I’m shocked Isaias beat the 2005 storms

Wow 😮

I would actually say it’s the combination of attribution science AND the fact that fossil fuel companies knew about the dangers of climate change and began a campaign of disinformation/deception while continuing to push fossil fuels on the world, profiting off its destruction

TA goals

The Super El Niño is breaking charts as well as records, including Climate Reanalyzer's, which previously went to 30 degrees C but had to be updated today. SSTs in this part of the Pacific are in unprecedented territory - and rising - roughly two months before the typical El Niño peak.

Will do everything in my power

so sorry about that heatwave king

sub 40F tonight!!! 😍😍😍😃😃😃

Great to know, I'll have to look at the methodology, though I unfortunately don't see it clearly posted... Honestly, I'm still just impressed how much difference is between RONI and ONI!

My new blog on the Super El Niño will hopefully answer some questions you might have on: ONI vs RONI, how El Niño impacts global weather patterns, and the state of emergency announcement in California

If you're ever interested in expanding to other cities, let me know... 😅

Where do you get the monthly dewpoint climatology graph? What a cool tool

Demands:

This normative shift in attribution science allows for innovation in attribution science, a build-up of operational attribution, and significant climate justice action through accountability.

Despite Big Tobacco's efforts to spread misinformation around smoking, scientists shifted time and resources from redemonstrating the tobacco and lung disease connection to identifying larger impacts on healthcare, economies, and societal well-being.

We also identify the link between smoking cigarettes and lung cancer as an apt analogy: after decades of scientific research, it was clear that smoking led to lung cancer, shifting the burden of proof away from scientists, allowing for accountability measures to advance.

It also shifts how uncertainty is interpreted in climate attribution science: "...uncertainty no longer reopens the foundational question of whether fossil fuel-driven climate change influenced an event, but instead informs estimates of how and of what confidence."

Rather than repeatedly testing the influence of human-caused climate change in a given extreme weather event, we should start from the assumption of human influence. This shifts the burden of proof of human influence from scientists to bad-faith actors (like fossil fuel companies).