Media Ignores Climate Change Background of Increased Flooding (Media Matters Short)

As The Scientific American noted a couple of years ago:

In a 2011 study published in Nature,

“. . . researchers examined daily records of rainfall, snowfall and sleet from more than 6,000 weather stations between 1951 and 1999. They found a rise in cases of extreme precipitation, such as rainstorms that deliver 100 millimeters of rainfall or more in 24 hours. The uptick could not be explained by natural climate fluctuations; instead it more closely matched what the patterns that computer models of climate predict for increasing concentrations of greenhouse gases. Humanity, in other words, has likely loaded the weather dice in favor of severe storms.”

Media Matters points out that this finding is cited by about 3% of newscasts on flooding in the US.

Ignoring Climate Context of Floods

Posted in Uncategorized | 9 Responses | Print |

9 Responses

    • You hadn’t heard?
      But no, it’s not that 97% are starkers. They’re just very reticent. Could it be that they and their employers do not enjoy the response to mentioning the most important thing going on?

    • Yes and that is the mirror image of 97% of climate scientists who are convinced CC is real, man made, and dangerous to the point of unraveling..

      The newscasters are complicit in 400,000 CC deaths/year (20 nation DARA study). But, then, most of us are, burning oil, etc…

      So, we all have to do our part. The stakes are as high as can be.

  1. The conservative mind has difficulty understanding that increased concentrations of water vapor in the atmosphere represent the effects of increased evaporation due to higher temperatures, and also represent increased latent energy for storms.

    Most of those opposed to the idea of global climate change seem not to have grasped some of the basic ideas of high school chemistry and physics.

    • I agree that many conservatives and deniers simply don’t understand basic physics. Meteorologists would certainly have this background, however, and have other reasons for ignoring or dismissing the science.

      • In fact, the American Association of Meteorologists have “officially” endorsed the basic conclusions of the IPCC (that climate change is real and caused by our emissions) and state. They state,

        “There is unequivocal evidence that Earth’s lower atmosphere, ocean, and land surface are warming; sea level is rising; and snow cover, mountain glaciers, and Arctic sea ice are shrinking. The dominant cause of the warming since the 1950s is human activities……. Prudence dictates extreme care in accounting for our relationship with the only planet known to be capable of sustaining human life.”

    • I noticed before about 2005 or so that there were indeed conservatives and libertarians who expressed concerns about global warming. For instance, neocon James Woolsey who pushed for energy efficiency at home, unusually enough.

      However, something changed. I didn’t understand it until the famous study showing that when people were shown evidence that opposed their leanings, they actually grew more extreme in their prejudices. Reason? The evidence was coming from the mouths of identifiable enemies. Thus the rampant hatred that exploded against Al Gore when his movie came out.

      I think from that time on it was impossible for Republicans to take even a precautionary position on AGW. Once it had been added to the list of evil schemes to bring about world socialism, such dissent meant brutal harassment from the ideological enforcers on the right.

      It was no longer a matter of what they understood about science. The implication of global warming is that greed will destroy the world. That idea must be eradicated at all costs, because it threatens the entire justification for private property, unregulated markets, and the infinite polarization of wealth under the guise of infinite economic growth.

  2. Every degree C increase in temp forces sky to uptake 7% vapor of water into troposphere where weather occurs. This can be confirmed by Paul prior to Sandy at Arctic News. The increase in moisture is going to expand into moist runaway.
    Read on below the fold for more rant//
    link to

Comments are closed.