St Louis flooding made more likely by global warming/climate change

[Lord of Planar]

You simply cannot be taken seriously because of the rants at you include in basically all of your posts.

I'm sorry you cannot comprehend my explainations. Purhaps you aren't equipped in the science of this topic to debate it.

 

[Bullseye]

“Record-breaking rainfall that caused flash flooding in the St. Louis area Tuesday morning, leaving cars trapped on streets, causing road closures and at least one death, is not just a freak occurrence: It’s a manifestation of human-caused climate change. By 7 a.m. Central time, rainfall since midnight averaged between 6 and 10 inches around the region.

THAT KIND OF SATURATION HAS BEEN MADE MORE LIKELY BECAUSE WARMER AIR NOLDS MORE WATER AND CAUSES MORE WATER TO EVAPORATE, and it’s happening more frequently as a result.

“In recent years, a larger percentage of precipitation has come in the form of intense single-day events,” the Environmental Protection Agency said. “Nine of the top 10 years for extreme one-day precipitation events have occurred since 1996. The prevalence of extreme single-day precipitation events remained fairly steady between 1910 and the 1980s, but has risen substantially since then.”

So while the Southwest suffers through a 20-year megadrought — the driest two decades in the region in at least 1,200 years — it has also experienced a 10% increase in the heaviest precipitation events between 1956 and 2016, according to the U.S. Global Change Research Program.

Other regions are seeing more dramatic storms and experiencing more frequent and severe flooding. The Midwest has 42% more heavy precipitation events per year than it did 60 years ago, and the Northeast is seeing 55% more.

St. Louis has been hit by record flash flooding. Here's how it's related to climate change.

Record-breaking rainfall that caused flash flooding in the St. Louis area Tuesday morning, leaving cars trapped on streets, causing road closures and at least one death, is not just a freak occurrence: It’s a manifestation of human-caused climate change.

news.yahoo.com

This is yet another example of how CLIMATE change affects WEATHER. The two are clearly tied together.

When it happens every year or two it's global warming; when it happens once every decade or two it's weather.

 

[HikerGuy83]

“Record-breaking rainfall that caused flash flooding in the St. Louis area Tuesday morning, leaving cars trapped on streets, causing road closures and at least one death, is not just a freak occurrence: It’s a manifestation of human-caused climate change. By 7 a.m. Central time, rainfall since midnight averaged between 6 and 10 inches around the region.

THAT KIND OF SATURATION HAS BEEN MADE MORE LIKELY BECAUSE WARMER AIR NOLDS MORE WATER AND CAUSES MORE WATER TO EVAPORATE, and it’s happening more frequently as a result.

“In recent years, a larger percentage of precipitation has come in the form of intense single-day events,” the Environmental Protection Agency said. “Nine of the top 10 years for extreme one-day precipitation events have occurred since 1996. The prevalence of extreme single-day precipitation events remained fairly steady between 1910 and the 1980s, but has risen substantially since then.”

So while the Southwest suffers through a 20-year megadrought — the driest two decades in the region in at least 1,200 years — it has also experienced a 10% increase in the heaviest precipitation events between 1956 and 2016, according to the U.S. Global Change Research Program.

Other regions are seeing more dramatic storms and experiencing more frequent and severe flooding. The Midwest has 42% more heavy precipitation events per year than it did 60 years ago, and the Northeast is seeing 55% more.

St. Louis has been hit by record flash flooding. Here's how it's related to climate change.

Record-breaking rainfall that caused flash flooding in the St. Louis area Tuesday morning, leaving cars trapped on streets, causing road closures and at least one death, is not just a freak occurrence: It’s a manifestation of human-caused climate change.

news.yahoo.com

This is yet another example of how CLIMATE change affects WEATHER. The two are clearly tied together.

From the comments in your article:

I am in St. Louis and drove through downtown this morning. We did break 100 year rain quantity and had flooding where we typically don't through out the city. But, this is pale in comparison to the typical flooding that occurs almost on a yearly basis when the Mississippi River rises from rain up north that come through the Midwest. Some areas are flooded and some losses occurred but when the Mississippi rises it is much worse.

