Is there any evidence showing a correlation between rising CO2 levels and extremes of weather?

[UV-RAY]

For me there is no physical evidence showing a direct link between one and the other.

[Methuselah]

I'm sceptical of many of those link myself, SI...I can still remember cold, windy stuff (September 1974, I think?) being blamed on the coming glacial...

[UV-RAY]

Extremes of weather have, are and will continue to plague mankind, in my lifetime I've seen no increase in these events and going off past historical weather records the same can be said. Now off course such events could become more commonplace but as of yet I would say no change.

[Methuselah]

I think that the only thing we can say for sure, at this time, is that the jury is still out.

[Devonian]

For me there is no physical evidence showing a direct link between one and the other.

Are you asking for, as per your title,  'any evidence'  or just 'physical evidence'? And how would you define 'extremes of weather'?

 

I think there is plenty of evidence our changing of CO2 conc will change the climate and thus the weather. I think there is evidence, for example, that the loss of Arctic sea is is bound up with rising CO2 conc. If we define extremes of weather as weather we wouldn't expect then I think we'll see more of that. If we define extremes of weather as weather causing loss of life or property then not much evidence yet but my view is we'll see it build up.

 

Just my view.

[UV-RAY]

Are you asking for, as per your title,  'any evidence'  or just 'physical evidence'? And how would you define 'extremes of weather'?

 

I think there is plenty of evidence our changing of CO2 conc will change the climate and thus the weather. I think there is evidence, for example, that the loss of Arctic sea is is bound up with rising CO2 conc. If we define extremes of weather as weather we wouldn't expect then I think we'll see more of that. If we define extremes of weather as weather causing loss of life or property then not much evidence yet but my view is we'll see it build up.

 

Just my view.

I think any links between the two are tentative at best and one nether side could say yeah or nay.

[knocker]

Weather Whiplash

 

And since climate change is global, the whiplash isn’t only happening in North America.

“In the U.S. of course, it is going from floods in 2011 (Missouri through Ohio River Valley to New England, flooding Mississippi and Missouri) to widespread drought in 2012 and back to floods in 2013,†said climate researcher Kevin Trenberth of the National Center for Atmospheric Research. “But it’s much worse in Australia: a nine-year drought then floods mid-2010 to mid-2011 and then back to drought and record heat in Jan(uary) this year.â€

Nor can the pattern be expected to get any better, say climate scientists.

“Society and its infrastructure were designed for the climate of the past, not for the rapidly changing climate of the present or the future,†reads the Climate Nexus report, quoting from the 2013 National Climate Assessment. “Climate change, once considered an issue for a distance future, has moved firmly into the present. Impacts related to climate change are already evident in many sectors and are expected to become increasingly challenging across the nation throughout this century and beyond.â€

 

 

http://climatecrocks.com/2013/05/09/fasten-your-seatbelt-weather-whiplash-is-the-new-normal/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

[UV-RAY]

Weather Whiplash

 

 

http://climatecrocks.com/2013/05/09/fasten-your-seatbelt-weather-whiplash-is-the-new-normal/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

Sorry but I can't take that link seriously, it's nothing more than propaganda. Anyone with an interest in weather and past climate knows full well that all such events have occurred with same amount of frequency and intensity.

[Devonian]

Sorry but I can't take that link seriously, it's nothing more than propaganda. Anyone with an interest in weather and past climate knows full well that all such events have occurred with same amount of frequency and intensity.

 

I have the highest regard for Dr Jeff Masters, his posts on Weather Underground are balanced, thoughtful, wise and highly informed.

 

I actually don't think the cast iron evidence of more extremes is there, yet. It might be in the future.

[UV-RAY]

I have the highest regard for Dr Jeff Masters, his posts on Weather Underground are balanced, thoughtful, wise and highly informed.

 

I actually don't think the cast iron evidence of more extremes is there, yet. It might be in the future.

I wasn't taking a pop at him, just some of the language expressed in that piece.

[knocker]

Sorry but I can't take that link seriously, it's nothing more than propaganda. Anyone with an interest in weather and past climate knows full well that all such events have occurred with same amount of frequency and intensity.

 

So anything that doesn't agree with your view,, even when made by respected scientists, is propaganda.

[UV-RAY]

So anything that doesn't agree with your view,, even when made by respected scientists, is propaganda.

Indeed it is, when there is no evidence at hand. Read that last paragraph and tell me that isn't propaganda.

[knocker]

What this.

