Guest essay by Eric Worrall
Apparently we’ve all become so used to unusual weather caused by climate change we haven’t noticed the world is ending.
The data is in. Frogs don’t boil. But we might.
By Nick Obradovich and Frances C. Moore February 25
…
Humans are amazingly adaptable creatures. We can live at the poles, in harsh deserts and even in space.
But sometimes our adaptability can be costly. Unhealthful diets, limited exercise, poor work-life balance, excessive time on social media — we each have bad habits we’ve become accustomed to that end up costing us in the long run. It takes an effort of will to recognize and modify the destructive patterns of behavior we’ve normalized.
…
However, the pace of our changing climate may also come with a downside. It may be easy for humans to normalize a climate that is, at least on geological-time scales, rapidly and dramatically changing.
…
Read more (paywalled): https://www.washingtonpost.com/weather/2019/02/25/data-are-frogs-dont-boil-we-might/
The abstract of the study;
Rapidly declining remarkability of temperature anomalies may obscure public perception of climate change
Frances C. Moore, Nick Obradovich, Flavio Lehner, and Patrick Baylis
The changing global climate is producing increasingly unusual weather relative to preindustrial conditions. In an absolute sense, these changing conditions constitute direct evidence of anthropogenic climate change. However, human evaluation of weather as either normal or abnormal will also be influenced by a range of factors including expectations, memory limitations, and cognitive biases. Here we show that experience of weather in recent years—rather than longer historical periods—determines the climatic baseline against which current weather is evaluated, potentially obscuring public recognition of anthropogenic climate change. We employ variation in decadal trends in temperature at weekly and county resolution over the continental United States, combined with discussion of the weather drawn from over 2 billion social media posts. These data indicate that the remarkability of particular temperatures changes rapidly with repeated exposure. Using sentiment analysis tools, we provide evidence for a “boiling frog” effect: The declining noteworthiness of historically extreme temperatures is not accompanied by a decline in the negative sentiment that they induce, indicating that social normalization of extreme conditions rather than adaptation is driving these results. Using climate model projections we show that, despite large increases in absolute temperature, anomalies relative to our empirically estimated shifting baseline are small and not clearly distinguishable from zero throughout the 21st century.
Read more: https://www.pnas.org/content/early/2019/02/15/1816541116
A more positive way of expressing this discovery, if we assume the weather anomalies are real, is that humans are adaptable – we would have no difficulty tolerating a few degrees of global warming.
But if the authors of the study had said something that upbeat, how would they have included their boiling frog metaphor?
In the parable of the boiled frog, the frog placed in cool water is boiled alive because it is unable to recognize the gradual increase in temperature as the water is heated. Fortunately, most people are smarter than frogs. As the authors note, “Humans are amazingly adaptable creatures. We can live at the poles, in harsh deserts and even in space.”
The parable of the boiling frog is also a fable. Numerous studies show the amphibian tries to escape.
From Snopes:
Like a fable, the “”boiled frog”” anecdote serves its purpose whether or not it’s based upon something that is literally true. But it is literally true? Not according to Dr. Victor Hutchison, a Research Professor Emeritus from the University of Oklahoma’s Department of Zoology, whose research interests include “”the physiological ecology of thermal relations of amphibians and reptiles to include determinations of the factors which influence lethal temperatures, critical thermal maxima and minima, thermal selection, and thermoregulatory behavior””:
The legend is entirely incorrect! The ‘critical thermal maxima’ of many species of frogs have been determined by several investigators. In this procedure, the water in which a frog is submerged is heated gradually at about 2 degrees Fahrenheit per minute. As the temperature of the water is gradually increased, the frog will eventually become more and more active in attempts to escape the heated water. If the container size and opening allow the frog to jump out, it will do so.
More here.
http://www.ou.edu/cas/zoology/Hutchison.htm
The “boiled frog” anecdote is false.
The human analogy is also false. Think of humans in a hot tub. They are there because it is hot. When it’s too hot they get out. Or adjust the temperature setting. But generally speaking, we don’t adjust the setting because some crazy says it’s going to be too hot in 100 years.
