I'll add something extremely significant that Cliff did not mention but was a huge factor.

For every +5 ppm of added CO2 to the atmosphere, since the Industrial Revolution, the average plant growth(with wide variations) has been an increase of around +1%.

The global CO2 has increased about 130 ppm from 290ppm to the current 420ppm.

This equates to a +26% increase in plant growth, including crop yields, just from photosynthetic fertilization.

Proof of that is below. Use plant studies like this that keep all the other factors constant and only enrich the air with added CO2.

 Keep in mind that the studies enriched way up to +300ppm and even higher. The benefits from added CO2 are always the greatest at lower levels.

So the benefits that started when we were increasing from 290 ppm were likely much MORE than 1% for every +5ppm. Adding more from here is likely to be adding less and less benefits until we max out at  the optimal level of 900 ppm which will never happen. 

Benefits now might be more like +1% for every +10 ppm for some plants. However, the studies below on native grassland in TX show that they may still be increasing at the rate of  +1% for every +5 ppm with another added 300 ppm.

Here's the proof:

http://www.co2science.org/data/plant_growth/plantgrowth.ph

http://www.co2science.org/data/plant_growth/dry/dry_subject.php

http://www.co2science.org/data/plant_growth/dry/dry_subject_g.php

http://www.co2science.org/data/plant_growth/dry/g/grassland.php

Native Texas Grassland

Statistics                                                                                                                                                  

Individual Experiment Results                                                                                                                                                                

So unless you want to make a case that photosynthesis is killing the planet and that massively boosting global food production is bad for the human race..........then CO2's contribution to this fire is something that's a MUCH greater positive for life on this planet than the negative from the added wildfire fuel that increases the intensity of many wildfires.

DeathbyGreening:

https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/69258/

With regards to drought from climate change being a major factor with these fires.

It's part of the normal Hawaii climate to have drought. Compared to the past 23 years, August 2023 has LESS drought than average, especially with no  D3 or D4 level drought, which is the extreme drought categories and only 2.9% in the D2 category. You can see that on the graph below.

Historical Drought Conditions in Hawaii  

https://www.drought.gov/states/hawaii               

Drought is a normal climate pattern that has occurred in varying degrees of length, severity, and size throughout history. Below, you can look back at past drought conditions for Hawai'i according to the U.S. Drought Monitor. The U.S. Drought Monitor is a weekly map that shows the location and intensity of drought across the country since 2000. View more historical conditions.

US drought monitor for HI, just updated today

https://droughtmonitor.unl.edu/CurrentMap/StateDroughtMonitor.aspx?HI

++++++++++++++

Despite that, there  has been more drought in Hawaii the last several decades.

A Century of Drought in Hawai‘i: Geospatial Analysis and
Synthesis across Hydrological, Ecological, and
Socioeconomic Scales

https://www.soest.hawaii.edu/MET/Hsco/publications/2022%20Drought.pdf

A Century of Drought  in Hawai‘i

https://www.hawaii.edu/climate-data-portal/a-century-of-drought-in-hawaii/

This is on the big island(different island)

A Hundred Year History of Drought at Hawaiʻi Volcanoes National Park

https://www.nps.gov/havo/learn/nature/drought.htm

This is from the same island, the last 23 years.

The amount of severe drought is very low compared to much of the last 2 decades, with no extreme or exceptional drought.

Maui County, HI Drought Monitor

https://data.indystar.com/drought/hawaii/maui-county/15009/

+++++++++++++++++++

My assessment is that climate change Likely is increasing the chances for extreme drought in HI (we don’t know if this was from a natural cycle or the result of a world 1 deg warmer, much of which came from higher CO2)

however, since  there is no extreme or exceptional drought right now in Maui, we can't say that climate change was a major factor in these fires….other than adding the fuel load from beneficial CO2 and photosynthesis.

