“Climate and weather are not the same”

[watsup]

Weather is a series of temporary, ephemeral actually, conditions; climate is the composite of weather over years and decades

heatwaves are weather events, not climate.

Climate and weather are not the same.

And there you have it. The AGW deniers think that all you have to do is to repeat “climate and weather are not the same” and that somehow shows that the increase in extreme weather events on a worldwide basis does NOT reflect the upsurge in global warming and the subsequent climate changes since the Industrial Revolution. They are wrong, of course, but they hold tight to their very simplistic statements. The question they don’t want to answer: if the CLIMATE is warming, can that contribute to a increase in extreme heat WEATHER events and, thus, further disruption in both climate and weather on a long-term basis?

 

[Napoleon]

This is a dishonest thread. The quoted members made those statements in a thread where @watsup was asserting that the freak heat wave in the UK is evidence of and equivalent to climate change.

 

[watsup]

This is a dishonest thread. The quoted members made those statements in a thread where @watsup was asserting that the freak heat wave in the UK is evidence of and equivalent to climate change.

Watsup did not say that the heat wave in the UK is “equivalent to” climate change. Misquoting is dishonest.
Is it evidence of climate change? If it is one of an ongoing series of an expanded number of extreme weather events, then it could indeed be evidence of climate change.

The point is that the AGW deniers think that by making the statement, they are somehow negating climate change on a general basis. It is a very simplistic way to look at it.

 

[fmw]

And there you have it. The AGW deniers think that all you have to do is to repeat “climate and weather are not the same” and that somehow shows that the increase in extreme weather events on a worldwide basis does NOT reflect the upsurge in global warming and the subsequent climate changes since the Industrial Revolution. They are wrong, of course, but they hold tight to their very simplistic statements. The question they don’t want to answer: if the CLIMATE is warming, can that contribute to a increase in extreme heat WEATHER events and, thus, further disruption in both climate and weather on a long-term basis?

Over the past 120 years, average global temperatures have increased 2 degrees F so we are in a warming trend. But the OP is correct nevertheless. Firstly temperatures have been unseasonably high in parts of the U.S. and Europe in recent days. Where I am in the U.S. temperatures this summer have been normal, even slightly cooler than normal so geography matters. The difference between normal and current temperatures is many many times greater than the average global temperature increase. So it is a an element of weather and is termporary. The problem isn't so much that people disagree on average temperature increases. People agree that it exists. The difference of opinion is about how much it matters. As you know, the average temperature could begin declining. It has happened repeatedly.

 

[watsup]

Over the past 120 years, average global temperatures have increased 2 degrees F so we are in a warming trend. But the OP is correct nevertheless. Firstly temperatures have been unseasonably high in parts of the U.S. and Europe in recent days. Where I am in the U.S. temperatures this summer have been normal, even slightly cooler than normal so geography matters. The difference between normal and current temperatures is many many times greater than the average global temperature increase. So it is a an element of weather and is termporary. The problem isn't so much that people disagree on average temperature increases. People agree that it exists. The difference of opinion is about how much it matters. As you know, the average temperature could begin declining. It has happened repeatedly.

The great majority of climate scientists on a worldwide basis can find no clue that the climate will do anything other than continue to warm for the immediate future due to AGW. That is the scientific consensus.

 

[Bullseye]

Watsup did not say that the heat wave in the UK is “equivalent to” climate change. Misquoting is dishonest.
Is it evidence of climate change? If it is one of an ongoing series of an expanded number of extreme weather events, then it could indeed be evidence of climate change.

The point is that the AGW deniers think that by making the statement, they are somehow negating climate change on a general basis. It is a very simplistic way to look at it.

Let's see some PROOF of this "expanding number of extreme weather events". From someone more authoritative than Greta Thurnberg.

 

[noonereal]

This is a dishonest thread. The quoted members made those statements in a thread where @watsup was asserting that the freak heat wave in the UK is evidence of and equivalent to climate change.

As I read @watsup he
asserted it was but one data point of thousands.

 

[watsup]

Let's see some PROOF of this "expanding number of extreme weather events". From someone more authoritative than Greta Thurnberg.

“Overall, extreme events have increased in the last 10 to 15 years. 70 percent of 405 extreme weather events were made more likely or more intense by human-induced climate change. 92 percent of 122 attribution studies of extreme heat found that climate change made them more likely or more severe. 58 percent of 81 rainfall studies found that human activity made them more probable or intense. And 65 percent of 69 drought events were also exacerbated by climate change.”

