California Drought Natural?

[seer]

No kidding? Really?

Study: Causes of Calif. drought are natural, not man-made

is almost opposite to what computer models predict will result from human-induced climate change.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/weathe...noaa/20095869/

[Bill the Cat]

At least NOAA isn't fudging the results to support their models

[shunyadragon]

At least NOAA isn't fudging the results to support their models

Can you document anyone fudging the results to support their models????

I am not sure that there is a consensus among scientists that global warming is the cause of the cyclic droughts of California. I may check to make sure. In fact I checked, the current consensus among scientist is no California droughts are no caused by Climate change. So what's the big deal here?!?!?!?!

I know the progressively severe droughts of Australia are considered to some extent caused by Climate change.

This probably more a science thread.

[Jedidiah]

No kidding? Really?

Study: Causes of Calif. drought are natural, not man-made



http://www.usatoday.com/story/weathe...noaa/20095869/

The problem in California is that it uses all the water it gets. Water comes from all over the west coast to California and when the natural cycle is against them it really shows up in things like drops in lakes and reservoirs.

[seer]

I may check to make sure. In fact I checked, the current consensus among scientist is no California droughts are no caused by Climate change. So what's the big deal here?!?!?!?!

The big deal was that there were scientists linking this drought to climate change, this is on a government site, The National Science Foundation:

http://www.nsf.gov/news/news_summ.jsp?cntn_id=132709

The atmospheric conditions associated with the unprecedented drought in California are very likely linked to human-caused climate change, researchers report.

Climate scientist Noah Diffenbaugh of Stanford University and colleagues used a novel combination of computer simulations and statistical techniques to show that a persistent region of high atmospheric pressure over the Pacific Ocean--one that diverted storms away from California--was much more likely to form in the presence of modern greenhouse gas concentrations.

"Our research finds that extreme atmospheric high pressure in this region--which is strongly linked to unusually low precipitation in California--is much more likely to occur today than prior to the emission of greenhouse gases that began during the Industrial Revolution in the 1800s," says Diffenbaugh.

Once again, science got it all wrong.

[Bill the Cat]

Can you document anyone fudging the results to support their models????

Did I say that they did?

[shunyadragon]

The big deal was that there were scientists linking this drought to climate change, this is on a government site, The National Science Foundation:

http://www.nsf.gov/news/news_summ.jsp?cntn_id=132709

Seer, this is not a big deal . . .

Science did not get it wrong. The knowledge of science is the consensus over time. Seer you're still looking for rabbits in Pre-Cambrian rocks.

There may be disagreements between scientists. It is possible Noah Diffenbaugh is right and it is possible the other scientists are right in this case. The evidence in this case is hardly conclusive.

From what I know of the climate cycles of the western United States I would probably side with the NOAA scientists, but these conclusions are based are based on models, and these models are improving with time, but there is nothing conclusive here to say 'science got it wrong.'

Once again, science got it all wrong.

Once again, no. You do not accept science, so looking for rabbits in Pre-Cambrian rocks is a waste of human life,

[seer]

From what I know of the climate cycles of the western United States I would probably side with the NOAA scientists, but these conclusions are based are based on models, and these models are improving with time, but there is nothing conclusive here to say 'science got it wrong.'

You have a government claiming, based on the scientific studies linked by the government, that the drought was caused by AGW. That was just false. The models did not work.

Once again, no. You do not accept science...

And neither do you, when it suits you. Like when it comes to an immaterial soul.

[Mountain Man]

Once again, science got it all wrong.

To be fair, the global warming/global cooling/climate change hysteria is not science but politics and dogma.

[seer]

To be fair, the global warming/global cooling/climate change hysteria is not science but politics and dogma.

Yes, but scientists are fueling the narrative.

[Leonhard]

Did I say that they did?

Oh come on, you made a fairly transparent jab at the whole global warming theory.

[Bill the Cat]

Oh come on, you made a fairly transparent jab at the whole global warming theory.

No I didn't. I made a comment that they didn't try to fudge their data to confirm their models. If you or anyone else thinks it was more than that, that's on you, not me.

[Leonhard]

No I didn't. I made a comment that they didn't try to fudge their data to confirm their models. If you or anyone else thinks it was more than that, that's on you, not me.

Alright, if you say so, but it did come off as such a jab.

[Bill the Cat]

Alright, if you say so, but it did come off as such a jab.

That's unfortunate, but wasn't my intent.

[Epoetker]

Obviously the proximate cause of the California drought is overpopulation due to its large numbers of Mexican imports, not "climate change." But talking about that is even more verboten than 'climate denialism.'