I like the cartoons. I think many scientists remain kids at heart, even when the cartoon has a hard message.
I think the last one speaks nicely to probability. The truck’s path might deviate a little, but the likelihood is high that both stick men will be schmucked by the truck. The probability of bad things caused by AGW is what seems to drive some of the so-called AGW ‘debate’, often labelled uncertainty. Insurance companies are very good at assessing the likelihood that they may have to pay out on particular events, such as floods and other extreme weather events. No one should attribute a single weather event to climate change. Weather and climate are not the same thing, although weather is clearly a function of climate. But I find it telling that after 6 years of living in Brandon that my home insurance company no longer offers flood insurance in my region, only sewer-backup coverage. I hope the poor people in Yorkton SK who were hit hard by a storm yesterday (July 1st) had flood insurance. I know I don’t … anymore.
Kate is a young climate scientist from the Canadian Prairies. She became interested in climate science as a teenager, and increasingly began to notice the discrepancies between scientific and public knowledge on climate change. She started writing this blog at age sixteen, simply to keep herself sane, but she hopes she'll be able to spread accurate information far and wide while she does so. Read more
Comments on any and all posts are more than welcome. However, please abide by a few rules:
Cite your statements appropriately - peer-reviewed sources for scientific claims, primary sources for quotes/current events/etc.
Don't smear someone's reputation based on pure speculation. This includes, but is not limited to, climate scientists.
Please refrain from personal attacks on myself or other commenters. Mean comments about how much you hate this comment policy are also kind of pointless.
Any violations of this comment policy will be deleted.