Attribution Science: Linking Climate Change to Extreme Weather

Scientists can now determine what role climate change plays in making extreme weather events more frequent and intense.

news.climate.columbia.edu

 

[soylentgreen]

Really!!! After all this time it still has to be explained that climate and weather are not the same. That simply just proves how disingenuous the climate deniers are if they are trying to pretend that cannot figure that out.

 

[PoS]

And there you have it. The AGW deniers think that all you have to do is to repeat “climate and weather are not the same” and that somehow shows that the increase in extreme weather events on a worldwide basis does NOT reflect the upsurge in global warming and the subsequent climate changes since the Industrial Revolution. They are wrong, of course, but they hold tight to their very simplistic statements. The question they don’t want to answer: if the CLIMATE is warming, can that contribute to a increase in extreme heat WEATHER events and, thus, further disruption in both climate and weather on a long-term basis?

LMAO! Thanks for once again proving that you know absolutely nothing about basic science and common sense for that matter.

Here is a link that could help you out (assuming you read and understand it)

What’s the difference between climate and weather?

Have you ever heard your TV weathercaster say, “Climate is what you expect, weather is what you get”? How do weather observations become climate data? And, how do scientists, communities, and businesses use NOAA’s climate data?

www.noaa.gov

Here is the relevant quote, because Im sure you'll miss it if I dont highlight it for you:

"Weather is what you experience when you step outside on any given day. In other words, it is the state of the atmosphere at a particular location over the short-term. Climate is the average of the weather patterns in a location over a longer period of time, usually 30 years or more."

Get it now?

 

[Bullseye]

“Overall, extreme events have increased in the last 10 to 15 years. 70 percent of 405 extreme weather events were made more likely or more intense by human-induced climate change. 92 percent of 122 attribution studies of extreme heat found that climate change made them more likely or more severe. 58 percent of 81 rainfall studies found that human activity made them more probable or intense. And 65 percent of 69 drought events were also exacerbated by climate change.”

Attribution Science: Linking Climate Change to Extreme Weather

Scientists can now determine what role climate change plays in making extreme weather events more frequent and intense.

news.climate.columbia.edu

LOL, sure. Doesn't look like the 99% you guys always claim. "10-15 years" isn't very convincing; There are ocean circulation variations that cycle on decade or multidecade cycles, for instance. Be interesting to see what baselines these studies were using for comparison and what algorithms the used to determine which were do to human activity. Thanks for trying.

 

[watsup]

LMAO! Thanks for once again proving that you know absolutely nothing about basic science and common sense for that matter.

Here is a link that could help you out (assuming you read and understand it)

What’s the difference between climate and weather?

Have you ever heard your TV weathercaster say, “Climate is what you expect, weather is what you get”? How do weather observations become climate data? And, how do scientists, communities, and businesses use NOAA’s climate data?

www.noaa.gov

Here is the relevant quote, because Im sure you'll miss it if I dont highlight it for you:

"Weather is what you experience when you step outside on any given day. In other words, it is the state of the atmosphere at a particular location over the short-term. Climate is the average of the weather patterns in a location over a longer period of time, usually 30 years or more."

Get it now?

See the OP. It’s amazing that you still cannot understand the manner in which climate and weather are related, especially as regards global warming/climate change.

 

[fmw]

The great majority of climate scientists on a worldwide basis can find no clue that the climate will do anything other than continue to warm for the immediate future due to AGW. That is the scientific consensus.

Yes I know. I also know it is an opinion. Nobody is any good at predicting the future. I don't know what immediate future means. If it means the next 2 to 5 years then I agree with the scientific consensus. If it means the next 100 years I would take that with a grain of salt.

 

[watsup]

Yes I know. I also know it is an opinion. Nobody is any good at predicting the future. I don't know what immediate future means. If it means the next 2 to 5 years then I agree with the scientific consensus. If it means the next 100 years I would take that with a grain of salt.

We are already experiencing the negative effects of AGW in extreme weather events happening more often, and it is quite clear that it is only going to get worse in the future.

 

[Deuce]

And there you have it. The AGW deniers think that all you have to do is to repeat “climate and weather are not the same” and that somehow shows that the increase in extreme weather events on a worldwide basis does NOT reflect the upsurge in global warming and the subsequent climate changes since the Industrial Revolution. They are wrong, of course, but they hold tight to their very simplistic statements. The question they don’t want to answer: if the CLIMATE is warming, can that contribute to a increase in extreme heat WEATHER events and, thus, further disruption in both climate and weather on a long-term basis?

In February they will be saying "look! It snowed! SO MUCH FOR GLOBAL WARMING!!!"