Cruces Atmospheric Sciences Forum – In science, the debate is never over!
Tag: climate change
[def. dictionary.com] a long-term change in the earth’s climate, especially a change due to an increase in the average atmospheric temperature: Melting glaciers imply that life in the Arctic is affected by climate change. … Foremost among them is the role of birth control in dealing with climate change.
[added comments] The above appears to be an overly simple definition of climate change and the last sentence is open to extensive discussion. There is much more to climate change than temperature. There is wind, precipitation, humidity, atmospheric pressure, and other elements. Also, there is nothing unusual about climate change, because the climate is constantly changing. Climate is simply average weather. What that is depends on the averaging period. Some say that at least 30 years of measurements are required to compute climatic averages, but that is not necessarily correct. There are good reasons to consider 60 years of measurements due to the 60-year Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO). The limiting factor in computing climatological averages is the amount of measurement data available. Generally, there is no more than 100 to 150 years of data unless proxy data are used. Regardless, the climatological average will be different for each different averaging period. Consequently, we must conclude that we really do not have sufficient data to know what the climatological averages are not to mention how they are changing.
‘More evidence that Hurricane Michael was definitely NOT a Category FIVE storm at landfall.’
Robert W. Endlich
In late September 2022 Category Four Hurricane Ian struck southwest Florida bringing death and destruction to southwest Florida. Ian’s arrival and wind damage spurred me to take another look at when 2018’s Hurricane Michael struck the Panhandle of Florida, and NOAA’s 2019 declaration that Michael was a Category Five storm at landfall.
Richard S. Lindzen
Professor Emeritus of Atmospheric Sciences, MIT
[This essay is a slightly extended version of a lecture delivered to a joint zoom meeting of the Irish Climate Science Forum and CLINTEL on March 31, 2021.]
For about 33 years, many of us have been battling against climate hysteria. We have correctly noted
The exaggerated sensitivity,
The role of other processes and natural internal variability,
The inconsistency with the paleoclimate record,
The absence of evidence for increased extremes, droughts, floods, wild-fires, and so on.
We have also pointed out the very real benefits of CO2 and even of modest warming. And, as concerns government policies, we have been pretty ineffective. Indeed our efforts have done little other than to show (incorrectly) that we take the threat scenario seriously. In this talk, I want to make a tentative analysis of our failure.