 

[watsup]

When it happens every year or two it's global warming; when it happens once every decade or two it's weather.

You clearly do not understand the large font text portion of the article. That’s not surprising for a denier.

 

[watsup]

From the comments in your article:

I am in St. Louis and drove through downtown this morning. We did break 100 year rain quantity and had flooding where we typically don't through out the city. But, this is pale in comparison to the typical flooding that occurs almost on a yearly basis when the Mississippi River rises from rain up north that come through the Midwest. Some areas are flooded and some losses occurred but when the Mississippi rises it is much worse.

But that happens gradually as the rain swells the river over time. That is quite different from NINE INCHES overnight as a result of the explanation in the OP.

 

[watsup]

I'm sorry you cannot comprehend my explainations. Purhaps you aren't equipped in the science of this topic to debate it.

I can comprehend your simplistic and wrong-headed denier “explanations” just fine. The problem is that you are a “reactionary”, meaning that you AUTOMATICALLY support denier drivel such as post #19 from flogger or, no doubt, posts #27 and #28 above which show that the particular chatters simply do not understand the SCIENCE behind the ability of warmer air to hold more moisture and thusly to dump it in greater quantities.
Let me suggest that you all go back and take some basic science courses in order to better understand the consequence of global warming and associated climate change.

 

[watsup]

Maybe this will help:

“There are many ways that climate change can cause floods. Coastal floods get a lot of attention, especially when they happen during a hurricane. But actually, inland flooding is more common. And the kind of devastating heavy rain that we've seen this week is something that climate scientists have predicted for many decades - that, as humans keep burning fossil fuels, the atmosphere gets hotter, the air holds more moisture and so, when it rains, it rains harder.
...the climate models are correct. And actually scientists can observe it in real time now, which is pretty scary. So heavy rain has increased all over the U.S. And in the southeastern U.S., including in Kentucky, it's increased by almost a third.”



These kinds of explanations are all over the internet if any of you deniers would like to learn more science.

 

[Lord of Planar]

But that happens gradually as the rain swells the river over time. That is quite different from NINE INCHES overnight as a result of the explanation in the OP.

I will venture to guess that it's the aerosols that make precipitation happen effectively in one event, instead of over several days. I'll bet the monthly and average totals aren't any records.

I have been consistent that CO2 is a good thing, and not a problem. The problems are actual physical pollutants.

 

[watsup]

I will venture to guess that it's the aerosols that make precipitation happen effectively in one event, instead of over several days. I'll bet the monthly and average totals aren't any records.

I have been consistent that CO2 is a good thing, and not a problem. The problems are actual physical pollutants.

Please cite your professional papers regarding climate change and the atmosphere so that we can study them more in depth to determine the viability of your research and data.
Or are you actually just a dilettante denier in an online chat room whose guesses we should not take seriously?

 

[Lord of Planar]

Maybe this will help:

“There are many ways that climate change can cause floods. Coastal floods get a lot of attention, especially when they happen during a hurricane. But actually, inland flooding is more common. And the kind of devastating heavy rain that we've seen this week is something that climate scientists have predicted for many decades - that, as humans keep burning fossil fuels, the atmosphere gets hotter, the air holds more moisture and so, when it rains, it rains harder.
...the climate models are correct. And actually scientists can observe it in real time now, which is pretty scary. So heavy rain has increased all over the U.S. And in the southeastern U.S., including in Kentucky, it's increased by almost a third.”

An article for novices, as the say "climate change" and skip specifics. The extra precipitation isn't very significant on an annual level, but aerosols appear to shorten the length of precipitation making the the same precipitation fall in a shorter time.

Inland flooding is more common because we restrict the flow of water, cap off the land that would have absorbed a large percentage of it, and have a greater quantity of seed aerosols in the atmosphere. They touch on this a little bit, but don't blame any of the newer flooding of our land use changes like they should. They also say nothing of aerosols that seed the clouds, changing the locations and intensity of precipitation.

