catbarf on 9/10/2007 at 01:20
Where I live in Pennsylvania, we've got people blaming the drought we're having on global warming. OMG! GLOBAL WARMING! FIRST IT MADE RAIN, NOW THERE ISN'T ANY RAIN! AAARGH!
jay pettitt on 9/10/2007 at 10:29
And that would be a problem for you because...?
catbarf on 9/10/2007 at 23:10
It isn't. It's just that one minute people are yelling that global warming is causing floods, and the next they're blaming it for droughts.
Mingan on 9/10/2007 at 23:34
In short, people have started using global warming to explain every weather oddities.
demagogue on 10/10/2007 at 00:20
Yeah, it's more like a statistical effect than a cause for specific events. It's actually bad reasoning ... sort of like biasing a dice, you can't blame a specific roll on the bias, but you can blame the statistical properties of a long run of rolls on it. Not to mention it's not entirely known which events are supposed to be affected, or how.
I think the reason the env crowd doesn't play up that part of it is because it builds political capital every time there's some disaster ... people cry 'global warming', and they sort of bite their tongue and don't mind the political pressure it adds for their side.
DaveW on 10/10/2007 at 01:04
Whether it's us or not, it is being used a bit as a tool for media attention nowadays. I mean, when fabric softener starts referencing it, it gets a bit silly.
Where I live it's getting used as an attack against airport expansion - notably Bristol Airport. Really, what they're worried about is people don't want to stay in the UK to go on holiday because it's rubbish (particularily the south west where it got flooded quite badly) - but they blame airports for it. Not the consumers creating the demand for bigger airports. So suddenly, airports and more jobs are bad for the economy (yes, they seriously think jobs are bad) and of course, airports are ruining the environment. Which means they have to pay more money on "environment tax" or whatever, hike their prices up, and push the protester's agenda. Sneaky buggers.
jay pettitt on 10/10/2007 at 01:21
Sure, it's a bit iffy to blame local, individual weather happenings on the global phenomenon that is climate change - we've always had weather. That said, the dice are biased. Global warming is, right now, the significant influence on the climate and climate begats weather; at some point you've got to get your head out the sand and call it what it is. A warmer climate will lead to both more precipitation and more obvious periods without, they're in no way exclusive of each other.
demagogue on 10/10/2007 at 01:40
Yeah, I agree. I think what bothers me a little is that people should be dealing with it in long term institutional terms, rather than getting all bothered after some hurricane that they rush to do some ad hoc thing that's going to be both more expensive and less useful in the long term than it needs to be.
So like, there could be some investment in a global insurance mechanism for global weather disasters (like they already have for oil spills and are working on for other env disasters), since one thing insurance is good at is keeping premiums at pace with statistical properties of an event, so it doesn't get too expensive and costs are spread across everyone at risk.
Rogue Keeper on 10/10/2007 at 07:40
Quote Posted by Mingan
In short, people have started using global warming to explain every weather oddities.
I remember quite well that when I was a kid, the weather during year wasn't as unpredictable with higher summer temperatures, strong storms, mini-typhoons where they weren't happening before, so yes, I must assume that
something has changed with climate during last 20 years.