The unusual pressure gradient from Hurricane Dora to the south and high pressure to the north, the MAIN reason for the fires  is another example of this:

https://cliffmass.blogspot.com/2016/03/the-golden-rule-of-climate-extremes.html

The GoldenRule

 Considering the substantial confusion in the media about this critical issue, let me provide the GOLDENRULE OF CLIMATE EXTREMES. Here it is:

The more extreme a climate or weather record is, the greater the contribution of natural variability.

Or to put it a different way, the larger or more unusual an extreme, the higher proportion of the extreme is due to natural variability.             

+++++++++

I listened to NPR for over an hour today and they mentioned climate change as the reason.

extreme drought and highs winds from climate change. They interviewed a meteorology professor from the University out there and he explained that it was almost entirely from natural variation NOT climate change. At the end though, he gave NPR what they wanted and stated, "However, Global climate models predict more of this sort of thing happening in the future"

Considering the increase in drought in HI the past several decades and for sure with faster growing vegetation, I would agree with that. 

When I get the chance, probably Friday morning, I’ll post graphs that show total global drought the past 4+ decades. it hasn’t increased.

also US data. the Midwest has seen a sharp decline in drought the past 30+ years For sure, a big part of it is from the microclimate established from massive vegetation during the growing season from agriculture.
The boost in CO2 to photosynthesis is contributing greatly to that as shown a few posts up in this thread.

If you follow the mainstream climate narratives, including the bought and paid for climate scientists that follow the money funding their research and determining the path of their careers and reputations, you would think we have massively increasing global drought......it's totally NOT true.

Heavier rains events, absolutely but NOT increasing drought from climate change.

Here's a few of the examples, including Scientific American that has sold their soul to the climate religion God(I had a subscription for 20 years). 

One of the key indicators that these reports are not just science is that they spend so much time stressing that humans did this and we need to spend a lot of money doing something about it.  When they site the IPCC models or predictions as evidence of the future.......it drops their credibility way lower for me. 

But how can the average person know this?

They can't. That's why they've been so effective at hijacking climate science for political agenda, crony capitalism and media ratings.

‘Absolutely No Doubt’ That Climate Intensified Current Drought

Global warming made drought that has gripped the Northern Hemisphere, from China to Europe to the U.S., 20 times more likely to occur

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/absolutely-no-doubt-that-climate-intensified-current-drought/

Scientists confirm global floods and droughts worsened by climate change

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/science/scientists-confirm-global-floods-and-droughts-worsened-by-climate-change

World ‘at a crossroads’ as droughts increase nearly a third in a generation

https://news.un.org/en/story/2022/05/1118142

+++++++++++++++++++++

That all sounds scary and convincing but the drought part is mostly junk science and politics(yes to the heavier rain events).

Here's more OBJECTIVE, AUTHENTIC science:

Scientists continue to publish new drought reconstructions indicating there were far more frequent and severe drought periods in the past several thousand years than anything observed in the modern period.

https://notrickszone.com/2021/06/14/several-more-new-studies-show-drought-is-now-less-common-and-severe-than-centuries-millennia-ago/

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2021/06/15/several-more-new-studies-show-drought-is-now-less-common-and-severe-than-centuries-millennia-ago/

Global drought trends and future projections

https://reliefweb.int/report/world/drought-numbers-2022-restoration-readiness-and-resilience

Published:24 October 2022https://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2021.0285

++++++++++++++++

As you can clearly see, global drought has been DECREASING in every category during climate change. And it makes sense because the atmosphere holds more moisture and  most places are seeing heavier precip over and above what's needed to compensative for the +1 deg. C in temperature.

Also, observations of the past, indicated that during global cooling periods/The Little Ice age, droughts INCREASED. With global warming/Medieval Warm Period, droughts decreased.

More in a minute

Satellite images show that the earth is massively greening up. Even deserts are greening up, which surprised me.

