All the hallmarks of a cult: they always have to come up with something new and proclaim Doom from a tiny 1.6F increase in global temperatures since 1850
It’s Not Just Poor Rains Causing Drought. The Atmosphere Is ‘Thirstier.’
Look down from a plane at farms in the Great Plains and the West and you’ll see green circles dotting the countryside, a kind of agricultural pointillism.
They’re from center-pivot sprinklers. But some farmers are finding older versions of these systems, many built 10, 15 or even 20 years ago, aren’t keeping up with today’s hotter reality, said Meetpal Kukal, an agricultural hydrologist at the University of Idaho. “There’s a gap between how much water you can apply and what the crop demands are,” he said.
By the time the sprinkler’s arm swings back around to its starting point, the soil has nearly dried out. The main culprit? Atmospheric thirst.
“A hotter world is a thirstier one,” said Solomon Gebrechorkos, a hydroclimatologist at the University of Oxford. He led a new study, published on Wednesday in the journal Nature, which found that atmospheric thirst, a factor that fills in some of the blanks in our understanding of drought, over the last four decades has made droughts more frequent, more intense and has caused them cover larger areas.
Meanwhile
Just like St. Greta, here are the XR wackos going full bore for Islamic extremists.
Anti-science cultist teach didn’t know that warm air holds more water vapor than cool air.
Lol
” It is only a theory”
Mr Teach is science a “theory” is THE best explanation of observed phenomena. It must be robust t enough to withstand intellectual attacks attacks by all who might disagree.
Science reailizes that we are finite beings living in an infinite world with infinite possibilities. A theory is THae best explanation of that world
If you have a better explanation for the planet heating at an historical rate, please present YOUR theory.
John,
Actually the concern about CO2 does not even rise to the level of hypothesis. There is no relation between carbon and climate change, if it is changing. Since you were lockup the environmental people have dropped the concept.
Johnny-Hairy-Aliassmith……You have no proof it’s a “historical rate”, as there’s nothing to compare this thermometer driven data to another era with thermometer data. But the real issue would be the alleged effect of the rate, not the rate itself.
Actually a Scientific Theory must pass several tests. Failure of any one fails them all.
1. It must be testable. If it can’t be tested then it is just a “belief,” as in a religion.
2. It must be predicable. If it does not respond exactly the same every time then it fails them all.
The claim that CO2 causes global warming has not and cannot be tested.
Every prediction has failed. FL is not under water. The polar bear population as increased.
What you warmest have is what is known as an Observational Theory. It is similar to saying that the cock crows and the sun comes up, or sacrifice a virgin and the volcano quietens.
IOW, correlation is not causation.