 

“Society and its infrastructure were designed for the climate of the past, not for the rapidly changing climate of the present or the future,†reads the Climate Nexus report, quoting from the 2013 National Climate Assessment. “Climate change, once considered an issue for a distance future, has moved firmly into the present. Impacts related to climate change are already evident in many sectors and are expected to become increasingly challenging across the nation throughout this century and beyond.â€

[BornFromTheVoid]

SI, seeing as you've previously dismissed peer reviewed science as "speculation", what kind of evidence will you accept in answer to your question?

Also, CO2 will not directly cause extreme weather, but will only contribute through indirect links, such as the increased atmospheric water vapour, changing the thermal gradient from the poles to souther latitudes, etc., but if all you're after is a correlation, that shouldn't be an issue.

[UV-RAY]

SI, seeing as you've previously dismissed peer reviewed science as "speculation", what kind of evidence will you accept in answer to your question?

Also, CO2 will not directly cause extreme weather, but will only contribute through indirect links, such as the increased atmospheric water vapour, changing the thermal gradient from the poles to souther latitudes, etc., but if all you're after is a correlation, that shouldn't be an issue.

SI, seeing as you've previously dismissed peer reviewed science as "speculation", what kind of evidence will you accept in answer to your question?

Also, CO2 will not directly cause extreme weather, but will only contribute through indirect links, such as the increased atmospheric water vapour, changing the thermal gradient from the poles to souther latitudes, etc., but if all you're after is a correlation, that shouldn't be an issue.

Where have I dismissed peer reviewed science, questioned it yes. As for links directly or indirectly the jury remains firmly on the fence I would say.

[ANYWEATHER]

Its a bit like the chicken and egg scenario, theres always been extreme weather and no change in the future. Co2 as nothing to do with it!!

[BornFromTheVoid]

Where have I dismissed peer reviewed science, questioned it yes. As for links directly or indirectly the jury remains firmly on the fence I would say.

 

Apologies, you said conjecture, not speculaton.

"even peer reviewed literature is based on conjecture."

 

You've also said

"there is nothing more faux than bad science dressed up as facts and that is what cli[m]ate science is."

 

So I find it hard to know what you'll accept as evidence.

 

Anyway, CO2 cannot cause extreme weather directly, there is no off or on the fence with that. But through the warming of the troposphere and perhaps cooling of the stratosphere, with the knock on impacts of that, there may be a link between CO2 and extreme weather. But none of that matters if you still won't accept that CO2 causes warming anyway.

 

How about posing the question in a slightly different way. What evidence would be enough to convince you that anthropogenic CO2 contributes to increased weather extremes?

[Methuselah]

Its a bit like the chicken and egg scenario, theres always been extreme weather and no change in the future. Co2 as nothing to do with it!!

Well, CO₂ certainly may have nothing to do with it...

[knocker]

Nobel prize-winning scientist cites evidence of link between extreme weather, global warming

 

PHILADELPHIA, Aug. 20, 2012 — New scientific analysis strengthens the view that record-breaking summer heat, crop-withering drought and other extreme weather events in recent years do, indeed, result from human activity and global warming, Nobel Laureate Mario J. Molina, Ph.D., said here today.

 

Molina, who shared the 1995 Nobel Prize in Chemistry for helping save the world from the consequences of ozone depletion, presented the keynote address at the 244^th National Meeting & Exposition of the American Chemical Society, the world's largest scientific society. The meeting, which features about 8,600 reports with an anticipated attendance of 14,000 scientists and others continues here through Thursday.

"People may not be aware that important changes have occurred in the scientific understanding of the extreme weather events that are in the headlines," Molina said. "They are now more clearly connected to human activities, such as the release of carbon dioxide ― the main greenhouse gas ― from burning coal and other fossil fuels."

 

Molina emphasized that there is no "absolute certainty" that global warming is causing extreme weather events. But he said that scientific insights during the last year or so strengthen the link. Even if the scientific evidence continues to fall short of the absolute certainly measure, the heat, drought, severe storms and other weather extremes may prove beneficial in making the public more aware of global warming and the need for action, said Molina.

 

"It's important that people are doing more than just hearing about global warming," he said. "People may be feeling it, experiencing the impact on food prices, getting a glimpse of what everyday life may be like in the future, unless we as a society take action."

 

http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2012-08/acs-nps072712.php

[Gray-Wolf]

More CO2 = more Energy in the system.

 

Does more energy 'in' mean no change in a system like the climate?

 

Seems like a 'no boner' to me.........

[ANYWEATHER]

Nobel prize-winning scientist cites evidence of link between extreme weather, global warming

 

PHILADELPHIA, Aug. 20, 2012 — New scientific analysis strengthens the view that record-breaking summer heat, crop-withering drought and other extreme weather events in recent years do, indeed, result from human activity and global warming, Nobel Laureate Mario J. Molina, Ph.D., said here today.