Carbon Dioxide Fertilization Greening Earth, Study Finds

https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/2016/carbon-dioxide-fertilization-greening-earth

https://phys.org/news/2013-07-greening-co2.html

Deserts 'greening' from rising CO2

                Satellite data shows the per cent amount that foliage cover has changed around the world from 1982 to 2010.

Increased levels of carbon dioxide (CO2) have helped boost green foliage across the world's arid regions over the past 30 years through a process called CO2 fertilisation, according to CSIRO research.                                                                                            

In findings based on satellite observations, CSIRO, in collaboration with the Australian National University (ANU), found that this CO2 fertilisation correlated with an 11 per cent increase in foliage cover from 1982-2010 across parts of the arid areas studied in Australia, North America, the Middle East and Africa, according to CSIRO research scientist, Dr Randall Donohue.

+++++++++++++++++++++++

Global Climate models using bad equations keep predicting increasing drought and keep busting........but they won't adjust them to match the empirical data/science because they aren't science. They are used as political tools.

Below, look what happens when we use a model based on photosynthesis, which, by a wide margin is having the most powerful impact on the planet.

Global Green Up Slows Warming

https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/images/146296/global-green-up-slows-warming

"The paper’s authors reviewed more than 250 published articles that have used satellite data, modeling, and field observations, to understand the causes and consequences of global greening. Among the key results, the authors noted that on a global scale greening can be attributed to the increase of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. Rising levels of carbon dioxide increase the rate of photosynthesis and growth in plants."

metmike: Why isn't this paper, based on 250........let me repeat that number 250 published articles using the best technology known to science............getting much news coverage?

Because they don't want you to know this. 

From the projections: According to climate models, the future looks even greener. The second map shows what the green-up might look like in the future based on the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP5) climate model, under a scenario in which increases in greenhouse gases lead to almost 5° Celsius (9° Fahrenheit) of warming by the end of the 21st century. Specifically, it shows the predicted change in the growing season’s “leaf area index” from 2081-2100 relative to 1981-2000. The chart below the map shows the predicted changes by latitude. Notice that high latitudes in the Northern Hemisphere are still expected to change the most.

metmike: There is almost no chance we will see that amount of warming.

Can you imagine if we had these things happen today?

One reason that we don't is the climate change IS PROTECTING US!!!!

https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/97710/#97769

The Dust Bowl for almost an entire decade of the 1930's was the worse climate disaster in U.S. history BEFORE climate change. The current climate OPTIMUM is actually helping to protect us from another Dust Bowl.

These were the temperatures for July 2023:

https://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/tanal/temp_analyses.php

https://www.wunderground.com/cat6/North-Americas-Most-Intense-Heat-Wave-July-and-August-1936

These were the temperature anomalies for July 1936. 

Greatest climate crisis in history 1876-1878.   50 million died, 3% of the global population.

1876-1878 was shortly after the Little Ice Age ended with the  global temperature 1 deg. C cooler than this and CO2 at 130 parts per million less than this.

Climate and the Global Famine of 1876–78

https://journals.ametsoc.org/view/journals/clim/31/23/jcli-d-18-0159.1.xml

During the late nineteenth century, a series of famines affected vast parts of Asia, causing mortality on a scale that would be unthinkable today (Davis 2001). Of these, the so-called Global Famine lasting from 1876 to 1878 was the most severe and widespread in at least the past 150 years (Hasell and Roser 2018; Gráda 2009; Davis 2001). The Global Famine inflicted acute distress upon populations in diverse parts of South and East Asia, Brazil, and Africa, with total human fatalities likely exceeding 50 million. These famines were associated with prolonged droughts in India, China, Egypt, Morocco, Ethiopia, southern Africa, Brazil, Colombia, and Venezuela (Davis 2001; Clarke 1878; Hunter 1877). Historical documentation indicates famine-related mortality between 12.2 and 29.3 million in India, between 19.5 and 30 million in China, and ~2 million in Brazil (Davis 2001), amounting to ~3% of the global population at the time. It was arguably the worst environmental disaster to ever befall humanity

++++++++++++++++++++++
These people continue to be completely denying that the current regime is a climate OPTIMUM for life and climate change is PROTECTING US.

