Chicago braces for a warm future...

[chet everett]

The quote from Dr. Angel strongly implies that there is some dire trend of increasing frequency of 100 yr storm events. If these more intense storms were happening with greater frequency the net result ought to be a clear trend of more total precipiation.

Even the assertation that these storms are dumping more rain seems incorrect. A comparison of two sources of data from the State Climatologists offices suggest that are frequently used to assess the degree to which authorities need to plan for 100 year storm events (which is short hand way of saying storms that fall into the greatest 1% of annual precipitation...) shows that more recent data suggests LOWER totals for much of the state and much fewer spots with higher totals --

[Chi-town Native]

Originally Posted by jwaiter

I thought the argument he was making was weather, due to climate change, was less predictable, including more storms and instability, the graph you are showing in your post has nothing to say about predictability or storms, unpredicatble severe weather doesnt necessarily suggest precipitation per month is steadily rising, it's more about the patterns of precipitation, a severe weather storm doesnt guarantee that you'll have more precipitation measured monthly year after year.

Exactly.

[Chi-town Native]

Originally Posted by chet everett

The quote from Dr. Angel strongly implies that there is some dire trend of increasing frequency of 100 yr storm events. If these more intense storms were happening with greater frequency the net result ought to be a clear trend of more total precipiation.

Even the assertation that these storms are dumping more rain seems incorrect. A comparison of two sources of data from the State Climatologists offices suggest that are frequently used to assess the degree to which authorities need to plan for 100 year storm events (which is short hand way of saying storms that fall into the greatest 1% of annual precipitation...) shows that more recent data suggests LOWER totals for much of the state and much fewer spots with higher totals --

Chet, this is just basic math. Saying that rainfall events happen in a shorter window and is thus more damaging to urban areas with limited infrastructure in absolutely no way, shape or form leads to your conclusions.

And you aren't trying to understand what it is that you don't get, as is clearly evident by posting a graph which is already almost a decade out of date.

Global Warming Hasn't Stopped - It's the Hottest Decade on Record | DeSmogBlog

If you want to debate the science, don't take it from me, go to the scientists who specialize in climate science, they will happily debunk and disabuse your confusion:

RealClimate: What ocean heating reveals about global warming

Let's try this as this pertains to Chicago and rain intensity and our sewer system:

Try and drink a week's worth of water in one day. Then don't drink any water the other 6 days of the week. On average, it's the same amount of water you consumed that week. See the problem?

[chet everett]

Gosh, the "drink a weeks worth of water in one day" argument is not supported by data either -- rainfall totals for the whole month of August in Illinois rarely are anything like are spring storms. Illinois State Water Survey - August and Summer Were Cool and Dry in Illinois, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

There is just no clear data that says we are facing anything that shift our weather to make it resemble what currently characterizes Baton Rogue...

The links I posted earlier pretty clearly show that the cumulative effect of the oceans and massive geological features are the primary drivers of local weather. You don't have to involve any sort of "climate change" discussion to understand planet's hot and cold spots -- Global Weather & Climate Extremes | ASU World Meteorological Organization

There is no trend to either wetter /more swampy conditions NOR any pattern that suggests drier / more desert like conditions are in the future of Chicago. Maybe the increased energy in the atmosphere will result in more intense precipiation events followed by more prolonged absence of precipitation resulting in NO net increase/decrease. Or maybe not.

Improved weather monitoring technology gives greater warning of dangerous conditions and saves lives. The global mean temperature has shown a very long term trend that also shows correlation with increased human population of the planet. Beyond that there is little true agreement as what the effects of any anthropenic climate changes will be on any individual population center.

[rubbersoul89]

Originally Posted by Chi-town Native

You are confusing so many different facets of science it is difficult to know where to begin.

that's his bag.

goes way beyond science, though.

[Vlajos]

I can't predict the future, but it's warm out tonight.

[chet everett]

Pleasantly cool this morning

[Chi-town Native]

Originally Posted by rubbersoul89

that's his bag.

goes way beyond science, though.

True. This looks convincing for a general audience...

Chasing Ice