CBS: Human Climate Change Fingerprint in Daily Weather Detected

January 4, 2020

Posted by greenman3610
Filed in Crock of the Week

17 Comments »

17 Responses to “CBS: Human Climate Change Fingerprint in Daily Weather Detected”

Sir Charles Says:

January 4, 2020 at 10:52 am
Study in Nature here => Climate change now detectable from any single day of weather at global scale

Reply
neilrieck Says:

January 4, 2020 at 12:04 pm
Video not available in Canada. So sad 😦

Reply
- talies Says:
  
  January 4, 2020 at 12:43 pm
  Can get it in UK 🙂
  
  Reply
- Sir Charles Says:
  
  January 4, 2020 at 5:55 pm
  It’s available in Europe. Not much in the video anyway. Here the article in the WaPo (which I cannot access even though I disabled my ad blocker as requested by the page) => https://www.washingtonpost.com/weather/2020/01/02/signal-human-caused-climate-change-has-emerged-every-day-weather-study-finds/
  
  Reply
  - rhymeswithgoalie Says:
    
    January 5, 2020 at 2:56 am
    If you delete your washingtonpost.com cookies, it should reset the freebie counter.
    
    Reply
    - Sir Charles Says:
      
      January 5, 2020 at 10:44 pm
      Thanks. Must check whether I even allow cookies for WaPo. I’m old school. Cookies only make you fat 😉
      
      Reply
- Sir Charles Says:
  
  January 4, 2020 at 6:02 pm
  Well. I tried it with a Canadian VPN and the video is perfectly showing on YT.
  
  Reply
- rhymeswithgoalie Says:
  
  January 5, 2020 at 2:56 am
  Might try getting it directly from the cbsnews.com web site.
  https://www.cbsnews.com/video/scientists-detect-fingerprint-of-human-induced-climate-change-on-weather/
  
  Reply
ecoquant Says:

January 4, 2020 at 12:25 pm
@neilrieck,

But you have the study link: Who needs the video?

Reply
- rhymeswithgoalie Says:
  
  January 5, 2020 at 2:58 am
  But you have the study link: Who needs the video?
  
  I find it useful to understand how the mass media are presenting the study to the less-informed citizens.
  
  Reply
redskylite Says:

January 4, 2020 at 3:31 pm
That’s great – though most of us are hardly surprised at all. I notice that the
Joint Institute for the Study of the Atmosphere and Ocean no longer provide the monthly PDO index reading (since September 2018), both Kevin Trenberth and Judith Curry write about how the AMO/PDO teleconnections affect the ENSO cycle and temperatures.

Latest from Penn is that there is no PDO/AMO cycle, just variability. Quite an astounding conclusion. Would be interested to hear Trenberth’s reaction to this news.

” The Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation (AMO) and the Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO) do not appear to exist, according to a team of meteorologists who believe this has implications for both the validity of previous studies attributing past trends to these hypothetical natural oscillations and for the prospects of decade-scale climate predictability.”

https://news.psu.edu/story/602574/2020/01/03/research/atlantic-and-pacific-oscillations-lost-noise

Reply
- redskylite Says:
  
  January 4, 2020 at 5:06 pm
  For several decades the existence of interdecadal and multidecadal internal climate oscillations has been asserted by numerous studies based on analyses of historical observations, paleoclimatic data and climate model simulations.
  
  Michael E. Mann, Byron A. Steinman & Sonya K. Miller ORCID:orcid.org/0000-0001-7640-94251
  
  https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-019-13823-w
  
  Reply
  - Sir Charles Says:
    
    January 4, 2020 at 6:05 pm
    Thanks for the links!
    
    Reply
- grindupbaker Says:
  
  January 4, 2020 at 11:21 pm
  Trade winds started increasing 1995 AD. I don’t know how much it affects various (except ENSO of course) but I’m a 1-trick pony.
  
  Reply
dumboldguy Says:

January 4, 2020 at 6:08 pm
Just goes to show how little we have found out in the short time that we have been studying global warming and climate change. I wonder if future studies will support or overturn this finding?.

And remember—-smoking marijuana, eating eggs, and drinking red wine is good for you, bad for you, good for you, bad for you…………….

Reply
- greenman3610 Says:
  
  January 4, 2020 at 9:10 pm
  oh I think “good for you” is the consistent answer there.
  
  Reply
- rhymeswithgoalie Says:
  
  January 5, 2020 at 3:06 am
  Mainstream media are notoriously bad at presenting science news. Even when the articles get it roughly correct, the headlines themselves are way off base, often completely contradicting the conclusions.
  
  Also, a lot of “science” articles are also hand-fed to news outlets with some catchy, blown-out-of-proportion results that happen to favor parts of the food (chocolate, eggs) or pharmaceutical (restless leg syndrome, etc.) industry.
  
  Reply