Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

KamaAina

(78,249 posts)
Wed Feb 25, 2015, 07:49 PM Feb 2015

Al Roker Says Harsh Weather Conditions This Winter Are Result Of Climate Change

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/02/25/al-roker-climate-change-storms_n_6746786.html

NBC weather anchor Al Roker believes that the extreme weather conditions the country is experiencing this winter are due to climate change....

"I think it is," Roker replied. "You can't point to any one event and say, 'This is climate change,' but what climate change opens the door for -- allows for -- are more extreme swings of weather."

Roker pointed to the contradiction between the lack of rainfall on the West Coast and the deluge of snow and ice on the East Coast.

"Climate change makes that more possible," he told King, adding that he prefers the term climate change to global warming.


Hoo boy. A believer in science and an African American. This ought to make him real popular over at Faux and FR!
38 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Al Roker Says Harsh Weather Conditions This Winter Are Result Of Climate Change (Original Post) KamaAina Feb 2015 OP
That was my exact same SARCASTIC thought, too! He'll be really popular now! CurtEastPoint Feb 2015 #1
He would have been fired for that at Fox News Turbineguy Feb 2015 #2
Funny you should suggest that. A weatherman at the OxyMoron's station in Fresno was fired KamaAina Feb 2015 #4
NBC just lost the bagger audience. randys1 Feb 2015 #3
Roker is not a scientist. former9thward Feb 2015 #5
Unlike the random man on the street, Roker has face-to-face ACCESS to experts on climate change. valerief Feb 2015 #6
I am aware of NBC journalists like Brian Williams. former9thward Feb 2015 #7
He has access to probably every meteorologist at The Weather Channel. valerief Feb 2015 #8
Oh, you make an allegation and you want me to do a search former9thward Feb 2015 #9
Nope. You're the one discounting an accredited journalist and you told me to valerief Feb 2015 #10
No you made the claim that Roker former9thward Feb 2015 #12
Well you don't know him or what he reads Kingofalldems Feb 2015 #11
So if a person "reads" something former9thward Feb 2015 #13
Yes but I don't know what he reads or studies day to day and neither do you. Kingofalldems Feb 2015 #14
"I guarantee he knows more than right wing blowhards." former9thward Feb 2015 #15
What the hell are you talking about? Kingofalldems Feb 2015 #16
Reading does not mean anything. former9thward Feb 2015 #17
Rush Limabaugh does not do weather forecasting, Roker does. Kingofalldems Feb 2015 #18
What is his degree in? former9thward Feb 2015 #20
So basically you're saying GP6971 Feb 2015 #19
So you believe an non scientist when they former9thward Feb 2015 #21
Like Al Gore? AgingAmerican Feb 2015 #22
Yes, like Al Gore. former9thward Feb 2015 #23
Are you a scientistt? If so, what degrees do you have, and where did you get them.? JDPriestly Feb 2015 #26
Since this thread was about Roker former9thward Feb 2015 #28
You are criticizing someone else for not being a scientist. I want to know what your scientific JDPriestly Feb 2015 #37
I am not debating climate change. former9thward Feb 2015 #38
You are really GP6971 Feb 2015 #27
Yeah, science is sorta like that. former9thward Feb 2015 #29
Can't disagree with that GP6971 Feb 2015 #36
it's good for him to speak the truth on climate change spanone Feb 2015 #25
Weather is not climate change. former9thward Feb 2015 #30
. spanone Feb 2015 #31
Nice try... former9thward Feb 2015 #32
it's a coalition of scientists. you appear to be an denier. i have no interest in converting you. spanone Feb 2015 #33
Here you go. Chathamization Feb 2015 #34
Well at least he was honest. former9thward Feb 2015 #35
al roker and our scientists too. spanone Feb 2015 #24
 

KamaAina

(78,249 posts)
4. Funny you should suggest that. A weatherman at the OxyMoron's station in Fresno was fired
Wed Feb 25, 2015, 08:02 PM
Feb 2015

for predicting a chance of showers on the day of the 'Dittohead Picnic"!

randys1

(16,286 posts)
3. NBC just lost the bagger audience.
Wed Feb 25, 2015, 07:55 PM
Feb 2015