These kinds of explanations are all over the internet if any of you deniers would like to learn more science.

There are currently no "deniers" arguing in this forum. Just science deniers like you.

You think NPR teaches science?

LOL...

LOL...

Only those who don't know any. OMG. How can you think NPR has any scientific value?

LOL...

What they say here is very, very simplified. I'm glad you learned a little bit at least.

This is better resource material:

​

According to a new MIT study in Geophysical Research Letters, the effects of anthropogenic aerosols exert a strong influence in determining where precipitation increases and decreases take place across the globe. Running historical simulations with models that represent aerosol-cloud interactions with far greater precision than in previous analyses, the MIT study indicates that the distribution of precipitation in the second half of the 20th century is dominated by the effects of anthropogenic aerosols over the tropics, and also substantially influenced in non-tropical regions of the Northern Hemisphere.​

How aerosols drive the rain

An MIT study finds the effects of human-made aerosols exert a strong influence in determining where precipitation increases and decreases take place across the globe.

news.mit.edu

 

[Lord of Planar]

Please cite your professional papers regarding climate change and the atmosphere so that we can study them more in depth to determine the viability of your research and data.
Or are you actually just a dilettante denier in an online chat room whose guesses we should not take seriously?

LOL...

This from someone who learns science from NPR?

LOL...

See my last post. The MIT article also links the paper, if it doesn't use too big of words for you.

LOL....

Learn science from NPR.

LOL...

 

[watsup]

LOL...

This from someone who learns science from NPR?

LOL...

See my last post. The MIT article also links the paper, if it doesn't use too big of words for you.

LOL....

Learn science from NPR.

LOL...

Does warmer air hold more moisture?

 

[watsup]

An article for novices, as the say "climate change" and skip specifics. The extra precipitation isn't very significant on an annual level, but aerosols appear to shorten the length of precipitation making the the same precipitation fall in a shorter time.

Inland flooding is more common because we restrict the flow of water, cap off the land that would have absorbed a large percentage of it, and have a greater quantity of seed aerosols in the atmosphere. They touch on this a little bit, but don't blame any of the newer flooding of our land use changes like they should. They also say nothing of aerosols that seed the clouds, changing the locations and intensity of precipitation.

There are currently no "deniers" arguing in this forum. Just science deniers like you.

You think NPR teaches science?

LOL...

LOL...

Only those who don't know any. OMG. How can you think NPR has any scientific value?

LOL...

What they say here is very, very simplified. I'm glad you learned a little bit at least.

This is better resource material:

​

According to a new MIT study in Geophysical Research Letters, the effects of anthropogenic aerosols exert a strong influence in determining where precipitation increases and decreases take place across the globe. Running historical simulations with models that represent aerosol-cloud interactions with far greater precision than in previous analyses, the MIT study indicates that the distribution of precipitation in the second half of the 20th century is dominated by the effects of anthropogenic aerosols over the tropics, and also substantially influenced in non-tropical regions of the Northern Hemisphere.​

How aerosols drive the rain

An MIT study finds the effects of human-made aerosols exert a strong influence in determining where precipitation increases and decreases take place across the globe.

news.mit.edu

Did you even read the article, or just latch on to the headline and not understand what was in it? Let me help you:

“While it is true that total precipitation change is controlled by average global temperature change, which, in turn, is largely based on greenhouse gas emissions, our research shows that aerosols have significantly impacted the distribution of precipitation change around the world since preindustrial times,”

How aerosols drive the rain

An MIT study finds the effects of human-made aerosols exert a strong influence in determining where precipitation increases and decreases take place across the globe.

news.mit.edu

Now carefully read the sentence up to the fourth comma. Do you understand what it says?
The second half of the sentence talks about the DISTRIBUTION of precipitation, which means that the study is based on changing patterns of WHERE there is precipitation, not on amounts in one event.
Please go back and read the entire article and try to better understand it.

