“sure, the forest I played in as a kid is silent, the trees are dying, insects are sparse, we go back and forth between buried in 10ft of snow and heat wave drought inside a month, the river is low enough that it exposed carvings of 1,000 year old famine warnings, but we keep getting flooded every year with once in a lifetime storms, but there’s NO EVIDENCE of climate change and I can prove it because [politician/company] said so”
Somewhat off topic but just some trivia from a geology weather class I took
100 year flood does not mean it happens every 100 years but there’s a 1/100 chance for it to happen annually
Putting climate change aside for a second for consistency sake, you could go for 150 or 200 years without a 100 year flood or on the other side only a 5 year gap for that 100 year flood if you’re unlucky
That’s correct, it’s about probability based on past known history. An area could get unlucky and have repeat conditions sooner than normal. When many areas appear to be having this same bad luck, it’s time to reevaluate the probabilities. It’s also why regular weather forecasts haven’t seemed to get things as right as they used to…using the past percent chance probabilities in a changing environment doesn’t hit as well as it used to.
“Another 100 year flood” seems like a ridiculous headline at this point. Denial is everywhere.
“sure, the forest I played in as a kid is silent, the trees are dying, insects are sparse, we go back and forth between buried in 10ft of snow and heat wave drought inside a month, the river is low enough that it exposed carvings of 1,000 year old famine warnings, but we keep getting flooded every year with once in a lifetime storms, but there’s NO EVIDENCE of climate change and I can prove it because [politician/company] said so”
Somewhat off topic but just some trivia from a geology weather class I took
100 year flood does not mean it happens every 100 years but there’s a 1/100 chance for it to happen annually
Putting climate change aside for a second for consistency sake, you could go for 150 or 200 years without a 100 year flood or on the other side only a 5 year gap for that 100 year flood if you’re unlucky
That’s correct, it’s about probability based on past known history. An area could get unlucky and have repeat conditions sooner than normal. When many areas appear to be having this same bad luck, it’s time to reevaluate the probabilities. It’s also why regular weather forecasts haven’t seemed to get things as right as they used to…using the past percent chance probabilities in a changing environment doesn’t hit as well as it used to.
Thanks for the input it never crossed my mind that weather (the thing that we can only predict) changes when the past data is no longer relevant
And a big problem we’re having is that due to climate change those 1/100 chance events are changing for the worst.
Oh 10000% it’s why I said ignoring climate change. Weather events are getting more frequent and more extreme