This reminds us that the clown car potential prez candidates are all being trained by one person or another how to be dumb

They have to be dumb to get the nomination, and some of them come by that naturally, but some have to be trained

former9thward

(32,082 posts)
5. Roker is not a scientist.
Wed Feb 25, 2015, 08:08 PM
Feb 2015

He did not take a significant number of science courses in college which is why he has a BA not a BS.
His degree is communications. He is a weather reader. His opinions on climate change have as much meaning as a random person walking down the street in front of NBC.

valerief

(53,235 posts)
6. Unlike the random man on the street, Roker has face-to-face ACCESS to experts on climate change.
Wed Feb 25, 2015, 08:17 PM
Feb 2015

You know, like a journalist does.

former9thward

(32,082 posts)
7. I am aware of NBC journalists like Brian Williams.
Wed Feb 25, 2015, 08:21 PM
Feb 2015

Please point to peer reviewed articles or books Roker has written on the subject. Please point to an actual scientist that Roker talked to that gave him the information which lead to these specific comments. Thanks in advance.

valerief

(53,235 posts)
8. He has access to probably every meteorologist at The Weather Channel.
Wed Feb 25, 2015, 08:25 PM
Feb 2015

If you don't trust him, you do the search. I believe the climate scientists and the journalists who speak for them.

valerief

(53,235 posts)
10. Nope. You're the one discounting an accredited journalist and you told me to
Wed Feb 25, 2015, 08:29 PM
Feb 2015

provide links. Congrats, you've won a seat on my Ignore list.

former9thward

(32,082 posts)
12. No you made the claim that Roker
Wed Feb 25, 2015, 08:39 PM
Feb 2015

talked to scientists who gave him this information. And not a link...

Kingofalldems

(38,487 posts)
11. Well you don't know him or what he reads
Wed Feb 25, 2015, 08:33 PM
Feb 2015

so that makes your opinions of him have as much meaning as a random person walking down the street.

former9thward

(32,082 posts)
13. So if a person "reads" something
Wed Feb 25, 2015, 08:41 PM
Feb 2015

he has the credibility of an actual scientist. No that is anti-science. I do know his background. Do you?

Kingofalldems

(38,487 posts)
14. Yes but I don't know what he reads or studies day to day and neither do you.
Wed Feb 25, 2015, 08:46 PM
Feb 2015

I guarantee he knows more than right wing blowhards.

former9thward

(32,082 posts)
15. "I guarantee he knows more than right wing blowhards."
Wed Feb 25, 2015, 08:48 PM
Feb 2015

So? Is that now the standard to make scientific statements? Maybe in your world, not mine.

former9thward

(32,082 posts)
17. Reading does not mean anything.
Wed Feb 25, 2015, 09:02 PM
Feb 2015

Reading is not science. Maybe for you. If a RW said they read something and then made a comment on climate change you would immediately denounce them and ask what degree they had and what peer reviewed articles and books he had written.

Kingofalldems

(38,487 posts)
18. Rush Limabaugh does not do weather forecasting, Roker does.
Wed Feb 25, 2015, 09:07 PM
Feb 2015

It's safe to assume he's done a lot of reading AND studying. His opinion is worth much more than Limbaugh's or yours for that matter.

GP6971

(31,220 posts)
19. So basically you're saying
Wed Feb 25, 2015, 10:11 PM
Feb 2015

that a person who works in a field outside of their degree can't be knowledgeable of the field they work in. That will go over well with a lot of people.

former9thward

(32,082 posts)
23. Yes, like Al Gore.
Thu Feb 26, 2015, 01:40 AM
Feb 2015

He has refused to debate the issue. And well he should. He is is the farthest from a scientist that anyone could be. What is his degree in?

former9thward

(32,082 posts)
28. Since this thread was about Roker
Thu Feb 26, 2015, 10:49 AM
Feb 2015

giving scientific pronouncements shouldn't you be asking him those questions? You won't because you will not like the answers.

JDPriestly

(57,936 posts)
37. You are criticizing someone else for not being a scientist. I want to know what your scientific
Thu Feb 26, 2015, 03:04 PM
Feb 2015

background is so that I can judge whether your opinions are more reliable than the other person who is not a scientist.