Nor did you take the time to read the actual study. Here is the first line of the Introduction: “The quantity of global total precipitation change is shown to respond robustly to the global mean surface temperature change, whereas the spatial distribution of such change carries significant regional characteristics and can be influenced by many factors including atmospheric circulation change [e.g., Mitchell et al., 1987; Allen and Ingram, 2002; Held and Soden, 2006].”

Loading…

agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com

What does the first phrase of the sentence say?

You really need to spend some time actually reading the material that you post rather than “shooting off your mouth” before doing so and thus embarrassing yourself.

 

[watsup]

I looked at the picture of the flooding along I-70, and see a poor use of K-rails causing the water to accumulate.
Weather conditions, can and do sometimes cause training of storms, and when that happens a log of rain falls in a short
time window. Places that design their systems for say 5 inches of rain in 25 hours, flood if they get 8 inches in 24 hours.
Paved areas, prevent ground absorption, and force runoff to collect in the drainage systems.
I suspect this is more of a land use change problem than a climate change problem.
View attachment 67403959

I suspect blah blah blah.....

 

[HangLow]

“Record-breaking rainfall that caused flash flooding in the St. Louis area Tuesday morning, leaving cars trapped on streets, causing road closures and at least one death, is not just a freak occurrence: It’s a manifestation of human-caused climate change. By 7 a.m. Central time, rainfall since midnight averaged between 6 and 10 inches around the region.

THAT KIND OF SATURATION HAS BEEN MADE MORE LIKELY BECAUSE WARMER AIR NOLDS MORE WATER AND CAUSES MORE WATER TO EVAPORATE, and it’s happening more frequently as a result.

“In recent years, a larger percentage of precipitation has come in the form of intense single-day events,” the Environmental Protection Agency said. “Nine of the top 10 years for extreme one-day precipitation events have occurred since 1996. The prevalence of extreme single-day precipitation events remained fairly steady between 1910 and the 1980s, but has risen substantially since then.”

So while the Southwest suffers through a 20-year megadrought — the driest two decades in the region in at least 1,200 years — it has also experienced a 10% increase in the heaviest precipitation events between 1956 and 2016, according to the U.S. Global Change Research Program.

Other regions are seeing more dramatic storms and experiencing more frequent and severe flooding. The Midwest has 42% more heavy precipitation events per year than it did 60 years ago, and the Northeast is seeing 55% more.

St. Louis has been hit by record flash flooding. Here's how it's related to climate change.

Record-breaking rainfall that caused flash flooding in the St. Louis area Tuesday morning, leaving cars trapped on streets, causing road closures and at least one death, is not just a freak occurrence: It’s a manifestation of human-caused climate change.

news.yahoo.com

This is yet another example of how CLIMATE change affects WEATHER. The two are clearly tied together.

​

 

[Lord of Planar]

Does warmer air hold more moisture?

Oh, is that the limit of your understanding?

Not necessarily. It can hold more moisture. That doesn't mean it does.

 

[watsup]

Oh, is that the limit of your understanding?

Not necessarily. It can hold more moisture. That doesn't mean it does.

The climate scientists say that it does.

 

[Lord of Planar]

The climate scientists say that it does.

Bullshit. Its not that simple. If they claim that it does, they are lying.

It is a tested fact of specimen. Warmer air can hold more moisture. That doesn't mean it does.

Tell me. If you come home in the winter, and your room is 45F degrees, and you turn the heater of and warm the room to 70F. Where did the extra water in the air come from that you think it has?

Care to provide a reliable link where they say it does?

 

[watsup]

Bullshit. Its not that simple. If they claim that it does, they are lying.

It is a tested fact of specimen. Warmer air can hold more moisture. That doesn't mean it does.

Tell me. If you come home in the winter, and your room is 45F degrees, and you turn the heater of and warm the room to 70F. Where did the extra water in the air come from that you think it has?

Care to provide a reliable link where they say it does?

We’re talking about the atmosphere, not my home in the winter. Please try to stay on topic.

 

[Lord of Planar]

We’re talking about the atmosphere, not my home in the winter. Please try to stay on topic.

