Santa Barbara Featured in Climate Change Article

Santa Barbara Featured in Climate Change Article title=
Santa Barbara Featured in Climate Change Article
58 Comments
Reads 10160

Brush fire near El Capitan on October 17, 2019 (Photo: CHP)

By an edhat reader

Santa Barbara has been featured in a Washington Post article covering climate change in California.

The article has an interview with the manager of the El Capitan Canyon Campground and how they've been negatively affected by fire and mudslides in the past few years. 

Research is showing that our once mild climate is growing hotter, drier, and windier creating intense wildfires, deadly mudslides, and extreme drought. Our area is warming at double the rate of the continental United States.

"Since 1895, the average temperature in Santa Barbara County has warmed by 2.3 degrees Celsius, according to The Post's analysis. Neighboring Ventura County has heated up even more rapidly. With an average temperature increase of 2.6 degrees Celsius since preindustrial times, Ventura ranks as the fastest-warming county in the Lower 48 states," the article states.

It's a very interesting read and I'm curious what other edhatters think. Here's the link to the full article.

Login to add Comments

58 Comments

Show Comments
macpuzl Dec 11, 2019 01:53 PM
Santa Barbara Featured in Climate Change Article

Deniers need to cherry-pick, ignore facts, and lie to justify their opinions. Meanwhile, climate scientists have been correctly predicting anthropogenic global warming for almost 50 years.
===========================================================================
https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2019/12/4/20991315/climate-change-prediction-models-accurate

Sam The Dog Dec 11, 2019 02:34 PM
Santa Barbara Featured in Climate Change Article

There is no denying the climate is changing, and that humans have had an impact. The extent of that impact can not accurately be quantified due to how complex our ecosystem is to model. Even before the Industrial Revolution the climate was constantly changing on time scales of not hundreds but thousand and tens of thousands of years. To take only 100 years of data, maybe less than half that being plentiful and reliable data, and make a determination of what the last 50 years should have looked like had humans not been on this Earth is simply not possible, let alone what the next 50 years is going to look like with and without human interference. Our system is simply too complex with too many variables we don't fully understand. We can barely predict the weather next month! While I completely agree that we need to be good stewards of our planet, climate change alarmist have gone way overboard and unfortunately are taking resources away from more pressing societal needs.

macpuzl Dec 11, 2019 03:05 PM
Santa Barbara Featured in Climate Change Article

STD - You are sorely mistaken. But, I really didn't expect a denier to read the article explaining how accurate our climate models have proven to be, nor to acknowledge that we are changing the climate at a rate far exceeding anything seen in the past. The rate of heating correlates with the radiative forcing induced by the increasing CO2 concentration in the atmosphere, which is primarily the result of human activities, primarily the burning of fossil fuels. Any attempt to cast that as a natural cycle is simply ignoring facts.

jqb Dec 11, 2019 03:36 PM
Santa Barbara Featured in Climate Change Article

Just to be clear, STD's opinions are not based on knowledge or understanding of climate science, and he doesn't even understand the difference between weather and climate, so there's no reason to accept what he wrote as true.

Sam The Dog Dec 11, 2019 02:38 PM
Santa Barbara Featured in Climate Change Article

And any discussion on reducing humans impact on the climate without addressing human population growth is ignoring the number one cause of anthropogenic climate change.... What is the maximum sustainable population of Earth? It isn't infinite.

PitMix Dec 12, 2019 08:41 AM
Santa Barbara Featured in Climate Change Article

Is anyone here volunteering to breed less? Let me be the first- no kids. And most of the people at my work don't have kids or just 1 or 2. So we are doing our part.