Meanwhile, here is an excerpt from a report by some real scientists you can rely on.



"A global network of profiling floats that provides scientists the most accurate means of observing energy accumulation in the climate system has detected an increase in the temperature of the world’s oceans over a recent eight-year period.

Researchers led by Dean Roemmich, a physical oceanographer at Scripps Institution of Oceanography, UC San Diego, found that the top 2,000 meters (6,500 feet) of the world’s oceans warmed at a rate of 0.4 to 0.6 watts per square meter (W/m 2) between 2006 and 2013. The rate translates to a warming of roughly 0.005° C (0.009° F) per year in the top 500 meters of ocean and 0.002° C (0.0036° F) per year at depths between 500 and 2,000 meters.

. . . .
. . . .
“When we measure globally and deep enough, we see a steady rise in the earth’s heat content, consistent with the expected greenhouse gas-driven imbalance in our planet’s radiation budget,” said study co-author Susan Wijffels of Australian research agency the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization (CSIRO).

The study puts a widely reported “hiatus” in global surface air temperatures since 1998 into context. Roemmich said the study illustrates that the hiatus in warming of the sea surface and the lower atmosphere is not representative of the steady, continuing heat gain by the climate system. Scientists measure that heat gain in terms of increasing temperature averaged over the water column.

More

https://scripps.ucsd.edu/news/distinct-rise-global-ocean-temperatures-detected

If you have doubts about global warming, you can get on one of Scripps' ships and see what is going on for yourself, how global warming is measured and tracked. Here you go:

https://scripps.ucsd.edu/news/blogs-and-expeditions

Have fun. Enjoy the snow while you can. I'm in California. It's warm here. Really warm. I have lots of sweaters. I wore them often in past years. This year, I've worn them, but rarely. Today the temperature in my back yard is 71.5 and it is only 10:53 am. We used to have winters with rain and fairly cold weather. Basil dies when it is cold. My basil has lasted through the winter. This is the first year that has happened.

https://scripps.ucsd.edu/news/blogs-and-expeditions

You don't have to be a scientist to understand global warming. You just have to be interested in reading what scientists report from their studies.

Here is an excerpt from the EPA report on climate change and the Northeast.

"Over the last several decades, the Northeast has experienced noticeable changes in its climate. Since 1970, the average annual temperature rose by 2°F and the average winter temperature increased by 4°F. [2] Heavy precipitation events increased in magnitude and frequency. For the region as a whole, the majority of winter precipitation now falls as rain, not snow. [2] Climate scientists project that these trends will continue.

As seen in the map, New Hampshire's summers could be as warm as North Carolina's summers are today by the end of this century. Over the same period, Boston is projected to experience an increase in the number of days reaching 100°F — from an average of one per year between 1961 and 1990 to as many as 24 days per year by 2100. [2] Under a higher emissions scenario, Philadelphia and Hartford could see as many as 30 days per year with temperatures reaching 100°F. [2]

Precipitation and Sea Level Rise Impacts
Bar chart that shows the observed and projected days per year over 90 and 100 degrees Fahrenheit in Boston, Massachusetts. Between 1961 and 1990 there was an average of about nine days per year over 90 degrees. The projections of average number of days per year over 90 degrees Fahrenheit for the lower emissions scenario shows about 15 days for 2010 to 2039; 25 days for 2040-2069; and 32 days for 2070 to 2099. Under the higher emissions scenario over the same time periods, the average number of days above 90 degrees Fahrenheit are projected to be about 18, about 38, and about 65. The average number of days per year over 100 degrees Fahrenheit was one from 1961 to 1990. Under the lower and higher emissions scenarios this statistic is projected to be 6 days per year and 24 days per year, respectively, for the 2070 to 2099 timeframe. View enlarged image
. . . .