They cherry pick every extreme and call it a climate crisis.

In June, it was cool in Phoenix but hot in Texas………..so all the reporters went to Texas to tell us about how hot it was and impossible without the climate crisis.

In July, the heat moved to Phoenix………so all the reporters moved their stories  to Phoenix.
Wherever the heat goes, that’s where they report from and they use it to tell us the planet is on fire.
No……….just the usual natural variations in weather that have always happened, while they cherry pick the expected extremes and call them a crisis.

Today’s fake climate crisis is a picnic compared to much worse weather/climate events in the past BEFORE CO2 went up. 

Speaking of picnics.
It was warmer than this in the higher latitudes of North America between 9,000 to 5,000 years ago by 2 deg. C (that’s a bit less than Hansen’s 1 million years). There was less Arctic sea ice. CO2 levels were lower. Thousands of years before the Industrial Age. 

That’s why it’s called the Holocene climate OPTIMUM……BECAUSE it was so warm…..the way most life prefers it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holocene_climatic_optimum

This month is the planet’s hottest on record by far – and hottest in around 120,000 years, scientists say    

https://www.cnn.com/2023/07/27/world/july-hottest-month-record-climate

 This summer is on track to be the hottest on record — by a significant margin  

 Summers have been trending hotter since at least the 1940s, and especially the past decade. Even before July has ended, global average temperature this summer has already surpassed that of summer 2019 — the previous record — by nearly a quarter of a degree Celsius.  

      Kim Cobb, a climate scientist at Brown University who was not involved in the report, called the new July temperature record “eye-popping,” but warned that it will be broken again.  

        “It is scary to remember that in another decade, this will be viewed as a relatively cool year, most likely,” she said, adding, “if people don’t like what they’re seeing this summer, they will be in for quite a shock at the higher warming levels we’re heading for.”    

      Petteri Taalas, secretary-general of the WMO, said July’s extreme weather reveals “the harsh reality of climate change.”

This summer is on track to be the hottest on record — by a significant margin  

 Summers have been trending hotter since at least the 1940s, and especially the past decade. Even before July has ended, global average temperature this summer has already surpassed that of summer 2019 — the previous record — by nearly a quarter of a degree Celsius.  

++++++++++++

How convenient to start their graph in 1941.

Was the Medieval WARM Period real? See for yourself below. For the MedievalWarmPeriod compared to today below: Red balloons showed it was warmer. Blue was colder than today(in that study) Green was wetter/more precip Yellow was drier https://wattsupwiththat.com/2017/01/03/documenting-the-global-extent-of-the-medieval-warm-period/                                     If you go to the link below, you can hit those individual balloons and get each individual study: https://www.google.com/maps/d/viewer?mid=1akI_yGSUlO_qEvrmrIYv9kHknq4&hl=en_US&ll=16.104045987509945%2C1.8272485000001097&z                                     +++++++++++++                       Over 100 studies from the Medieval Warm Period, most of which show the planet was this warm or warmer 1,000 years ago. It was also ...

Aug. 6, 2023, 8:32 p.m. metmike

To summarize so far:

1. We had an event in Maui that was mainly the result of extreme weather  from the increased pressure gradient and resulting high winds (climate change actually decreases the pressure gradient because of decreasing the meridional temperature gradient). Clearly this was natural variation.

2. Increased growth of the grass which provided the fuel because of beneficial CO2 enriching the atmosphere was clearly a big factor. 

3. The last 3+ decades in Hawaii have featured more drought than the previous 7 decades. However, the current D1,  moderate drought in Maui is LESS SEVERE than the average drought condition over the last 2 decades. 

