Posted on 09/18/2017 8:35:10 AM PDT by Oldeconomybuyer
Houston has barely begun to dry out from Hurricane Harvey, and Florida faces a massive rebuilding effort after the Irma catastrophe. These two storms, among the most powerful in American history, are typical of the extreme weather events that are likely to become more common as the planet warms.
So why isn’t the public heeding scientists and demanding climate action by politicians that could help deal with these destructive extremes? You can point fingers at the influence of fossil fuel companies, at misinformation from climate deniers and at political obstructionism, notably from a fragmented Republican party. But a much deeper force is also at work: the way our brains function.
Humans aren’t well wired to act on complex statistical risks. We care a lot more about the tangible present than the distant future. Many of us do that to the extreme — what behavioral scientists call hyperbolic discounting — which makes it particularly hard to grapple with something like climate change, where the biggest dangers are yet to come.
Our political institutions can help people focus on the long view by surveying climate impacts on a regular basis, so that each extreme storm is less a novel event and more a part of a pattern that needs sustained policy attention. One model is California’s program of localized climate assessments that inform decisions about land-use planning and development. Another is the Obama administration’s regular, nationwide assessments, which are at risk of termination under President Trump.
Our brains are unfortunately not wired to tackle problems like climate change. With some help we can build policies that enable us to do better. What the storms in the Gulf and Atlantic are reminding the public — for now, if not for long— is that the consequences of failure are big.
(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...
Yet, what makes barometric pressure the standard for "most powerful"?
Why do individuals consciously choose to live so close to the water?
Why do individuals consciously choose to return to low lying areas and not learn the lesson?
That is where the research is needed. There is a logical connection between what an individual thinks and his behavior. There is no logical connection between what many individuals think on a non-political topic and the sum of their behavior on a political topic.
"climate deniers" ROFL!
"political obstructionism" *sob*. We actually have opposition!
I checked the NOAA website, and their position is that WE DONT KNOW if GW had anything to do with this years numbers.
So, now we’re too STUPID to understand their lies. Despite their failures repeatedly to show us any truth, we’re supposed to just believe them because we’re not smart enough to decide for ourselves.
“Joseph Goebbels was a German politician and Reich Minister of Propaganda of Nazi Germany.”
The nazi’s at least were honest. They actually called their propagandists, propagandists.
Your screen name nails the “climate change” issue.
It is a non-verifiable and non-falsifiable claim.
In other words—it is a cult belief.
Weather is far too complex for current computer models to accurately assess—and there is far too little old (pre twentieth century) accurate data to compare and analyze.
Because water is a necessary component to life.
And living even an hour away from water does not mean that you will not get dumped on.
Why do individuals consciously choose to return to low lying areas and not learn the lesson?
Because that is where the fertile soil is.
If it flooded yearly you might have a point, but it does not.
I assume because it is easy to measure. That is often how comparisons are done, using simple, clear measurements whether they matter or not.
On the other hand, “sustained winds”, “wind gust”, “precipitation in a single location over a period of time”, “eye circumference”, “tropical storm boundary circumference” — which is the “best” measurement?
We wouldn’t really want to give a storm credit for how much water it was able to pick up, or how much damage it manages to do — Sandy was devistating to New Jersey because it happened to hit at high tide and came in at exactly the right angle to squeeze a storm surge up into the mainland — even though it was a cat-1 hurricane. 6 hours later, nobody would really be thinking about it.
Those who point to a hurricane or any ONE weather event as “proof” of global warming are no different than those who point to ONE early or late snowfall as disproof. But of course it’s only the folks holding up a snowball who the media ridicule over this.
So just to remind the alarmists of something they often say during cold spells - weather is not climate, so give it up already on this hurricane nonsense.
The 1900 Galveston Hurricane was the first to have hit a location where there was a stationed weatherman, Isaac Cline. He didn't get it right, even though the Cubans, who understood hurricanes better than anyone, had warned him what was coming.
Incidentally, just to show the force of the storm, it maintained hurricane force winds all the way up to Chicago, then still powerful it blew across northern Ohio, finally across the Atlantic, to play out in Siberia. The storm travelled half way around the world, without benefit of any "global warming" or "fossil fuel" generated CO2.
In light of that info, one might be inclined to conclude that, if anything, Climate Change has reduced the severity of hurricanes.
I don't think of storm of that magnitude has been seen outside of Jupiter. And I don't mean Florida. I mean the planet. Or am I think of Saturn? Not the car, but the planet.
The higher the number of authors...the higher the amount of BS.
David G. Victor is a professor at UC San Diego’s School of Global Policy & Strategy and codirector of the Initiative on Energy and Climate at the Brookings Institution.
Nick Obradovich is a research scientist at MIT’s Media Laboratory.
Dillon J. Amaya is a PhD student at the Scripps Institution of Oceanography.
Joseph Goebbels was a German politician and Reich Minister of Propaganda of Nazi Germany.
No one knows I’m a dog on the Internet.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.