I think you need to leave these discussions until you learn some science.

 

[watsup]

I think you need to leave these discussions until you learn some science.

More psychological projection from you.

Climate scientists say that the warmer atmosphere due to human-produced CO2 can (and do) cause clouds and associated weather systems to hold more moisture and thus be able to dump more rain, thus increasing flooding probabilities on basically a worldwide basis. Can you show otherwise?

 

[Lord of Planar]

More psychological projection from you.

Climate scientists say that the warmer atmosphere due to human-produced CO2 can (and do) cause clouds and associated weather systems to hold more moisture and thus be able to dump more rain, thus increasing flooding probabilities on basically a worldwide basis. Can you show otherwise?

Globally, yes. That doesn't mean the air everywhere will be like that. This will mostly be prominent in areas of large water, but since cooler air can holds less, much of it precipitates out as it mixes with cooler higher altitude air, and the end result is seldom much different.

 

[flogger]

You can build infrastructure and make plans to reduce the risk of flooding in those areas. That at the same time it becomes much harder and costlier then climate change make floods and much more severe. There it can also be no plans for such events because before they would have been so unlikely. From my previous link.

"Global warming increased the likelihood and intensity of the floods that ravaged Germany and Belgium in July, claiming more than 200 lives and causing billions of euros worth of damage, according to a study by leading world scientists released on Tuesday."

Climate crisis made Europe's deadly floods 'up to 9 times more likely'

Scientists have found that floods as extreme as these are also very likely to happen again.

www.euronews.com

Annual deaths from worldwide climate and weather events are at an all time low. Crop yields are at an all time high with the earth greening at a significant rate due to increased CO2 fertilization . There is more reforestation than deforestation (though there is I concede a significant loss of habitat in more sensitive areas). The ice cap didnt disappear as Gore predicted it would by 2014 . The populations of the Maldives and Seychelles (slated to be underwater by now) have doubled with multi million dollar investment in beachfront holiday accommodation there .

For the last few millennia the Earth has been significantly warmer than it is today with both ourselves and the polar bears thriving. We are currently in an era of CO2 poverty if one actually checks the earths paleoclimatic record. The average level over the period life has existed being around 4 - 5 times what it is today. Indeed around 1700 CO2 levels came dangerously close to the kill level for plants at 180PPM (kill level is 150PPM) and were historic lows measured against the previous paleoclimatic norms

projects.iq.harvard.edu/files/climate/files/kobashietal2011.pdf

mclean.ch/climate/Ice_cores.html

In short we are currently economically destroying ourselves over something that represents a net benefit to us for the benefit of those who certainly don't have our best interests at heart

 

[watsup]

Annual deaths from worldwide climate and weather events are at an all time low. Crop yields are at an all time high with the earth greening at a significant rate due to increased CO2 fertilization . There is more reforestation than deforestation (though there is I concede a significant loss of habitat in more sensitive areas). The ice cap didnt disappear as Gore predicted it would by 2014 . The populations of the Maldives and Seychelles (slated to be underwater by now) have doubled with multi million dollar investment in beachfront holiday accommodation there .

For the last few millennia the Earth has been significantly warmer than it is today with both ourselves and the polar bears thriving. We are currently in an era of CO2 poverty if one actually checks the earths paleoclimatic record. The average level over the period life has existed being around 4 - 5 times what it is today. Indeed around 1700 CO2 levels came dangerously close to the kill level for plants at 180PPM (kill level is 150PPM) and were historic lows measured against the previous paleoclimatic norms

projects.iq.harvard.edu/files/climate/files/kobashietal2011.pdf

mclean.ch/climate/Ice_cores.html

In short we are currently economically destroying ourselves over something that represents a net benefit to us for the benefit of those who certainly don't have our best interests at heart

Standard inane denier talking points Gish Gallop. *YAWN*

 

[flogger]

Standard inane denier talking points Gish Gallop. *YAWN*

And of course your standard evasion

If you cannot address any of the points made in my post then might suggest you change your bison avatar for one of these