Climate change and the California drought

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/21/science/climate-change-intensifies-california-drought-scientists-say.html?_r=0

just so you know, for those that prefer to dismiss science, this is in the Science section of the NYT

What a load of pseudo-science bullshit.

" Even though the findings suggest that the drought is primarily a consequence of natural climate variability,the scientists added that the likelihood of any drought becoming acute is rising because of climate change. The odds of California suffering droughts at the far end of the scale,like the current one that began in 2012,have roughly doubled over the past century,they said.

“This would be a drought no matter what,” said A. Park Williams,a climate scientist at Columbia University and the lead author of a paper published by the journal Geophysical Research Letters. “It would be a fairly bad drought no matter what. But it’s definitely made worse by global warming.”

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/04/14/science/californias-history-of-drought-repeats.html

The drought,now in its fourth year,is by many measures the worst since the state began keeping records of temperature and precipitation in the 1800s. And with a population now close to 39 million and a thirsty,$50 billion agricultural industry,California has been affected more by this drought than by any previous one.

But scientists say that in the more ancient past,California and the Southwest occasionally had even worse droughts —so-called megadroughts —that lasted decades. At least in parts of California,in two cases in the last 1,200 years,these dry spells lingered for up to two centuries.

The new normal,scientists say,may in fact be an old one.

Californians themselves are the cause.

PkrBum wrote:What a load of pseudo-science bullshit.

" Even though the findings suggest that the drought is primarily a consequence of natural climate variability,the scientists added that the likelihood of any drought becoming acute is rising because of climate change. The odds of California suffering droughts at the far end of the scale,like the current one that began in 2012,have roughly doubled over the past century,they said.

“This would be a drought no matter what,” said A. Park Williams,a climate scientist at Columbia University and the lead author of a paper published by the journal Geophysical Research Letters. “It would be a fairly bad drought no matter what. But it’s definitely made worse by global warming.”

Not sure what your quotes are supposed to point out. There would still be a drought, yes, but it is worse because of rising temperatures.
.
Now if you would like to challenge the research that led to this conclusion, please educate us on how the research is faulty.

PkrBum wrote:http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/04/14/science/californias-history-of-drought-repeats.html

The drought,now in its fourth year,is by many measures the worst since the state began keeping records of temperature and precipitation in the 1800s. And with a population now close to 39 million and a thirsty,$50 billion agricultural industry,California has been affected more by this drought than by any previous one.

But scientists say that in the more ancient past,California and the Southwest occasionally had even worse droughts —so-called megadroughts —that lasted decades. At least in parts of California,in two cases in the last 1,200 years,these dry spells lingered for up to two centuries.

The new normal,scientists say,may in fact be an old one.

From your article
"Most climate models show Northern California becoming slightly wetter in the decades to come, but at the same time, average temperatures are expected to increase across the state. And just as record-high temperatures exacerbated the drought this year by causing more evaporation and reducing snowpack, warmer conditions can be expected to make things worse in the future.

"A recent study, for example, suggests that in the second half of this century, the warming that will result from rising concentrations of greenhouse gases will greatly increase the risk of a severe long-term drought in the Southwest and Plains that could rival or even exceed some of the ancient ones."

Get back to me when it lasts a hundred years then. I wouldn't buy any farm land there if I were you.

nadalfan wrote:http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/21/science/climate-change-intensifies-california-drought-scientists-say.html?_r=0

just so you know, for those that prefer to dismiss science, this is in the Science section of the NYT

WOW...SCIENCE SECTION OF THE FAR, FAR LEFT NEW YORK TIMES!

That settles it!

But I used the same source as the op. Does that tell us anything? I doubt it.

Hillary is going to jail and there is no climate change....it is amazing the breadth of misconception some hold........could one of you please tell me if the Cubs are going to win.......or lose......then I could sleep better.

2seaoat wrote:Hillary is going to jail and there is no climate change....it is amazing the breadth of misconception some hold........could one of you please tell me if the Cubs are going to win.......or lose......then I could sleep better.

No one anywhere has said there is no CLIMATE CHANGE, that's a cute little ploy you greenies have frequently worked in the past. When something goes awry, you just change the name. Such as using the term Liberal or Progressive instead of what you really mean which is Socialist.

GLOBAL WARMING is what you intend. Climate change is where you (progressives) have slithered in your attempt to pretend that's what you were saying all along.

I just have seen first hand with flooding and historical records that something is very wrong with our climate, and I believe the consensus of the scientist.   It really is pretty simple.......but I love your political nomenclature........liberal equals socialist......yep, if nothing else you are consistent........trying to shill for the mining industries and make anybody who wants less pollution a greenie or socialist......too funny.  Just like your understanding of inflation or managing brokers.....it does make it fun around here.  I think we should give you a participation ribbon so you do not feel like you are wrong and losing.......and we will make sure coach lets you have a snack.

Markle wrote:

2seaoat wrote:Hillary is going to jail and there is no climate change....it is amazing the breadth of misconception some hold........could one of you please tell me if the Cubs are going to win.......or lose......then I could sleep better.

No one anywhere has said there is no CLIMATE CHANGE, that's a cute little ploy you greenies have frequently worked in the past.  When something goes awry, you just change the name.  Such as using the term Liberal or Progressive instead of what you really mean which is Socialist.

GLOBAL WARMING is what you intend.  Climate change is where you (progressives) have slithered in your attempt to pretend that's what you were saying all along.

You have the cojones to use the word "slither" about anyone but yourself?

2seaoat wrote:I just have seen first hand with flooding and historical records that something is very wrong with our climate, and I believe the consensus of the scientist.   It really is pretty simple.......but I love your political nomenclature........liberal equals socialist......yep, if nothing else you are consistent........trying to shill for the mining industries and make anybody who wants less pollution a greenie or socialist......too funny.  Just like your understanding of inflation or managing brokers.....it does make it fun around here.  I think we should give you a participation ribbon so you do not feel like you are wrong and losing.......and we will make sure coach lets you have a snack.

You left out Progressive. The synonyms are Progressives, Liberals, Socialists.

We need to continue building coal plants. That provides us with cheap, plentiful energy. The opposite of the direction semi-retired President Obama is dragging this country.

Do you even know how clean modern coal plants are today?