4. So is the last 3+ decades of more drought in HI a part of a natural cycle or is it party of man made climate change? Empirical data/observations PROVE that drought has decreased across the planet during climate change, so it's hard to make a case that this is from man made climate change.

5. Global climate models all tell us that this increase in drought was from climate change caused by the increase in CO2 (from humans burning fossil fuels) and that it will continue to get worse. This is what the mainstream science continues to repeat, along with the media sensationalizing that and all extreme weather DESPITE the evidence of the exact opposite happening in the REAL world which I showed you above. 

6. The climate science we're getting is coming from a theoretical world based on busted global climate models that project scary scenarios thru the end of this century. These are just tools used to hijack authentic climate science to exploit CO2's enormous power to generate many trillions from crony capitalism, science funding,  political agenda's and big boost to ratings from sensationalism. 

7. Almost nobody is an atmospheric scientist that has all the data and  the understanding of the physical laws of meteorology. You will not that they constantly insist that we "follow the science" and "97% of scientists agree on this" (well, I'm in that 97% because what they agree on is that we've had global warming from humans).

They do NOT agree on a climate crisis.

So it was easy to hijack climate science and almost everybody that believes in it is sincere in their belief and really wants the best for our planet. .......which is what made them especially vulnerable. Who could be against "saving the planet"?

8. Ironically, most of their solutions are WRECKING the planet, like wind turbines(killing birds/bats/whales for diffuse/intermittent, expensive energy, tearing up the earth for raw materials, then damaging ecosystems/landscapes, then going into landfills in 20 years)  and the only true green energy, as proven above are the fossil fuels that are greening the planet up by 26% over the last 100 years because of the beneficial gas CO2's role in photosynthesis.  

Back at AmerWx, this was recently posted in the  Global Average Temperature 2023 thread:

   1 hour ago,  TheClimateChanger said: 

In other climate news besides the extreme heat in the Iberian Peninsula and North Africa, deadly fires have broken out on Maui in recent days.

------------------

My reply was this:

Please elaborate on the connection of CC and the terrible Maui fires. I'm asking because I posted a detailed write-up about the causes in the relevant tropical thread (with NWS sources cited) and didn't realize CC was assumed to be a contributing factor:

-------------

 If I get a reply back, I'll probably post it in my next post in here.

Thanks much, Larry!

The Climate Changer has yet to respond even though he read my reply to him, but another poster (chubbs) did with the following YouTube video made 3 years ago:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=172&v=pDNNRFwAOMY&embeds_referring_euri=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.americanwx.com%2F&feature=emb_title

Thanks, Larry.

I'm trying to keep the politics, like that out of this thread as much as possible but the reality is that climate science in 2023 IS based almost entirely on divisive politics, power grabs, political agenda, crony capitalism and dishonest media way over hyping and sensationalising every extreme weather event and using it to scare people about a non existent climate crisis.

It is a complete waste of time trying to get people on either side to see anything different that what they are convinced they know on this topic.

When people are convinced that 2+2=5, in the weather/climate world, when I show the authentic weather/climate data proving that 2+2=4 it just does not compute in their brains because their brains are programmed with 2+2=5.

You and me are not like that but the majority of people are.........which is exactly how they are with politics........and this is politics.

The saddest thing of all is that many mainstream scientists are also that way and in practice, they use the ANTI scientific method.

Even brilliant scientists much smarter than me.

They created a speculative theory about global warming and programmed models with the equations they are convinced are right.

The recent adjustment was to make them HOTTER when the data showed they were too hot already. 

This was one of my favorites:

https://www.drroyspencer.com/2014/02/95-of-climate-models-agree-the-observations-must-be-wrong/

Regardless. The fact that the increase in CO2 has caused plant growth to be boosted by 26%, proven with thousands of studies is never mentioned tells you how biased one side is.

Fossil fuels are used to create the worlds synthetic fertilizer which feeds half the planet.