“The changing global climate is producing increasingly unusual weather relative to preindustrial conditions. In an absolute sense, these changing conditions constitute direct evidence of anthropogenic climate change …”.
The fundamental premise of the paper is demonstrably false, how can such nonsense pass peer review⸮
That was their genuflection to dogma so they could get published.
It’s too late, the world is already boiling. (this guy is actually college educated)
https://twitter.com/ryanaboyd/status/1100578488044576768
“The changing global climate is producing increasingly unusual weather relative to preindustrial conditions …”.
It was preindustrial conditions that were “unusual”:
Is this the ‘normal’ pre-industrial weather he is referring to?
This from the Adelaide Hills in South Australia
CO2 = 291ppm (www.sealevel.info/co2_and_ch4.html)
Nah, I think it’s more that we’re suffering from “the boy who cried wolf” syndrome, and also the “liar liar, pants on fire effect”. But, the horse has left the barnyard, and the climate chickens are coming home to roost.
Let’s discuss the weather.
https://energynews.us/2019/02/27/midwest/wind-turbine-shutdowns-during-polar-vortex-stoke-midwest-debate/
“Humans are amazingly adaptable creatures. We can live at the poles, in harsh deserts and even in space.”
If they have enough energy sources (and water, etc). Cut off those resources and see if they if they “adjust” the rulers.
It surely is time to “adjust” the would be rulers. I’d rather not wait ’till energy prices quadruple while temperatures drop over the next 20 years.
Personally… I’m having trouble adapting…I really miss freezing my a$$ off like we did back in the 70’s.
Okay, so if I have this correct, because humans can adapt to ‘Climate Change(tm)’ we are at greater risk of ‘Climate Change(tm)’.
Okay…
I’m really getting tired of this whole scam.
These lefties think they are smarter than the rest of us. They really make me ill. Media and Academia and Government have managed to generate this propaganda machine for their illegitimate power/money gains. It’s all just a peer pressure chorus.
I’m starting to lose my revulsion for public hangings… which I’m starting to hope commence after the earth begins some obvious cooling over the next decade or so.
“Nobody ever wins the first time they run for office.” Alexandria_Ocasio Cortez
Unless you’re bank rolled into office with help from Justice Democrats:
Cenk Uygur and Kyle Kulinski founded Justice Democrats with ten others, including former staffers from the Sanders campaign such as its Director of Organizing Technology, Saikat Chakrabarti, and MoveOn.org fundraiser Zack Exley.
Saikat Chakrabarti is now Chief of Staff for AOC. This group would do anything to see America fail.
According to a quote in the above article: “However, the pace of our changing climate may also come with a downside. It may be easy for humans to normalize a climate that is, at least on geological-time scales, rapidly and dramatically changing.”
The stupidity . . . it burns!
Today, I can travel from a location will little precipitation and sustained day/night temperatures of about 80 °F/60 °F and easily with 6 hours be at a location with heavy precipitation and sustained day/night temperatures of 30°F /15 °F. It’s commonly known as going on a snow skiing vacation.
Note only that, but I don’t suffer any ill effects from this sudden change in environment conditions if I elect to stay in appropriate housing and wear appropriate clothes.
Furthermore, humans living year round at both the location I left and the location of my skiing vacation have reliably demonstrated that life–and making a livelihood–are sustainable at both environmental conditions for hundreds of years. Flora and fauna indicate the same thing.
The rate of temperature change that I experience on my skiing vacation is equivalent to about 50 °F over 6 hours, or a rate of about 7,300,000 °F/100 years. Compare this to the IPCC’s Paris Accord target of not exceeding a global temperature increase rate equivalent to 1.4°F/100 years (0.8°C/100 years).
Ah, the carbon conundrum. It’s not over until the last baby… fetus is drawn and sequestered.
that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed.
The reason people don’t realize “the ravages of CAGW” is because there hasn’t been any based on the empircal evidence…
Even IPCC’s AR5 report admits there hasn’t been any increasing frequency/severity trends for 100 years in: hurricanes, typhoons, cyclones, tornadoes, floods, droughts, thunderstorms, rainfall, tropical storms, subtropical storms and hail.
