Why Should I Care?

Since our last post about seasonal prediction of tropical cyclones, one of the organizations (the UK Meteorology Office) mentioned in that post has come out with their official forecast.  The UK Meteorology Office, or simply Met Office, has made a prediction that is substantially different than the other forecasts to date.  Traditionally the Met Office is the last to issue their forecast each season, but often their forecast will be in line (but not always) with the other agencies we discussed last time.  However, this forecast seems to speak to the very question posed previously – Are Seasonal Tropical Cyclone Predictions Useful? « continue reading »

This time a year, those involved with forecasting tropical storms and hurricanes in the Atlantic Ocean tend to get busy.  On June 1st we kicked off the official start of the 2009 hurricane season for the Atlantic, and while we have not had any name storms yet there was already a close call (Tropical Depression 1).  Generally speaking however, the main activity for the season does not usually get under way until August, so for most folks what you tend to hear about this time of year is the latest forecasts for the projected seasonal activity.  With all the significant landfalling hurricanes along the US gulf coast the last few years, these forecasts have gotten a great deal of attention in recent years.  However, do these predictions real provide value?  And if so, for whom? « continue reading »

Some of you who follow climate topics may have seen some articles in recent months talking about Sea Ice.  Some of the chatter has been about whether Sea Ice levels have really changed over the last 30 years.  Others have looked at the changing sea ice patterns in the Arctic Ocean and discussed the possibility of sea ice disappearing completely from the Arctic Ocean.  While both of these concepts are interesting and potentially worthy of future posts, the question I hear most often related to sea ice is – Why does it really matter what is going on with Sea Ice? « continue reading »

…waste?
…fewer blog posts?
…increased energy usage and carbon emissions?

Yes I know that Sea Ice was next up on the docket, but recent events and a recent study have sidetracked me on an issue with which we are all very familiar – Spam!  It is reasonable to wonder why in the world this topic would even appear on this blog, but bear with me for a bit.  I think you will find that this scourge of the information age has relevancy for each of these questions and I am sure quite a few more that you can think of. « continue reading »

Maybe we should start by addressing the question – What is the Montreal Protocol?  This international agreement aimed at eliminating man made chemicals that are believed to weaken the important ozone layer that protects the planet.  In our last post we looked at the issue of why humans have been essentially status quo with respect to our increasing carbon emission levels.  The Montreal Protocol was sited as an example of a successful human response to an issue related to the climate, but is it really? « continue reading »

It is known that the industrial age has lead to great quantities of Carbon Dioxide being introduced into the atmosphere that is well above any natural emission levels in recent millennia.  It is also naive to imagine this would have no meaningful impact on the planet.  Let’s for a moment accept the findings in the most recent IPCC study regarding CO2 and the potential implications, as this is the closest thing we have to international consensus on the issue.  So why don’t we see more meaningful changes occurring with regards to carbon emissions? « continue reading »

The initial post in our series on ‘Climate Forecast Uncertainty’ discussed the topic of climate data and made mention of ‘new’ sources of climate data.  While our instrument based record of the climate extends into 19th century in some cases, most global encompassing data sets are less than 100 years old.  The first weather satellite was launched less than 50 years ago and weather forecasts in the US were not even first issued until 1871 and even then just for a smattering of cities.   Yet today we are trying to forecast climate for 25, 50, and 100+ years into the future.  Doing this effectively means having an understanding for at least equal periods going back in time and if possible even further.  This need arises particularly in making sure we account for parts of our climate that have long time span recurring cycles.  So a logical question is ‘how do we do this’? « continue reading »

As promised, this is the first set of Internet sources that can improve your understanding about climate and climate change as well as the implications for public policy and the economy.  These first 10 links are just a starting point and will be built upon over time, but given that the goal is provide a bit more information than just a link, the process will take place in groupings or logical blocks.  Each time a new set of links is added, a post like this one will appear and then the cumulative list will grow with the new links added to the ‘Links’ page found in the left column.  Feel free to comment on these sources or make additional recommendations at the end of the post or in the ‘Who Do Your Trust?’ post. « continue reading »

I have never met two people that had precisely the same opinion on everything, have you?  While it might make it a bit easier to get things done if all humans saw things precisely the same way, at the same time it would certainly be boring.  We often face disagreements with a friend, family member or colleague that can be addressed between the two parties as the outcome only effects the parties directly involved in the disagreement.  Even if the group engaged in the debate grows by a small amount, reaching at least a consensus is often feasible.  In these cases we may give in to a solution that we don’t agree with or to an argument that is completely flawed for a variety of reasons: the topic is not important to us, we just don’t feel like arguing, we don’t want to hurt someone’s feelings, etc.

However, even in a disagreement with one other person there are times that reaching an agreement is very difficult, and arguments from both sides may seem to have merit.  Now imagine topics as far reaching as the global recession or climate change.  Not only do experts in the fields that deal with these topics at times disagree on both attribution of cause and potential outcomes, but throw into the mix that we are dealing with topics that impact nearly 7 billion people and things get a bit more complex.  Different ideologies and philosophies further complicate trying to work as a global society in agreeing on and dealing with issues.  So how can you as an individual contribute to a resolving a debate?  By both presenting valid arguments and identifying false arguments. « continue reading »