Humans made the natural drought cycle worse with land use practices. See: https://drought.unl.edu/dustbowl/

"Several actions in the 1920s also increased the region’s vulnerability to drought. Low crop prices and high machinery costs (discussed in the previous section) meant that farmers needed to cultivate more land to produce enough to meet their required payments. Since most of the best farming areas were already being used, poorer farmlands were increasingly used. Farming submarginal lands often had negative results, such as soil erosion and nutrient leaching. By using these areas, farmers were increasing the likelihood of crop failures, which increased their vulnerability to drought."

We know why SoCal's natural drought cycle was worse in recent years too. See: https://www.nytimes.com/2021/10/21/us/california-drought.html

"Because of human-induced climate change, California is experiencing warmer temperatures, and this summer was our hottest on record. That unusually balmy weather exacerbates drought conditions — and transforms what could be a normal fluctuation in precipitation into a full-blown crisis."

And we know why SoCal atmospheric rivers delivered more water than usual the last two years as well. See: https://www.cfr.org/article/how-big-climate-threat-are-atmospheric-rivers

"Climate change will likely make the flooding caused by atmospheric rivers more difficult to manage. A recent study funded by the Department of Energy showed that climate change and global heating could cause total precipitation in future atmospheric rivers to increase by as much as 40 percent. California is already enduring wetter storms: scientists found that climate change increased the amount of rainfall in two atmospheric rivers in 2017 by between 11 and 15 percent. "

The part that you persistently refuse to acknowledge (and let's be clear: you are factually wrong about this) is that the temperature changes we are seeing and the resulting extreme weather are absolutely due to higher CO2 and other greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere. They are also much more dramatic and rapid than we have seen in past history, negating your so-called "always has, always will" argument. We can predict global changes in temperature due to changes in CO2 concentration very well. The extreme weather that results is also expected, but harder to predict. But we know that it is here, just like Charleston said. We also know that it will get worse as we put more CO2 into the atmosphere.

None of that has anything to do with the proposed solutions, which is what you actually object to. It's just a scientific fact. It's a fact that you have to dispute because you don't like the proposed solutions.
[Post edited by CMUHoo at 04/20/2024 3:55PM]