Peru, Chile and Bolivia hit by floods after heavy rain - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Political issues and parties from Mexico to Argentina.

Moderator: PoFo Latin America Mods

Forum rules: No one line posts please. This is an international political discussion forum, so please post in English only.
#14170021
Floods won't increase if they bother to develop properly. In many countries they allow construction to take place without taking into account that water flows a heck of a lot faster on roofs and paved terrain. Increased flooding is largely caused by man. But it's not a global warming issue, it's a kill the grass and cut the trees down and pave it over problem.
#14170251
Goldberg, I looked up some literature and found something I want to quote:

The pattern of changes in extremes uncovered by the research matches the predictions made in a number of climate models. Dr Fowler, author of the study at Newcastle University, claims 'the changes in the 40 year period are consistent with the trend we would expect from global warming'.

But Philip Eden, one of the country's leading and most respected climatologists, argues that the claims could be misleading. The problem, he says, is down to the short period of rainfall statistics analysed.

He claims that by taking a much longer time period, for example the whole of the 20th century, the frequency of high intensity rainfall events that we have witnessed in the past 30 years is not unusual.

The eras of heaviest summer downpours have actually coincided with cooler summers, not warmer summers, in particular 1912-1931, and again from 1948-1969.

In autumn and winter, downpours are closely linked with the strength of westerlies, which were very low in the 1960s, the start point of the study, and reached a peak between 1988 and 2002, he continued.

That said there does seem to have been more incidences of flooding in the last couple of decades.

But could it be that this is more a function of urbanisation and flood plain development, than any significant increase in high intensity rainfall events?


And the media could have played their part in making us think that flooding is on the increase.


Source:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/paulhudson/2 ... lood.shtml

Given that the world has stopped warming over the last 12 years or so, when we search data we need to make sure the time series includes recent years, otherwise it's skewed improperly. Also any scenarios using to predict flooding increases in the future need to be analyzed very carefully, because these scenarios tend to be goofy sometimes.

Finally, given the evident rise in urbanization in places such a Latin America, and the lack of attention paid to flood control in the region, it would be extremely unlikely to see a regional reduction in flood events.
Last edited by Social_Critic on 11 Feb 2013 20:47, edited 1 time in total.
#14170287
A comment about man made damage from flooding.

I live in the Nevada desert. When it rains, the water has to go somewhere and usually travels through channels that are dry most of the year. The water creates dry river beds, arroyos and such.

So, it continually amazes me how people will buy homes and buildings constructed in flood prone areas. Then, when they get flood damage, they expect the government to compensate them for their stupidity.

Sadly, those who suffer flood damage from many places around the world simply don't have the same places to turn to as we in more industrialized nations do.
#14170423
I dispute the need to get hysterical, and also believe the weather data sets and models need work. The scenario planning is also a problem area. The general public is being driven into a hysteria I believed is uncalled for. I live in Europe, you don't see the continuous fear mongering and irrational policies I see here.
#14170485
Sithsaber wrote:Anyone who disputes "global warming" (which should be changed to climate change in order to avoid confusing the stupid) is pretty much sticking their heads in the sand at this point.

Pretty much full agreement here. Social_Critic has been acting like an ostrich on this issue for quite a few months now.
#14171330
It seems to me many of you suffer from cognitive dissonance. I've made the point that there's no need to get hysterical. My position is fairly simple, rather than spend money trying to reduce carbon emissions we should improve data gathering and computer models. I noticed the world stopped warming about 12 years ago, and we really do need to understand why. I realize most of you are young and lack the background to understand the models and how they work. But I understand enough to realize they need work.
#14171367
I love these implied accusations.

"You know, if we keep polluting like this, it will have an impact on our environment."
"Stop being HYSTERICAL."
"I was actually quite calm, considering the seriousness of..."
"There you are being HYSTERICAL again."
"I was really just pointing out the scie-
"HYSTERICAL"
"What does that even mean?"
"You'll know when you've been around as long as I have."
"Do you have a point to ma-"
"HYSTERICAL. HYSTERICAL. HYSTERICAL. HYSTERICAL."
#14171465
Around here nobody points out science. I can't even find anybody who understands what a model grid means, or what is goofy scenario planning. All I get is stares.

PoFo isn't much better. It's impossible to discuss a subject when there's panic and everybody runs around as if te world were about to catch on fire. It's kinda funny.

Quote it and we can see. Anyway U of A encampment[…]

I wonder how many years we have until America beco[…]

@QatzelOk Mind you, if this is a long-term st[…]

I'm waiting, why is it implausible again? Even you[…]