 

Molina, who shared the 1995 Nobel Prize in Chemistry for helping save the world from the consequences of ozone depletion, presented the keynote address at the 244^th National Meeting & Exposition of the American Chemical Society, the world's largest scientific society. The meeting, which features about 8,600 reports with an anticipated attendance of 14,000 scientists and others continues here through Thursday.

"People may not be aware that important changes have occurred in the scientific understanding of the extreme weather events that are in the headlines," Molina said. "They are now more clearly connected to human activities, such as the release of carbon dioxide ― the main greenhouse gas ― from burning coal and other fossil fuels."

 

Molina emphasized that there is no "absolute certainty" that global warming is causing extreme weather events. But he said that scientific insights during the last year or so strengthen the link. Even if the scientific evidence continues to fall short of the absolute certainly measure, the heat, drought, severe storms and other weather extremes may prove beneficial in making the public more aware of global warming and the need for action, said Molina.

 

"It's important that people are doing more than just hearing about global warming," he said. "People may be feeling it, experiencing the impact on food prices, getting a glimpse of what everyday life may be like in the future, unless we as a society take action."

 

http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2012-08/acs-nps072712.php

What about the 1930,s dustbowl era? Horrific for many folk, the dust was swept as far as New York! Not a mention then of a Greenhouse effect, global warming, or climate change, I think folk need to check on historic data, theres simply nothing new under the sun!!

[knocker]

theres simply nothing new under the sun!!

 

 

Well that's a surprise.

 

In the 1970s and 1980s, Molina, F. Sherwood Rowland, Ph.D., and Paul J. Crutzen, Ph.D., established that substances called CFCs in aerosol spray cans and other products could destroy the ozone layer. The ozone layer is crucial to life on Earth, forming a protective shield high in the atmosphere that blocks potentially harmful ultraviolet rays in sunlight. Molina, Rowland and Crutzen shared the Nobel Prize for that research. After a "hole" in that layer over Antarctica was discovered in 1985, scientists established that it was indeed caused by CFCs, and worked together with policymakers and industry representatives around the world to solve the problem. The result was the Montreal Protocol, which phased out the use of CFCs in 1996.

 

Adopted and implemented by countries around the world, the Montreal Protocol eliminated the major cause of ozone depletion, said Molina, and stands as one of the most successful international agreements. Similar agreements, such as the Kyoto Protocol, have been proposed to address climate change. But Molina said these agreements have largely failed.

 

I'm afraid when it comes to listening to Mario Malina's and yours ANYWEATHER opinion on the subject I will have to side with the former. I can't think why. No offence intended.

[ANYWEATHER]

Well that's a surprise.

 

In the 1970s and 1980s, Molina, F. Sherwood Rowland, Ph.D., and Paul J. Crutzen, Ph.D., established that substances called CFCs in aerosol spray cans and other products could destroy the ozone layer. The ozone layer is crucial to life on Earth, forming a protective shield high in the atmosphere that blocks potentially harmful ultraviolet rays in sunlight. Molina, Rowland and Crutzen shared the Nobel Prize for that research. After a "hole" in that layer over Antarctica was discovered in 1985, scientists established that it was indeed caused by CFCs, and worked together with policymakers and industry representatives around the world to solve the problem. The result was the Montreal Protocol, which phased out the use of CFCs in 1996.

 

Adopted and implemented by countries around the world, the Montreal Protocol eliminated the major cause of ozone depletion, said Molina, and stands as one of the most successful international agreements. Similar agreements, such as the Kyoto Protocol, have been proposed to address climate change. But Molina said these agreements have largely failed.

 

I'm afraid when it comes to listening to Mario Malina's and yours ANYWEATHER opinion on the subject I will have to side with the former. I can't think why. No offence intended.

Thanks Knock!!""""""""""""""""""""""""""!!!!

[Gray-Wolf]

Well with CO2 passing the 400ppm mark last week it appears the planetary experiment is still going on even if some folk can't decide if it's an issue? You'd better hope that it isn't as the planet was very different the last time we saw such levels (which we didn't having not evolved yet) 800,000yrs ago.

 

With everything arranged much as we see it today we'd have to guess what else, other than GHG forcings, gave us sea levels 5m higher and temps a lot warmer around the globe ?

 

I don't like this game. It appears that whilst 'the jury's out' GHG levels are still sky rocketing and will be in the atmosphere for over 1,000yrs

[knocker]

Research Links Extreme Summer Heat Events to Global Warming

08.06.12

 

A new statistical analysis by NASA scientists has found that Earth's land areas have become much more likely to experience an extreme summer heat wave than they were in the middle of the 20th century. The research was published today in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

 

http://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/features/warming-links.html