Barge traffic halted on Mississippi River by lowest water levels in a decade

[snakestretcher]

Do you drive a gas vehicle?

I have posted many times on this board about changing to hybrids, EVs and EV/hybrid cars.

99% of the replies I receive to those posts is excuses on why they don't change their vehicle.

I bought the first hybrid in April 2001. I decided then to never buy a regular gas car again and I haven't. The one I have now is my fourth hybrid.

My next vehicle will be an EV/hybrid car.

If you care about climate change, change the vehicle you drive. Cars are one of the main causes of climate change.

I don't drive and never have done.

 

[fmw]

Barge traffic halted on Mississippi River by lowest water levels in a decade​

New YorkCNN Business —
The lowest water levels in the Mississippi River in a decade, caused by a severe Midwest drought, have closed the vital channel to barge traffic at a crucial time of the year for the transport of crops from the nation’s heartland.
...
The region that feeds water into the Mississippi River has been hit especially hard by a regional drought since July, leading to sharply lower levels around Arkansas and Tennessee, according to data tracked by the US Geological Survey. The two highest levels of drought have recently expanded across the Midwest and the South, according to last week’s US Drought Monitor.
==============
Here is one for those who are still denying climate change. The mighty Mississippi is at the lowest level in a decade.

Except that blaming it on climate change is guesswork.

 

[SuperDS77]

No doubt, but climate change and its impacts have been predicted since the 1890s. Models were inaccurate at first but have improved dramatically with the advent of computers, proxy record collection and analysis, satellite imagery, and big data.

All of those methods are indeed improvements in the collection of data. Thing is, we are comparing them to data that was acquired in a much different and much less accurate manner. Thus making meaningful comparisons quite difficult. Extrapolating such a tiny slice of data and applying those trends to future data is pure guesswork.

All of the temperature increases and climatic changes that were predicted 30 years ago have generally happened.

Not to be rude, but I call bovine scat on that one. So many predictions have been remarkably inaccurate it would be hard to list them all.

There is no other scientific explanation for earth's dramatic change in global mean temperatures over the last century. The temperature increases have coincided with rises in atmospheric carbon (ppm) and global wealth. You can say "Oh yeah, well the temperature increased during the Permian Period" Sure - there's a likely scientific explanation for that: volcanism. What is the scientific explanation for the recent climatic events?

There are most definitely OTHER scientific explanations for temperature changes. I know this is simplistic, but true, correlation does not always equal causation.

Really, nothing other than what scientists have said all along: global climate change.

Yes "global climate CHANGE", what is usually left out is the qualifier "human caused" climate change. Why is that?

 

[multivita-man]

All of those methods are indeed improvements in the collection of data. Thing is, we are comparing them to data that was acquired in a much different and much less accurate manner. Thus making meaningful comparisons quite difficult. Extrapolating such a tiny slice of data and applying those trends to future data is pure guesswork.

It's not, but you can believe it if it makes you sleep better.

Not to be rude, but I call bovine scat on that one. So many predictions have been remarkably inaccurate it would be hard to list them all.

A 50-Year-Old Global Warming Forecast That Still Holds Up - Eos

In 1972, Mikhail Ivanovich Budyko used a simple methodology to make climate predictions that remain surprisingly accurate today and that could serve as a new “business-as-usual” scenario.

eos.org

Comparing 2019 to 1970, Budyko predicted an increase in the global mean temperature of 1°C and the disappearance of about 50% of Arctic multiyear ice. Observations have borne out these trends, demonstrating that mean global temperature increased by 0.98°C over this period and that the extent of multiyear Arctic sea ice in September 2019 was about 46% smaller than in 1970 (Figure 1).

RealClimate: Evaluating a 1981 temperature projection

RealClimate: Guest commentary from Geert Jan van Oldenborgh and Rein Haarsma, KNMI Sometimes it helps to take a step back from the everyday pressures of research (falling ill helps). It was in this way we stumbled across (pdf). In 1981 the first author of this post was in his first year at...

www.realclimate.org

To conclude, a projection from 1981 for rising temperatures in a major science journal, at a time that the temperature rise was not yet obvious in the observations, has been found to agree well with the observations since then, underestimating the observed trend by about 30%, and easily beating naive predictions of no-change or a linear continuation of trends. It is also a nice example of a statement based on theory that could be falsified and up to now has withstood the test. The “global warming hypothesis” has been developed according to the principles of sound science.

Those are just two papers that accurately predicted increases - there are more.

There are most definitely OTHER scientific explanations for temperature changes. I know this is simplistic, but true, correlation does not always equal causation.

There is no explanation for the increase of atmospheric carbon and the rise in global mean temperature - at least not the significant, rapid increases that we've observed in just the last few decades. Solar cycles occur every 11 or so years. Volcanism doesn't account for it. There's one culprit: human industrial output.

Yes "global climate CHANGE", what is usually left out is the qualifier "human caused" climate change. Why is that?

Not left out, just assumed.

 

[NWRatCon]

It's obvious, isn't it? Biden drained the Mississippi. Tweety told us this would happen, and if he didn't, he at least thought it.

But it was classified...

 

[NWRatCon]

Our climate-denying friends:

What, me worry?

