,
8 tweets,
2 min read
Read on Twitter
Every time I tweet about weather and climate some people (most politely, some less so) will declare, 'but weather and climate are not the same thing'. The urge to facetiously respond that 'this is totally new information' is strong, but, of course, rude and counter productive.
So the search for an effective explanatory metaphor continues... This one is OK, but still not quite right:
Weather and climate is different, right? But there are degrees of difference. They are not different like a dog and a table are different. They are different in the way a leaf and a tree are different - one is part of the other.
If the leaf changes shape, colour, and weight, then the tree changes shape, colour, and weight, albeit microscopically. They are different, but they are intrinsically connected. If one leaf changes, the tree changes. If enough leaves change, then the whole tree visibly changes.
Now what if the tree catches a disease? The tree is diseased, all the leaves are diseased, but only some of them change colour or shape to demonstrate that fact.
The rational response is not 'the growing number of visibly damaged leaves may have happened anyway', it is 'here is clear evidence this tree is diseased; we should probably do something about that'.
Again, scientific attribution of weather events is important, but all weather now occurs within a climate system that has changed as a result of human activity. Every weather event, even the most mundane, bear either the finger or bootprint of climate change.
Weather and climate may be different, but they are connected.
