperatures and the extreme weather events that have become so much more common.

From Krugman

Professor Krugman does a good job explaining probability distribution and how it relates to climate change predictions. Worth a read.

Mediterranean Is Scary Laboratory of Ocean Futures | Wired Science | Wired.com

The predicted effects of climate change are being met in the Mediterranean. The results are more obvious and dramatic, but the drivers are the same all over the world, said Pierre Chevaldonne, a University of the Mediterranean biologist.
From: Mediterranean Is Scary Laboratory of Ocean Futures | Wired Science | Wired.com

If global warming is a hoax, why are the predictions coming true?