Overall, the amount of precipitation throughout the Northeast is projected to increase. Less winter precipitation falling as snow will likely increase the number and impact of flooding events. Sea level rise, storm surges, erosion, and the destruction of important coastal ecosystems will likely contribute to an increase in coastal flooding events, including the frequency of current "100-year flood" levels (severe flood levels with a one-in-100 likelihood of occurring in any given year). By the end of the century, New York City may experience a 100-year flood every 10 to 22 years, on average. [2] Damages to coastal property and infrastructure could impact the insurance industry. New York State alone has more than $2.3 trillion in insured coastal property. [2]

More

http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/impacts-adaptation/northeast.html

Climate change is the reality regardless of who agrees or disagrees with it. It is not a matter of opinion. It is a matter of the science, and the science thus far is so solid that it is irrefutable.

former9thward

(32,082 posts)
38. I am not debating climate change.
Thu Feb 26, 2015, 05:34 PM
Feb 2015

Although posters who somehow think Roker is a god are trying their best to make it appear I am. To say that any weather whatsoever means climate change is just silly and utterly unscientific. It is what I would expect from Roker but not from people who believe in science.

Anyone can pretend and say anything about themselves on the internet. Therefore anything I say about my background will be denounced in those terms so why bother playing that game?

former9thward

(32,082 posts)
30. Weather is not climate change.
Thu Feb 26, 2015, 10:53 AM
Feb 2015

I have read that a thousand times on DU when a RW says something about it being cold in July or something. But now weather does equal climate change. Link to one actual scientist who says this year's winter weather is because of climate change.

spanone

(135,884 posts)
31. .
Thu Feb 26, 2015, 11:15 AM
Feb 2015
Winter Storms
Climate change is fueling an increase in the intensity and snowfall of winter storms. The atmosphere now holds more moisture, and that in turns drives heavier than normal precipitation, including heavier snowfall in the appropriate conditions.1

Heavy snowfall and snowstorm frequency have increased in many northern parts of the United States.2 The heavier-than-normal snowfalls recently observed in the Midwest and Northeast United States are consistent with climate model projections. In contrast, the South and lower Midwest saw reduced snowstorm frequency during the last century.3 Overall snow cover has decreased in the Northern Hemisphere, due in part to higher temperatures that shorten the time snow spends on the ground.

Snowstorms Shift Northward in the Northern Hemisphere
The regional pattern of fewer snowstorms in the southern United States and more in the North corresponds to a similar northward shift of cold-season storms in the entire Northern Hemisphere over the past 50 years. Mid-latitude storms have decreased in frequency (e.g., in the United States overall) while high-latitude storm activity has increased (e.g., in Canada).4 It is likely that human influence contributed to these changes.5

- See more at: http://www.climatecommunication.org/new/features/extreme-weather/winter-storms/#sthash.Ae9wCKyU.dpuf

former9thward

(32,082 posts)
32. Nice try...
Thu Feb 26, 2015, 11:54 AM
Feb 2015

Your link is an opinion piece, by an anonymous author -- so no accountability, based on past articles in science magazines and journals. Is the author a scientist, who knows? Was it peer reviewed? No. It says nothing about the specific weather this year. That is what Roker was giving his pronouncement about.

Chathamization

(1,638 posts)
34. Here you go.
Thu Feb 26, 2015, 12:04 PM
Feb 2015
Climate Progress:

Another epic blizzard is bearing down on New England. There is a “big part” played by “human-induced climate change,” especially warming-fueled ocean temperatures, according to Dr. Kevin Trenberth, former head of the Climate Analysis Section at the National Center for Atmospheric Research.

I asked Dr. Trenberth to comment on the role climate change has on this latest storm, which is forecast to set records. He explained:

The number 1 cause of this is that it is winter. In winter it is cold over the continent. But it is warm over the oceans and the contrast between the cold continent and the warm Gulf Stream and surrounding waters is increasing. At present sea surface temperatures are more the 2F above normal over huge expanses (1000 miles) off the east coast and water vapor in the atmosphere is about 10% higher as a result. About half of this can be attributed to climate change.

former9thward

(32,082 posts)
35. Well at least he was honest.
Thu Feb 26, 2015, 12:14 PM
Feb 2015
The number 1 cause of this is that it is winter. In winter it is cold over the continent. If you read the link only his predictions which have come true are bolded. The ones that haven't are normal text. That is not what scientists do.
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Al Roker Says Harsh Weath...