Jump to content


joules mm1

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 177
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • 3 months later...

Has anyone else noticed this "comment" being inserted into every newspaper article about any weather event ?


Experts say that climate change is expected to increase the frequency of extreme weather events, but linking any single event to global warming is complicated.


Just lazy editors ....... or more calculated than that ??




Link to comment
Share on other sites

We've had bushfires here in Australia, the US has had bad fires as well, western Canada has had some record high temperatures, Europe is having some devastating floods ........... and it is all being caused by "climate change" according to some.


And yet, when we have a period of perfect weather and lovely days, this apparently must also be caused by "climate change", but never gets mentioned. If "climate change" is real, then all weather must result from it, good, bad, and indifferent.


Maybe my grasp of science isn't too flash, but all i really see is weather. And I reckon that weather , taken over hundreds of years, becomes "climate".


What am i missing ?




Link to comment
Share on other sites

Climate change is real, global warming is real.


What is unreal are expectations the Paris Agreement or any actions on climate change still won't see us having fires, floods and droughts. My reason for saying this is if any fire, flood or drought we're experiencing now is the result of 1.1 - 1.2 degrees C rise in average global temps., how in heck will the rise to 1.5 - 2.0 degrees C rise as per the Paris Agreement be a desirable outcome?


Unless I can find a fountain of youth I won't be around in 2050 to hear people explaining that dislocation in reasoning. I'm a bit cheesed off by that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The first signs of catastrophe were detected 10 days ago by a satellite orbiting 800km above the tranquil hills around the Rhine river.


Over the next few days scientists sent the German authorities a series of forecasts so accurate that they read like a macabre prophecy: the Rhineland was about to be hit by “extreme” flooding, particularly along the Erft and Ahr rivers, and in towns such as Hagen and Altena.


Yet despite at least 24 hours’ warning that predicted, almost precisely, which districts would be worst affected when the rains came, the flood caught many of its victims largely unawares.


More than 160 people in Germany and Belgium are known to have died and hundreds remained missing on Sunday.


The floods have subsided in parts of the Rhineland and the sun broke through the low clouds over the region on Saturday (Sunday AEST), but the situation remains critical in Erftstadt, 16km southwest of Cologne. Houses were flattened after foundations were swept away and a vast sinkhole has caused part of the town’s castle, the Burg Blessem, to collapse. President Frank-Walter Steinmeier visited the scene and promised swift aid. “Your fate is tearing our hearts apart,” he said. “Many people in these regions have nothing left but their hope. We cannot afford to disappoint this hope.”


Chancellor Angela Merkel will travel to flood-ravaged areas in the neighbouring state of Rhineland-Palatinate on Monday after ­returning from a visit to the White House.


Hannah Cloke, a professor of hydrology at Reading University, attributed the number of deaths partly to a “monumental failure” to heed warnings from forecasters. In the early 2000s Professor Cloke and two colleagues designed the European Flood Awareness System (Efas) with a disaster such as this in mind. After the floods in central and eastern Europe in 2002, which claimed at least 110 lives, they ­resolved that, next time, victims had to be forearmed. The algorithms combine observations from the EU’s Copernicus satellites with hydrographical records and readings of river levels to allow national agencies up to 10 days to prepare for the worst.


This time, however, the scientists’ warnings had little impact. Efas raised the alarm on July 10 – four days before the first floods – with warnings to the German and Belgian governments about the high risk of flooding in the Rhine and Meuse basins.


Over the next few days it produced minutely detailed charts predicting most of the areas that would suffer the heaviest damage. Its German partner agency requested specific analysis of several rivers including the Ahr, along whose banks at least 93 people later died, with more than 600 people injured.


Professor Cloke said that some of the flash flooding would have been difficult to forecast in detail but there was “certainly time” to prepare larger towns and cities with warnings or evacuations.


The Federal Office for Citizen Protection and Disaster Assistance (BBK) issued alerts to the relatively small fraction of the public who had downloaded its apps. Most people, however, were taken by surprise.


One underlying problem is the state of Germany’s alarm systems. Last September the BBK held a ­national “warning day”, when people were supposed to be simultaneously deafened by sirens and inundated with alert messages in a simulated natural disaster. It was a debacle: most of the technology did not work.




So, there were catastrophic floods previously.

The authorities were warned, but didn't take the necessary actions.

But it's all because of "climate change".


I suspect that "climate change" is a political phenomenon , rather than a scientific one.




Link to comment
Share on other sites

Europe’s flood-warning system is also to blame

In addition to climate change, experts have also pointed to communication failures in the European Flood Awareness System.


The German weather service issued warnings for the event on Monday, three days before it actually happened. The hydrological services in Germany also issued a warning. Given the number of warnings in place, experts have said that the problem is not as much forecasting as communicating the severe impacts of flooding events to the greater population.


“The issue is not that there wasn’t a warning in place. There was. We’ve got really good forecasting models now. So, both these events, and also the floods that we saw in New York and London earlier in the week, there were flood warnings in place for those. We knew that heavy rainfall was coming,” Linda Speight, a flood forecasting specialist at the University of Reading in England, told me.


“Over 100 people should not have died in a flood in Germany. That shouldn’t happen in Western Europe in 2021,” she said.


Speight, who works at the nexus of hydrology and meteorology to understand how the weather will cause flooding, thinks the high loss of life could be because people did not understand the seriousness of the warnings.


“If you issue a weather warning which says there’s going to be 200 millimeters of rain tomorrow, that doesn’t mean anything. It doesn’t mean a lot to me — and that’s my area of specialism, so I doubt it means very much to the general public,” Speight said. “We need to change how we communicate warnings. For example, instead of saying, ‘There will be 200 millimeters of rain,’ we need to say, ‘There will be rapidly rising water levels, damage to properties, a risk to life.’”


And as extreme weather events like these become more and more common, learning how to communicate the danger effectively will be even more critical. “Across the world, we need to get better prepared for these kinds of events,” Speight said. “Everybody can learn lessons from the flood in Germany and see how they can apply them to improve to be more prepared in their own countries.”


But while early-warning systems can help reduce the loss of life, the ultimate answer is for humans to stop emitting carbon dioxide and other planet-warming greenhouse gases.


“The climate is warming, and it will keep on warming as long as we emit CO2. Last time I checked, we’re still emitting huge amounts of CO2,” Geert Jan van Oldenborgh, a visiting professor at Oxford University who studies the impact of climate change on extreme weather events, said.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Create New...