 

[Lycanthrope]

Water disappearing like global sperm counts. All is well, nothing to see here.

 

[Lycanthrope]

I don't drive and never have done.

That you, Mr. Tolkien?

 

[coyote505]

Water disappearing like global sperm counts. All is well, nothing to see here.

Sperm counts not dropping near fast enough to save us here. Going to take action. But that will cause POC consternation and shouts of "Racist". Too bad. It's that or cook.

 

[coyote505]

It's not, but you can believe it if it makes you sleep better.

A 50-Year-Old Global Warming Forecast That Still Holds Up - Eos

In 1972, Mikhail Ivanovich Budyko used a simple methodology to make climate predictions that remain surprisingly accurate today and that could serve as a new “business-as-usual” scenario.

eos.org

RealClimate: Evaluating a 1981 temperature projection

RealClimate: Guest commentary from Geert Jan van Oldenborgh and Rein Haarsma, KNMI Sometimes it helps to take a step back from the everyday pressures of research (falling ill helps). It was in this way we stumbled across (pdf). In 1981 the first author of this post was in his first year at...

www.realclimate.org

Those are just two papers that accurately predicted increases - there are more.



There is no explanation for the increase of atmospheric carbon and the rise in global mean temperature - at least not the significant, rapid increases that we've observed in just the last few decades. Solar cycles occur every 11 or so years. Volcanism doesn't account for it. There's one culprit: human industrial output.



Not left out, just assumed.

Climate scientists are like economists. They've predicted 12 of the last 4 recessions.

I remember scientists being horrified about the Concorde and SST; that their persistent high altitude contrails would accelerate Global Cooling and doom us.

Hindsight being 20/20, its easy to go back and pick prescient sages NOW.

However, warming Now seems to be well enough established to warrant action. The only effective action involves birth control as one of its chief components. Those who are not willing to accept this are not worthy of being called Leaders, or even intelligent.

 

[multivita-man]

Climate scientists are like economists. They've predicted 12 of the last 4 recessions.

AGW has been predicted since the 1890s, so...nope. But you do you.

I remember scientists being horrified about the Concorde and SST; that their persistent high altitude contrails would accelerate Global Cooling and doom us.

okay.

Hindsight being 20/20, its easy to go back and pick prescient sages NOW.

Mmm..

However, warming Now seems to be well enough established to warrant action.

Predicted in 1895 - almost 130 years ago. Just sayin'.

The only effective action involves birth control as one of its chief components.

Maybe.

And probably a lot less efficiency.

 

[snakestretcher]

That you, Mr. Tolkien?

Pretty much, yes! I lived in London most of my life and owning a car there is pointless when there's excellent public transport to be had, so I never bothered to learn to drive, and never really had the urge.

 

[Metric Mouse]

Our climate-denying friends:
View attachment 67423614
What, me worry?

Don't worry! Our president is begging countries to pump more oil. That'll fix this problem...

 

[Lycanthrope]

Pretty much, yes! I lived in London most of my life and owning a car there is pointless when there's excellent public transport to be had, so I never bothered to learn to drive, and never really had the urge.

I am envious. Where I live in the States unreliable public transportation and urban sprawl means getting around without a car is a challenge.

 

[snakestretcher]

I am envious. Where I live in the States unreliable public transportation and urban sprawl means getting around without a car is a challenge.

I rode a bicycle around London while cars were stuck in jams. Kept myself fit and save a boatload of money at the same time.

 

[coyote505]

I rode a bicycle around London while cars were stuck in jams. Kept myself fit and save a boatload of money at the same time.

Here in New Mexico, we have 2.1 million people spread over 300,000 square km. Most suggestions from urbanites are totally inapplicable. Better mileage WOULD be welcome.

 

[Olddemocrat]

Except that blaming it on climate change is guesswork.

Perhaps! But it is very highly educated guesswork with a correspondingly high degree of certainty.

 

[NWRatCon]

Perhaps! But it is very highly educated guesswork with a correspondingly high degree of certainty.

"Bah! That science stuff is for pointy-headed Liberals. Education is for nerds. Wanna see me crush a beer can on my forehead?"

 

[Olddemocrat]

"Bah! That science stuff is for pointy-headed Liberals. Education is for nerds. Wanna see me crush a beer can on my forehead?"

Good one. Keep 'em coming.

 

[NWRatCon]

It is always frustrating to get involved in threads such as this. On one side people are discussing science, facts, logic and articulating how to address these potential concerns and consequences. On the other side there is denialism, deflection, and delusional ejaculations. Sometimes that effluence is covered up by pseudo-scientific mumbo-jumbo, but it always amounts to the same thing.

The world is going through a climate upheaval. That is obvious to anyone with a functioning brain (okay, technically, frontal cortex. Some of our brethren function sufficiently - and nearly exclusively - within their cerebellums). The evidence is everywhere and affecting everyone. Things can be done about it.

Humans were gifted (or evolved) an amazing ability of foresight. With that we can imagine the future. Right now there are a number of potential futures apparent to us. We can not do anything and continue on our present path, which will lead to more catastrophic weather events, or we can make an effort to ameliorate those effects by changing behavior.

Our planet is a zero-sum environment. Which path seems more rational?