The Washington Post’s hyper-Warmist/weather guy Jason Samenow has decided to perform a bit of introspection on the scaremongering emanating from the Cult of Climastrology
Is the media scaring the public too much about climate change and extreme weather?
The media has gone overboard in calling attention to links between climate change and extreme weather, contend two scholars in the United Kingdom. They argue that journalists are oversimplifying connections between weather and global warming and are resorting to scare tactics that are distracting the society from being prepared for extreme weather. The hype is responsible for a counterproductive and paralyzing “atmosfear,†they claim.
Let’s be clear: this doesn’t happen in a vacuum. These “journalists” are Warmists themselves and receive talking points from other Warmists, who provide the scary material and over-the-top prognostications with little actual scientific evidence. The media take it and run, often making it even scarier.
But their contention of a media-induced “atmosfear†goes too far. It’s possible to both plainly and carefully communicate how climate change is affecting extreme weather while also stressing the importance of extreme weather preparedness, irrespective of climate change.
In their provocative analysis in the journal Weather, Climate and Society, Vladimir Jankovic and David Schultz of the University of Manchester raise some valid points worthy of consideration. The most important point they make is that the overwhelming majority of damage from extreme weather results from people and property in harm’s way — not climate change. Some journalists and activists, in their zeal to connect the dots between weather and climate change, don’t place enough emphasis on this.
There really is no such thing as “extreme weather”. There is just weather, some of which is worse than others, and this has been going on for a long, long time. Nor is weather getting worse.
However, what the authors gloss over is that our atmosphere is fundamentally changed because of increasing greenhouse gases, and the effects on certain types of extreme weather are real. We can’t ignore this. It would be irresponsible for journalists to omit this very important aspect of the climate change story.
This is exactly what the analysis is talking about: idiotic pronouncements like a fundamental change to our atmosphere meant to scare people.
Consider these examples in which climate change is having significant impact on weather extremes:
* Locations all around the United States (and the world) are setting substantially more warm temperature records than cold temperature records. More extreme heat events have societal consequences. Warming from rising greenhouse gas concentrations is almost certainly playing a role in this.
Huh. Suddenly, it’s now important that places in the use are setting warm records. When it’s cool records and such, we’re told that the U.S. only accounts for 2% of the Earth’s surface, so, those are unimportant.
Journalists, as well as advocates for climate action, should take care in specifying which weather extremes may have been altered by climate change and how — and rely on peer-reviewed analysis.
Will they rely on the scientific documents that show there is no increase in “extreme weather?” Or, just look at the ones they like?
There is a very interesting comment from Steve T, part of the Capital Weather Gang for the Washington Post
My principal concern in regard to scientific credibility in communication of climate change matters is the ubiquitous use of “Weasel Words†(WWs). WWs such as could, suggest, might, perhaps, conceivably, appear to – and a dozen more in a list I’ve compiled – are designed to leave the impression that a specific and/or meaningful statement has been made; but, in actuality, phraseology incorporating them is almost without meaning. For example “could†is sufficiently (purposely?) ambiguous to render any claim with regard to the influence of climate change possible and unverifiable.
There’s more to it, click the link to read the rest of the comment. He makes a good point. We are constantly inundated with the Weasel Words, which I noted many, many times. These are meant to highten the scare factor that something could maybe might possibly doom us. We’re told that extreme weather could get worse. It isn’t. Nor are tropical systems, rainfall, nor droughts. Nor other weather.
