Comments on: Climate Changes: Weather Whiplash and a Smarter Media

By: The Daily Frack – July 1

The Daily Frack – July 1 — Mon, 27 Jul 2015 13:31:51 +0000

[…] change? University of Delaware alumna Joanna Huxster reports new findings about the mental. Climate Changes: Weather Whiplash and a Smarter M… I want to quickly mention two interesting items that crossed my desk. First is a study in Nature […]

By: GregH

GregH — Wed, 08 Jul 2015 22:28:18 +0000

Yes and I think Sinclair was overly optimistic. I’m going for a reverse statistical effect: there’s no reason to think any one viewer will change his or her mind, but maybe the weight of millions of tiny suggestions on tv will push the general sentiment towards “We need to do something.”

By: Brainstorms

Brainstorms — Fri, 03 Jul 2015 22:24:11 +0000

Regarding these difficulties, Greg had a blog post dealing specifically with this subject:

http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/2014/08/03/how-to-talk-to-your-uncle-who-things-global-warming-is-a-hoax/

It’s often worse than “they don’t want to know”. As Upton Sinclair observed, “It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it.”

By: GregH

GregH — Fri, 03 Jul 2015 22:11:27 +0000

The simple fact is that the physics of atmospheric/oceanic warming are such that counter-intuitive consequences occur.

Agreed, but how to package this idea in a way that will penetrate the consciousness of the average tv news consumer? Not that they want to know about this stuff, but it’s the thought that counts.

By: zebra

zebra — Thu, 02 Jul 2015 13:11:31 +0000

It would be worth noting Abraham’s quote in his previous article from the Trenberth et al paper.

The climate is changing: we have a new normal. The environment in which all weather events occur is not what it used to be. All storms, without exception, are different. Even if most of them look just like the ones we used to have, they are not the same.

The point being, talking about “attribution” needs to be done very carefully to avoid providing another source of confusion and potential misrepresentation.

There are no observed “natural” variations if by that one means “variations that would have occurred absent the presence of anthropogenic CO2.”

By: Bernard J.

Bernard J. — Thu, 02 Jul 2015 02:23:42 +0000

It's timely to comment on the effects of warming on the jet stream. I've bumped into quite a few deniers recently who use instances of extreme cold to "prove" that global warming is not occurring. The simple fact is that the physics of atmospheric/oceanic warming are such that counter-intuitive consequences occur. What these deniers are refusing to acknowledge is that some consequences are counterintuitive - but this refusal to admit is not actually a refutation of the science. In the end their whole premise is based on their intuition, and it is a classic demonstration of why we have the scientific method with experimentation and data collection/analysis rather than plain old 'common sense' as a way to objectively understand the universe.

By: Greg Laden

Greg Laden — Wed, 01 Jul 2015 23:54:13 +0000

I’m sure there will be. We are already seeing some variation among the Republicans, for the first time (almost). It will be interesting to see if candidates in the GOP who admit that AGW is real and important are driven from the herd.

By: croscwa

croscwa — Wed, 01 Jul 2015 22:43:43 +0000

Any study on coverage of the candidates Climate Support (or non-denial) comments?