Ocean Sea Levels have also been stuck at around 8”/century since the 1800’s, regardless of changes of CO2 levels…
About the only thing that has changed is a 20% increase in global greening and a 15% increase in crop yields due to higher CO2 levels, which are good things…
We little froggies are kicking back in the jacuzzi, sipping margaritas, listening to Queen’s “We’re the Champions of the World”, while enjoy the highest living standards and longest lifespans in human history, and wondering why Leftists have completely lost their minds….
I think the Boiling Frog is the PERFECT AGW hype metaphor… but not for the reason you might think. We all know the old saw that Al Gore and your annoying neighbor and countless other people, mostly under dodgy circumstances involving psychology and politics, repeat as gospel. Since this is ‘science’ we can claim that so long as ~97% of the people who cite the B.S. are scientists, it must be true. But among the remaining 3% are people who’ve tried the experiment… and those who study reptiles.
[Dr. Victor Hutchison of the University of Oklahoma] “The legend is entirely incorrect! The `critical thermal maxima’ of many species of frogs have been determined by several investigators. In this procedure, the water in which a frog is submerged is heated gradually at about 2 degrees Fahrenheit per minute. As the temperature of the water is gradually increased, the frog will eventually become more and more active in attempts to escape the heated water. If the container size and opening allow the frog to jump out, it will do so.” Naturally, if the frog were not allowed to escape it would eventually begin to show signs of heat stress, muscular spasms, heat rigor, and death.'”
The takeaway phrase here is, “become more and more active in attempts to escape”. Let’s shorten this to “attempts”. Does it sound ominous yet? The old saw implies there is no barrier to escape. But in order to perform reproducible Science, barriers must be introduced. The frog jumps out for the Nth time. “Stupid frog!” they say and chase it around the room. They are getting the feeling that the frog might just be bored or uncooperative. In order to avoid touching it (and getting warts) they’ll Modify the experiment. A barrier is introduced. They form a Committee Of One whose purpose is to monitor and decide whether each jump against the barrier was from willful disobedience OR a bona fide attempt to escape.
The Experiment begins again. At ~8 minutes the water is almost 40degC and the frog jumps. “We’re feeling perky today,” the Experimenter comments, putting a mark under NOPE. Then the phone rings. Later the frog is found dead.
1. WE are the frog.
2. AGW ALARMISTS are those who are placing barriers and have declared themselves as arbiters of moral judgement, for their own selfish purposes. Our repeated attempts to avoid adversity or unwarranted austerity are to them, willful disobedience.
3. Unsolicited sales calls must become unlawful with severe penalties.
The changing unusual climate is producing increasingly hysterical totes and troughers who found it hard to forget that nearly all the warming since 1850 occurred before 1940.
The magnitude of social cost/reaction is proportional to the evidence. If you want to reorganized civilization in your own image, you need absolute, dramatic, and irrefutable proof including millions already dead, and tens of millions dying. Screaming when nothing is going on with climate is otherwise a mental disorder or a demand for attention.
Wow, you people are dumb.
The whole world believes in this thing called science…only the Republican Party does not. You know, the same people that invented vaccines and got us to the moon. All 12,000 climatologists and the whole world believes in climate change and that the impacts are here and now. Even 70% of Americans now believe. So, you are a tiny minority of idiots on a global scale.
Keep watching Fox while I pray for the future of yours and my children.
Please, list these weather events that are conclusively proven to have been caused by more CO2 in the atmosphere.
12K people who’s livelihood depends on the scam continuing, believe in the scam. That’s solid proof right thar.
If the alarmists couldn’t appeal to authority, they’d look as dumb as they believe everyone else to be.
Greg, you are the idiot. You are following rumors and lies, not facts. My children will be fine.
lol. So what they are really saying is that it is the rocks that should be worried, not the humans?
Using climate model projections we show that, despite large increases in absolute temperature.
The only place you will find large increases in absolute temperature is in climate models.
Observed data, not so much.
This seems to be yet another example of mixing datasets. The resolution of recent data is incomparable to decades ago. Also Twitter breeds extreme views to acquire attention.
