Tornadoes, climate change, and the Republicans' refusal to acknowledge the truth
We've just seen the fiercest start to the U.S. tornado season in history. This has left me wondering why so many media outlets neglected to examine if there is any link between this devastation and rising levels of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere.
It's a particularly pertinent issue as we go into the Super Tuesday Republican primaries where one of the challengers, Rick Santorum, has been a longstanding denier of human-induced climate change.
"[Climate change is] an absolute travesty of scientific research that was motivated by those who, in my opinion, saw this as an opportunity to create a panic and a crisis for government to be able to step in and even more greatly control your life," Santorum claimed earlier this year. "I for one never bought the hoax."
Mitt Romney has more recently come around to being fool on this topic. Meanwhile, Newt Gingrich has also flip-flopped to become a denier.
Newt Gingrich speaks out of both sides of his mouth on climate change.
Meanwhile, on the Climate Progress website, a leading climatologist is quoted as saying it is "irresponsible not to mention climate change in stories that presume to say something about why all these storms and tornadoes are happening".
Kevin Trenberth, the former head of the climate analysis section with the National Center for Atmospheric Research, told the website's editor, Joe Romm:
"The environment in which all of these storms and the tornadoes are occurring has changed from human influences (global warming). Tornadoes come from thunderstorms in a wind shear environment. This occurs east of the Rockies more than anywhere else in the world. The wind shear is from southerly (SE, S or SW) flow from the Gulf overlaid by westerlies aloft that have come over the Rockies. That wind shear can be converted to rotation. The basic driver of thunderstorms is the instability in the atmosphere: warm moist air at low levels with drier air aloft. With global warming the low level air is warm and moister and there is more energy available to fuel all of these storms and increase the buoyancy of the air so that thunderstorms are strong. There is no clear research on changes in shear related to global warming. On average the low level air is 1 deg F and 4 percent moister than in the 1970s."
The director of the National Climatic Data Center, Tom Karl, told Romm: "Best info we have on the relationship between a warmer world and severe convective storms that can produce tornadoes is in the 2008 Synthesis and Assessment Report of the US Global Change Research Program. Chapter three of that Weather and Climate Extremes Assessment indicates that several studies do show that environmental conditions favorable for convection are more likely with more greenhouse gases, but results are not conclusive."
However, Karl added: "What we can say with confidence is that heavy and extreme precipitation events often associated with thunderstorms and convection are increasing and have been linked to human-induced changes in atmospheric composition."
Romm noted that the public isn't fully aware of the potential links between tornadoes and climate change because of the Republicans' head-in-the-sand approach to climate change.
"The population hasn’t even acclimatized to the climate change we’ve had already — in part because the GOP and the fossil-fuel-funded disinformation campaign have obfuscated efforts to inform the public," he stated.
The Republican candidates are dancing to the tune of industry-funded right-wing "think tanks" like the Heartland Institute, which are promoting doubts on climate change. The Heartland Institute's efforts were nicely spoofed in the video below:
Industry wants to brainwash American youths about climate change.
Follow Charlie Smith on Twitter at twitter.com/csmithstraight.
Comments
17 Comments
Al Bore
Mar 5, 2012 at 3:45pm
There is change everywhere.
We can't deny it.
We must control climate fluctuation.
If we don't control this climate variation, a catastrophic climate crisis will change all life on the planet forever.
We must do as the good scientists tell us for they are the ones who know, not us.
And Bush can *(&(%&*(%&*%(*&%*(&^%#^%$@#%$@!!!!!!!!!
Peace, Love.
Kim Collins
Mar 5, 2012 at 3:57pm
For those keeping score at home:
2011 was the 35th year in a row with above-average global temperatures. Each of the past several decades has been hotter than the last (i.e. 2000s > 1990s, 1990s > 1980s, 1980s > 1970s).
Or, if you'd prefer the video version from NASA's Goddard Institute: http://youtu.be/EoOrtvYTKeE
NoLeftNutter
Mar 5, 2012 at 4:03pm
Another alarmist article from Charlie that trumpets one limited amount of data over a limited period of time but ignores other evidence like record cold and snow fall in Eastern Europe and Alaska to "prove" that CAGW exists. Here's a quote from the bed-wetters play book for you Charlie - If it's colder it's just weather, if it's warmer then it's climate change".
Kim Collins
Mar 5, 2012 at 4:18pm
@NoLeftNutter:
You might want to follow the science a bit more closely. A recently published study has found that the rapid melting of sea ice over the last three decades is "bringing colder, snowier winters to the UK and other areas of Europe, North America and China."
Why?
"If less of the ocean is ice-covered in autumn, it releases more heat, warming the atmosphere.
This reduces the air temperature difference between the Arctic and latitudes further south, over the Atlantic Ocean.
In turn, this reduces the strength of the northern jet stream, which usually brings milder, wetter weather to Europe from the west.
It is these "blocking" conditions that keep the UK and the other affected regions supplied with cold air.
The researchers also found that the extra evaporation from the Arctic Ocean makes the air more humid, with some of the additional water content falling out as snow."
Source: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-17143269
Link to the study: http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2012/02/17/1114910109.abstract?sid=588...
Birdy
Mar 5, 2012 at 4:27pm
Will forms fix it? Maybe the government can throw long complicated bureaucratic forms at the tornados.
K. Forest
Mar 5, 2012 at 5:22pm
I would wager that anyone denying the impacts of human-induced climate change is being paid for their denial, is scientifically illiterate or is lying to support a political party. Theological arguments and "liberty" arguments are red herrings. These people would bet their children's future against getting an extra buck; or they equate the extra buck with some kind of security against the natural world. Short term (what's in it for me) thinking for long term universal pain.
bll01
Mar 6, 2012 at 1:45am
I now understand why the science was hidden from the people during the medieval dark days. All that is standing between the people and another new modern day dark age is medieval leadership.
Birdy
Mar 6, 2012 at 2:43am
re: K. Forest
I would wager that anyone denying the complete impossibility of the government solving any problem more complicated than untying shoelaces is dependent on government freebies or has a degree in an industry that's dependent on corporate welfare.
I would also wager that anyone who thinks "liberty arguments are red herrings" has never experienced tyranny first-hand and hence has no appreciation for the privilege of owning yourself.
I don't mind if you disagree. I think it's great if you want to clean up the earth. Go crazy.
Just don't threaten me and steal my things.
Is that really too much to ask?
Chenango21
Mar 6, 2012 at 3:47am
Hello Apocaholics!
Apocaholism: the compulsion to find sources of doom which provide a rationale for instituting massive command and control legislative and regulatory regimes. In addition to providing power to the its adherents it has the added benefit of enhancing the sense of moral and intellecutal superiority to adherents over opponents who are charactized as being stupid and/or evil. All tactics to vanguish opponents are justified as the end (supposed global salvation) justifies the means.
Examples: Malthusian population growth, ozone layer destruction, genetic modification of crops destroying the bioshpere,imminent dna destruction as evidenced by legless frogs, imminent global pandemic, anthropogenic climate change.
NoLeftNutter
Mar 6, 2012 at 6:17am
Gee Kim, maybe you should do a little thinking for yourself. Ten years ago the "experts" you cite were saying that by now, snow in Great Britain would be a thing of the past. Now that the facts have proven them wrong they've moved on to a new set of predictions equally difficult to falsify. The alarmists really like supporters like you though, you're one of their "useful idiots" who simply parrot the meme without thinking about the science.