So that was fun

Thanks to @SenateBanking @BankingGOP for the opportunity to testify

Some thoughts on the hearing follow ...
Testimonies of

Frank Nutter @TheRAA…

@abdshafiee Abdollah Shafieezade…

Smart & w/ much solid policy recommendations to improve resilience & reduce vulnerability

(But both should stop confusing economic loss with climate trends!)
In most hearings I've been in Ds only engage D-invited witnesses & Rs w/ R-invitees

This wall of tribalism broke down today for just a brief moment

@SenatorTester listened to my testimony & express real surprise to learn that disaster losses are down as % GDP

Two points ...
1. That he didn't know this is a failure of climate science advice. He should know this - it is the @SenateBanking committee with a focus on US GDP

2. He gave the UCS witness a hanging curve & asked her to counter data in my testimony ... she completely dodged the opportunity 🤷‍♂️
My view that there are 2 frames for extreme weather & climate science currently at odds with each other:

1-A Bumper Sticker (everything is climate change, don't mention nuance, might be misused)

2-Nuanced (actually, climate risk management depends on getting science right)
There is really no way to reconcile these two perspectives

I do see the Bumper Sticker folks work hard against the expression of Nuanced views, even though the latter is the view of the IPCC, USNCAv1, WMO, peer reviewed lit etc

If you don't ...
If you don't actually care about scientific accuracy then by all means focus on RCP8.5 and assert that every extreme is getting worse

For instance, advocacy for emissions reductions are insensitive to such inaccuracies - they are just Bumper Stickers for a cause
But for some decisions... like central bank stress testing, US regulatory policy, local adaptation, re/insurance etc scientific accuracy actually matters

I don't actually think accurate science subtracts from the cause of emissions reductions - so why not have accurate science?
Here is my full written testimony…

I am happy to hear your reactions and comments


• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh

Keep Current with Roger Pielke Jr.

Roger Pielke Jr. Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!


Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @RogerPielkeJr

22 Jul
This is an important paper on flooding globally for several reasons

Do, H. X., Westra, S., & Leonard, M. (2017). A global-scale investigation of trends in annual maximum streamflow. Journal of Hydrology, 552, 28-43.…
First, recognizing that there are regional differences, more locations saw decreasing trends than increasing trends

Overall, that means less flooding Image
Second - and this is really important - evidence of decreasing floods are contrary to evidence of increasing precipitation, and specifically maximum precipitation intensities

So YES extreme precip is going up (due to CC), but that does not mean that floods are also! Image
Read 6 tweets
21 Jul
There is no doubt that attribution claims have run far out ahead of detection of trends

"Since 1951, the number of heavy rainfall days per year for the whole of Germany has hardly changed, almost independently of their definition"…

HT @AndrewSiffert
Similarly for Zhengzhou… Image
I'm not sure how the current strong attribution claims (it's obvious, right?) can be reconciled with the observational data, but I'm sure there is an explanation

If certain extreme events have become much more likely, then evidence should show them being more likely? Or not?
Read 10 tweets
18 Jul
Sport is still rife with doping
Between 10% and 40% of athletes in Tokyo might be cheating…
From The Edge
See the EPO?
Pielke, R. (2018). Assessing doping prevalence is possible. So what are we waiting for?. Sports medicine, 48(1), 207-209.

@TheEconomist notes the results of a 2011 WADA/IAAF study of doping prevalence

WADA/IAAF tried to prevent its publication
Read 7 tweets
18 Jul
I can’t get over how egregiously wrong this NYT article is

Vulnerability to weather extremes is currently lower than it has ever been - in rich and poor countries — ever!

This is one of the most significant science, technology & policy success stories of the past century👍
But what about flood vulnerability in Europe?
Sharply down over the past 150 years

Does that mean no floods? No tragic loss of life and damage?
No of course not

Reducing vulnerability is never completed but the trends are remarkable & that’s good news…
The idea that “no one is safe” (NYT)
Is as much misinformation as anti-vaccine propaganda

People around the world have never in all of history been more safe in the face of weather and climate extremes

Is there still vulnerability, exposure & loss?
You bet

More work to do?
Read 4 tweets
17 Jul
My piece in the WSJ today on the importance of climate adaptation
My discussion of Mike Hulme’s “climate reductionism” didn’t survive the edit, but it is a really important piece for understanding the incredible flattening of knowledge on climate…
“In this new mood of climate-driven destiny the human hand, as the cause of climate change, has replaced the divine hand of God as being responsible for the collapse of civilizations, for visitations of extreme weather & for determining the new 21st-century wealth of nations”
Read 6 tweets
13 Jul
🚨New pub🚨

How Climate Scenarios Lost Touch With Reality
A failure of self-correction in science has compromised climate science’s ability to provide plausible views of our collective future
by me & @jritch
@ISSUESinST (online 7/26)

Read it here now:…
This is a tl;dr update of this 21k-word paper:

Pielke Jr, R., & Ritchie, J. (2021). Distorting the view of our climate future: The misuse and abuse of climate pathways and scenarios. Energy Research & Social Science.…

Plz email or DM for a PDF
We view the "stubborn commitment to error" in the continued use of outdated climate scenarios "as one of the most significant failures of scientific integrity in the twenty-first century thus far"

And that's because climate change is real & important
Read 5 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!