Another secret about fossil fuels: Haber Bosch process-fertilizers feeding the planet using natural gas-doubling food production/crop yields. September 2019

https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/39215/

Life without petroleum based products:6,000 products made with petroleum.  Killing Coal. Fossil fuels and fertilizer. Biden praises high gasoline prices.
https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/84689/ 

Most of the time, it's a complete waste of energy to debate with people on this issue because its climate religion and climate politics NOT authentic science.

1. From the reply by chubbs, did you see the video he linked me to in the post just before your last one?

2. I just got a reply from someone else, a pro met named csnavywx, which included a tweet from the pro met Anthony M:

Might be relevant: https://journals.ametsoc.org/view/journals/clim/28/22/jcli-d-15-0006.1.xml

Paper's a bit dated now but conclusion still holds. Stronger drying from subsidence probably not helping.

And whaddya know:

https://twitter.com/antmasiello/status/1689357643381342208?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1689357643381342208%7Ctwgr%5Ef94ab162a03095a84cf47ae8f8aded18aa7766c2%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.americanwx.com%2Fbb%2Findex.php%3Fapp%3Dcoremodule%3Dsystemcontroller%3Dembedurl%3Dhttps%3A%2F%2Ftwitter.com%2Fantmasiello%2Fstatus%2F1689357643381342208

The PGF was a big environmental fire contributor, as discussed by others, with the tropical cyclone passing south. But check out the dry mid levels advecting right towards Hawaii from the SW USA, too (2-hr mid level WV loop since 8/4 courtesy of RAMMB/CIRA). Yeesh.

@Weather_West

Now, I'm sure there was some component of drying from mass deposition from the TC (as Andy points out in the comments), but it was very dry regardless. 

Most publications will probably cite the stuff we hear all the time (increased SSTs, etc), but being as SSTs are regionally cooler than normal, that wasn't much of a factor here. Gonna say the downsloping helping mix down super dry air aloft was it.

Interesting stuff, Larry.

Especially the study with the potential explanation for why HI suddenly turned drier after 1990.

However, it looks like they didn't have data before 1970. 

"Hawaii has two distinct 6-month seasons (Giambelluca and Schroeder 1998): dry (May–October) and wet (November–April"

We know that this was well into the dry season in Maui, so that in almost every year, it would have been pretty dry for months. That is normal.  Most of the previous 20 years were actually drier than this with more severe ongoing droughts.

The weather in July 2023 looks like temps were a couple of degrees above average. Just under the average .5 inches of rain falling (.36) but its always pretty dry in the Summer there.

Here's the weather on the days of the fire for the main city hit. Dew points are 65 or higher except for a 1 hour 61 on the 9th. So typical and fairly humid. Not sure where the stories about extremely dry air are coming from.

Note the high winds during the daylight hours from the pressure gradient between Dora to the south and High pressure to the north. A natural weather variation independent from climate change.

The wind was clearly the dominant player, along with invasive grass growing bigger and faster every year because of the increase in CO2 and photosynthesis.

I wonder what started the fire?

I read that only 1% of fires in HI are natural.

https://www.wunderground.com/history/monthly/us/hi/kahului/PHOG/date/2023-7

Daily Observations-Aug 8, 2023

Not sure why later than this on the 8th is not available

Daily Observations-August 9, 2023

Hawaii wildfires: How did the Maui fire start and what we know about the Lahaina blaze?

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/how-did-hawaii-wildfires-start-what-know-about-maui-big-island-blazes-2023-08-11/

Nearly 85% of U.S. wildfires are caused by humans, according to the U.S. Forest Service. Natural causes include lightning and volcanic activity.

In Hawaii, less than 1% of fires are due to natural causes, according to Elizabeth Pickett, co-executive director of the Hawaii Wildfire Management Organization.

Of everything discussed,  this is the most disturbing by far.

Why weren't Maui residents warned about the fire sooner?