Chip of SB Dec 11, 2019 05:02 PM
Santa Barbara Featured in Climate Change Article

I would like to offer a few suggestions to the "believers" out there. I think that's a fitting companion term for "denier." If you plan to continue to effectively promote your religious beliefs in the future, I would highly recommend you stop using the terms like "global warming." Weather tends to be unpredictable. What if it ends up getting much colder and wetter in the next few years? If you hang your hat on "warming" you will have some awkward explaining to do. Sure, you could call it a "pause" or something, but that could become untenable if a long term cooling trend were to take hold. Folks will look back on the "global warming" scare much like we look back on the dire predictions of a coming ice age from the 70s. Instead, use terms like "man made climate change." That way you can take credit for any future weather patterns, hot or cold, wet or dry. It might also be a good idea to back away from CO2. At least call it a "climate change gas" or similar to hedge your bets. I would also suggest that "believers" start enforcing a policy against making any specific predictions. There are already far too many apocalyptic predictions that have not come to pass. Preach the gospel and warn of the apocalypse, but don't ever, under any circumstances, commit to any specific trends or timelines. Keep it vague! You can't risk adding another failed prediction to the record. Stick to your core values: people are sinful, they should feel guilty for living and having fun, etc. Exploit those core values to promote your agenda. Finally and most importantly, keep your options open so your religion can adapt to changing times in the future.

macpuzl Dec 11, 2019 05:05 PM
Santa Barbara Featured in Climate Change Article

Stick that head in the sand! Denying and ignoring the facts is your stock in trade. And you still seem to have no clue about the difference between weather and climate.

a-1576114355 Dec 11, 2019 05:32 PM
Santa Barbara Featured in Climate Change Article

OP Thank you for the link to the full article. I read it, top to bottom. What upset me was the Avocado growers saying avo groves aren't a viable business and Agave is the way to go. No avocados in Santa Barbara? Gah.

Shasta Guy Dec 11, 2019 11:18 PM
Santa Barbara Featured in Climate Change Article

These are two compilations that review past global warming predictions. There are others, but these are the most compressive. Unfortunately for this first one compiled in 2017, the IPCC changed their website so that the reference links in the article come up dead. *********************************** https://wattsupwiththat.com/2017/10/30/some-failed-climate-predictions/ ********* This second link is a compilation of newspaper articles ********** https://realclimatescience.com/fifty-years-of-failed-apocalyptic-forecasts/ *********** This reaches back to the first arctic melting scares of the 1920s-1930s, flips to the global cooling scare of the 1970s, the famine disasters of Paul Ehrlich (aka The Population Bomb), then the current global warming scare hatched in the 1980s. You can’t change what the experts in past said what would happen in the future that didn’t happen. Read them for yourself, and don’t be bullied by those who are AGWer extremists. Here’s an interesting polar bear update****************************** https://climatism.blog/category/polar-bears/ ********** They won’t be disappearing from the arctic anytime soon, but they will be disappearing from posters about global warming since their numbers appear to be on the rise.

macpuzl Dec 12, 2019 11:30 AM
Santa Barbara Featured in Climate Change Article

There you go again, citing websites that feature climate disinformation, written by charlatans that have no climate science knowledge. Just look those sites up on RationalWiki or SourceWatch, and you'll see that they are funded by the dark money anti-science groups that back big carbon, and have no scientific standing whatsoever. SkepticalScience will show you how their conclusions are total bunk. If you want information on a given subject, and not disinformation and opinion masquerading as fact, consider the source. Use some critical thinking skills, which require you to drop your political bias.
==========================================================================
https://climate.nasa.gov/evidence/

macpuzl Dec 12, 2019 03:55 PM
Santa Barbara Featured in Climate Change Article

The same old tired fallacies are being trotted out here by the shameless deniers and shills. So far, they all appear in the list of 197 (so far) refuted denier claims that you can see in detail, with explanations, at =============================================================================
https://skepticalscience.com/argument.php
=============================================================================
Some you'll see in these Edhat comments are: #6 "Models are unreliable", #11 "Ice age predicted in the 70s", #22 "1934- hottest year on record", #35 "IPCC is alarmist", #37 "Polar bear numbers increasing", #63 "Scientists can't even predict weather", #69 "Sea level rise predictions are exaggerated", #71, #89, #92, #97, #100, #113...

Sam The Dog Dec 12, 2019 04:36 PM
Santa Barbara Featured in Climate Change Article

I'd read through the comments of your link, a quick scan showed some provided links to scientific papers countering the denials of the denier claims. While the climate is changing, the global warming alarmist saying cities will be inundated by the ocean and everyone on the coast will die are doing a disservice to what the our collective motivation should be - being good stewards of our planet.

Pages

Please Login or Register to comment on this.