"Hundred year <weather>"

Pump more oil; burn more clean coal - let the marketing people handle the fall-out. That's their JOB.....
We don't need to incentivize people to transition, we just need to build our own "golden dome" aka DJT's version of star wars project. Space Force; were they can't hear you scream........
Just like fashion; what's old is new again.......


Sorry too much coffee this morning.......

 

You sure do waive the flag of fascism well... It's as if you live in a world where you have zero accountability or responsibility to what future generations will experience on this planet due to your hateful flippant ability to not perceive right from wrong.

 

The answer is climate deniers are incapable of "realizing" anything that shows sharing and kindness because they think being greedy and selfish is the only thing that matters. Any path of logic you present to them will be discounted, discredited and oppressed because they've never been forced to live in a world that's based on logic only hype and hyperbole and worshiping the lies of the richest people because they think they'll get rich with the same self-serving attitude even though they only get ripped off rather than rich!

Or more to the point:

 

In my opinion, a contributing factor in the increasing flooding risks is the constant spreading of urbanization, along with its attending increase in impervious surfaces. That dramatically increases surface runoff.

 

Agreed... The city of Houston for example in the 80 & 90's had an elaborate flood control system where they couldn't build. But then in the early 2000's the usual corrupting influences argued that they could build houses in all the flood control channels and the streets could take the place of the flood control channels. Then in 2018 Hurricane Harvey hit and a million vehicles were destroyed or damaged, which was entirely preventable had it not been for all the greedy scum real estate developers that have never been held accountable for the loss and suffering they create for so many.

 

i'm not a denier, but how do the scientists differentiate between manmade and natural?

 

Manmade vs. natural desequestering of CO₂? Or manmade vs. natural something else?

 

climate change

 

I'd be happy to explain...

450 million years ago during the Ordovician period CO2 in the atmosphere reached an all time high of near 8,000ppm with the lowest ever occuring C02 in the atmoshpere at 172ppm during the glacial maximum 20K years ago.

Most all of the evolution of humans occurred on the planet when CO2 in the atmosphere was at 280ppm, which is known as pre industrial levels. Currently we're at 427ppm in the atmosphere.

Everything mentioned above except the last sentence is considered natural fluctuations... The last sentence is considered man-made and is also considered to be a much faster change with more serious and sudden surprises compared to a very slow changing natural system.

 

Ahhhhh; I believe laws was broken and pardons were issued...... That's why the first thing this administration did was neuter the investigative arms of the government, to avoid check and balances. And get this; the excuse they used was to weed out government corruption.
We are stupider than we look.......and we got what the few voted for, though the choices wasn't great.
Gotta watch more TV and conspiracy theories; so I can neuter more brain cells........

 

Well, it wasn't quite just the few ... not quite half the people who voted ... but closer to half than any other ticket got.

 

I simply know a lot of people that whine about the election and my first question to them is - 'did you vote'?
Now if your a convicted felon - you've got a good excuse; otherwise I don't want to hear it.
If you didn't participate, you've let someone else make the choice for you.....
We were at 70% in the 2020 election cycle; whereas Russia was 77% and Uruguay in the high 80's to low 90 percentile - which I thought was a fascist regime. of course I don't know if guns was involved at the polling sites or the numbers were all just made up.


YMMV

 

since no one here seemed to understand my question, i asked dr. google. this seemed like a good explanation for the layman: Natural_vs_anthropogenic_climate_change

 

"since no one here seemed to understand my question" well that's a bit cruel. Is there anything on that web link you did not already know?

This is a very inviting topic because it is multidisciplinary, with serious consequences for people, and is happening now.

Oceans and lower atmosphere are gaining heat content. This allows lower atmosphere to hold more water, it is actually just a bit more; for details see Clausius-Clapeyron equation.

Another (related) thing changing climate does is to increase energy transfer, equator to poles. Atmosphere was already turbulent and twisty, and this increase makes it more so. Increased variability in time and space means large departures from the mean become more common. If anyone were to ask, I rank this change as more important that Claus/Clap above.

Tropical storm Barry was not very newsworthy, but from it a high-moisture chunk of air stuck together until floating over Texas Hill Country. The rain happened at night so we can suppose that air chunk got lifted by a cold-air wedge at surface and ascended enough to get icey then rainy. (During daytime there is surface heating and uplift which is rather the opposite, but with similar rain results. Very interesting topic)

That chunk stuck together and stayed more or less in place for large rain in small area in short time. Under it is limestone geology which is really interesting but beyond scope of brief discussion. Local landform is such that dynamic surface water has only a single river for exit. Summer vacation joy is such that many people were near the low-flow areas of that river, and within its high-flow areas. Asleep, or otherwise not attentive to issued flood warnings. Or those warnings were not strident enough. Anyway, tragedy ensued.

Is that enough? Want more?

 

"a contributing factor in the increasing flooding risks is the constant spreading of urbanization, along with its attending increase in impervious surfaces"

That is so. In TX and perhaps not known to all, Commercial developments doing ?? amount of paving must also build water-impounding structures against that result. I know that from a commercial development in San Antonio TX area by a friend. No further details here I suppose it would not be a PriusChat thing to review such regulations at TX-level, US-level, or elsewhere. But at least there is some awareness of @wxman idea.

Not a factor in this flood tragedy. TX Hill Country is not 'paved' and local geology is the local controlling thing. Houston TX flood 2017 may be an example of paving towards tragedy (but not only that).

We might discuss other examples where anthropogenic reduction of soil (water) permeability have turned out badly.
==

We might discuss what 100-year floods mean, and probit analyses, and their unresponsiveness to non-stationary climates. How deep shall we go?

 

There in lies the problem, not that the majority voted for Trump, but more the majority didn't vote at all and they are getting their reward for being too lazy to care about what might happen if Trump was elected.

That left the brainwashed section of society make the choices for all. If Trump received the vote of more 50% of the population, then you could say he had a mandate to do what he has done ...... but that isn't the case is it, it was 50% of those who got off their arse and voted, actually voted for Trump .......

The question will always be asked, did the person casting the vote actually use their own name, or the name of someone else on the registered voter role?

Will what has happened this time improve voter turn out next time? Only spreading the word about how America ended up in the position they are in and warning them that unless they got out there and voted next time and every time after that, can save them from a lifetime of what they are just now discovering were complete fabrications ... not even distortions of the truth .... complete fairytales, and the type without a happy ending .....

T1 Terry

 

Interesting, and that was a study ending in 2023, things seem to be accelerating faster than even the most rabid climate scientists had predicted.
Some are suggesting we have already reached the point of no return due to the massive amounts of methane being released from thawing permafrost and warm deep sea events releasing methane that was trapped in a crystalline state .....

No answers so far on how to reduce the methane concentrates in the upper atmosphere ...... but it is increasing at a very alarming rate Methane Levels: Current & Historic Atmospheric CH4 / Global Temperature Graph & Widget

Something rarely spoken about, methane has a 80 times the heat retention capacity as carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, but it only has that capacity for around 20 yrs .... but doesn't just stop at that point, even after 100yrs, it still has 28 times the effect carbon dioxide has in the upper atmosphere

T1 Terry