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-66476746#:~:text=Soon%20after%20flames%20were%20reported,to%20the%20east%20of%20Lahaina.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

I've worked with the Severe Storm Forecast Center, Hurricane Center(visited both places in the 1980's) and NWS(visited the local office dozens of times before they moved to Paducah), using their wonderful products for 4 decades and can't say enough great things about them.

They've saved 10s of thousands of lives the past century.

Same thing with others dedicated to saving lives during natural disasters. They often risk their lives to save others.

So it's very difficult for me to find potential fault with them. However, it appears that they may have dropped the ball in this case. Failed to provide timely warnings that might have saved some of the lost lives.

The sirens never went off. The description of the events and their lack of timely actions to warn people  looks really bad. In fact, they misled at times, it appears.

Worst of all, with increasing wildfires in Hawaii the past 2 decades, there appears to have been no substantive actions taken to help prevent this and there were no plans in place in case it did.

++++++++++++++++

Hawaii underestimated the deadly threat of wildfire, records show    

https://www.cnn.com/2023/08/11/us/hawaii-wildfire-threat-invs/index.html

Our hearts and thoughts go out to those impacted by this horrible event.

Maui fires raise questions over warnings, death toll hits 80

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/maui-wildfire-death-toll-rises-55-search-victims-gears-up-2023-08-11/

+++++++++++

Before and after: Satellite images show Hawaii wildfire devastation

https://www.axios.com/2023/08/10/hawaii-wildfires-lahaina-before-after-photos

Hawaii underestimated the deadly threat of wildfire, records show

https://www.cnn.com/2023/08/11/us/hawaii-wildfire-threat-invs/index.html

      One Maui County reporton wildfire prevention from 2021 stated that while the number of acres consumed by wildfires had spiked, funds to prevent and mitigate them were “inadequate.” The report also stated that the county fire department’s strategic plan included “nothing about what can and should be done to prevent fires” – in what it called a “significant oversight.”      

      The report recommended a thorough risk assessment of fire hazards, but it’s not clear whether officials heeded the recommendation.  

     +++++++++++++++++++

After several days of analysis and discernment, it's clear where the blame for this catastrophe lies. Just read the report/article above as well as others. They were well aware of the risks and had ample opportunity to take steps to minimize/mitigate and prepare for it. They did NOTHING. Using climate change as a scapegoat for a natural disaster caused by natural variation of the weather and excessive growth of grasslands does not cut it!

We should feel empathy for the victims. Other places should take note and use this as a wake up call/lesson BEFORE it happens there. Hawaii ignored their numerous wake up calls With increasing major fires and a long history but no actions.

It doesn't have to be that way. Cutting CO2 emissions is NOT the solution to manage situations like this and the  misleading use of tragic events for that is offensive.

Adaptation and  preemptive actions are an effective option and would likely have saved many lives here!

The videos below are shocking!

Shadab Javed@JShadab1

Video footage of 8th of August before fires started in #Lahaina Electric poles falling off. May be this could be one of the reason of the deadly wildfires. Follow for more updates. Video Credits - @livingearthsystems (Instagram handle)

https://twitter.com/i/status/1690415918453800961

++++++++++++++

Mike@PantherMike182

Humanity is dead.  They just drove right past her and left her for dead… 

https://twitter.com/i/status/1689409366984949760

+++++++++++++++++

Shadab Javed@JShadab1

Devastating People of #lahaina wanted to share their first hand experience in the Lahaina fires. They wanted the world to see the reality of the situation. Follow for more stories.

https://twitter.com/i/status/1690431105080713216

++++++++++

Ivan@Ivankalema01

The historic town of Lahaina was leveled  The death toll from the devastating wildfires in Maui, Hawaii has reached 80. Thousands of people have been displaced, more than 1,700 structures have been destroyed. 

https://twitter.com/i/status/1690344115223838721

++++++++++++++

@NikkiThaGodB1

Horrible aftermath of devastating fires in #Maui as death toll continues to rise. 

https://twitter.com/i/status/1690378561964625920

+++++++++++++++++++++

Pathetic people, like below like to use social media to spread DISinformation.