I’m skeptical.
The resolution of current datasets is 0.1C+/- 0.05 C, for all practical purposes. Not such a big change, actually.
The Storm Channel is presenting a couple of cold fronts moving in as if it is somehow “different” for cold fronts to come in this time year. (I’m talking about the US.)
There are numerous recurring weather patterns that have occurred often enough to have acquired a name or a “saying” over time.
Santa Anna Wind
Nor’easter
Polar Express
Indian Summer (…er…Native American Summer)
Another saying for this time of year, “March: In like a lion, out like a lamb.”
There’s nothing “unusual” going on with the weather. Some of us remember the “new and unusual” events happening before. (Our parents just didn’t buy us cell phones back then. They didn’t exist.)
Was this an unprecedented winter for the Midwest or the Northeast? Do a search for “The great blizzard of ’78” and “The blizzard of ’78”. (Two different events)
The uptick in the hype about Man’s CO2 causing warming and cooling and changeling etc is the only “boiling frog” scenario going on.
(The Green New Deal ring a bell?)
Don’t forget another weather-related descriptive term:
“Blowhard.”
BTW, I’ve just about finished my analysis of 2015 temps at Phoenix Sky Harbor AP. I haven’t run the numbers for the 30-year baseline yet, but I have finished the monthly average temps for the year. I also haven’t gone back over the numbers looking for egregious math or logic errors, but this is what I got .
2015
Jan 14.8 +/- 0.6 °C
Feb 18.7 +/-0.3 °C
Mar 22.4 +/-0.7 °C
Apr 23.5 +/- 0.5 °C
May 26.0 +/-0.7 °C
Jun 34.5 +/- 0.6 °C
Jul 34.8 +/-0.3 °C
Aug 35.9 +/- 0.4 °C
Sep 32.2 +/- 0.3 °C
Oct 26.4 +/- 0.6 °C
Nov 16.7 +/ – 0.7 °C
Dec 12.3 +/- 0.6 °C
I fudged up some numbers for a baseline that gave me a standard deviation of 2.7, which is about a third of that for the averages of the months. I simulated a set of anomalies that ended up with a standard deviation of 1.0, which I think is pretty generous. Take the average of the anomalies : 0.1 °C and the SD/sqrt(N=12) and I got -0.1°C +/- 0.3 °C. Pretty brutal numbers.
This is why I think the Law of Large Numbers is a red herring. Say we used 5000 stations and got the same numbers, -0.1°C for the anomaly and 1.0 for the standard deviation. dividing 1.0/sqrt(5000) = 0.014°C., and the average anomaly for the year would still have as much uncertainty as is pretended there is precision.
If you are going to boil a frog, do check it is legal:
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/02/22/bear-grylls-could-fined-killing-boiling-frog-bulgaria/
The boiling frog analogy needs a bit more thought.
Frog Scenario:
You place a frog in a ~20 degree C pot of water and raise the temperature by ~80 degrees C over a period of a few hours. The frog dies.
AGW Scenario:
You place a human being in an environment that varies in temperature by around 10 degrees C each day and up to 40 degrees C each year. You then raise the average temperature by 2 degrees over a period of 100 years. The human dies.
Obviously the Human Psyche is far more fragile and susceptible to temperature change than the average frog.
According to the weatherman: This last week higher than “normal temps”. Forecast for the next two week: Lower than “normal temps”. Growing up back in the 50’s, 60,s & 70’s I don’t remember weathermen referring to “Normal Temperature”. It was just “Temperature”
I’ve never tried to boil a live frog, because I’m not an a-hole. But I suspect it’s a myth that the frog would stay in the pot. When it becomes uncomfortable, why wouldn’t the frog will jump out?
But as long as we’re playing with this analogy, raising the water temperate by 3C, will not result in any need to jump, especially if the expected negative consequences of jumping are much worse than the expected consequences of staying put.
Think how many extreme and unprecedented climate changes must have been lost to history, just because the people who lived through it would have failed to notice after a while. It must mean that the thousands of written observations of visible climate change during the MWP and LIA were even more extreme than what scholars had previously thought.