CBKNEWS@CBKNEWS121

Aug 10

This photo is circulating social media. Apparently this beam was captured before the Hawaii fires. Can anyone confirm? Follow

@CBKNEWS121

Truth@Truth846467231

look at the trees with NO damage in the middle of the so called fires. You are looking at a directed energy ATTACK like the one that happened in California when building destroyed but trees were OK

https://twitter.com/i/status/1690364237267550208

Posted on: August 12, 2023

Pacific Disaster Center and the Federal Emergency Management Agency releases Fire Damage

https://www.mauicounty.gov/CivicAlerts.aspx?AID=12683

AccuWeather@accuweather

The majestic 150-year-old Banyan tree in Lahaina still stands following destructive Hawaii wildfires

https://twitter.com/i/status/1690024473175490560

+++++++++++++

Laisa@Sehunerella

This link has 80 pages of photos of the e aftermath. Today I learned what the X marked on the cars meant . Rest in Love and Peace for those who lost their lives in this tragedy.

https://www.facebook.com/photo/?fbid=10160152627264685&set=pcb.10160152636349685

++++++++++++++++++

I'm thru spending any more time showing that climate change had almost nothing to do with this tragedy(over and over already), which only takes away from focusing on the real causes(to learn lessons) and empathy for the real human suffering....... but ran across this post on X just now.

Steve Milloy@JunkScienceWaPo

@ssdance

 still trying to blame Maui wildfires on global warming -- claims alleged 2°F since 1950 constitutes 'strongest connection.' https://washingtonpost.com/weather/2023/08/12/hawaii-fires-climate-change-maui/ But National Weather Service data for Maui airport shows no unusual or special warming in 2023. https://weather.gov/wrh/Climate?wfo=hfo More climate debunking from meteorologist Cliff Mass. https://cliffmass.blogspot.com/2023/08/wind-driven-wildfires-on-maui.html

 The climate hoax is just one lie after another.

++++++++++++++++

Now for some typical junk science bs from this climate alarmist:

Jeff Berardelli@WeatherProf

This is exactly right. Routinely including just one sentence to remind people why these extremes are getting worse is responsible & necessary. We journalists and scientists assume people already know this bec we’ve said it a million times. They should. But many don’t.

Emily Atkin

@emorwee

Aug 11

Kudos to @Reuters' breaking news team for including not just the role of climate change, but of fossil fuels, in the Maui wildfires. It is so meaningful and easy to include a graf like this in breaking news coverage of climate disasters. Yet so few do it.

++++++++

Now for the authentic climate science:

Bjorn Lomborg@BjornLomborg

·

3h

This has to stop: AP makes up story to blame Hawaii fires on climate Peer-reviewed science finds no climate signal in Hawaii drought https://journals.ametsoc.org/view/journals/clim/35/13/JCLI-D-21-0754.1.xml

 In unrelated news: AP gets $8 million to push climate alarm https://ap.org/ap-in-the-news/2022/climate-grant-illustrates-growth-in-philanthropy-funded-news

Quote Tweet

The Honest Broker

@RogerPielkeJr

We're well into the "have you no shame?" phase of climate reporting where "facts" are just invented out of whole cloth  AP: "Hawaii went from lush to bone dry and thus more fire-prone in a matter of just a few weeks" https://apnews.com/article/hawaii-wildfires-climate-change-92c0930be7c28ec9ac71392a83c87582

 Data: HI drought to 8 Aug 23

Diagnosing Hawaii’s Recent Drought

          01 Jul 2022

https://journals.ametsoc.org/view/journals/clim/35/13/JCLI-D-21-0754.1.xml

Drone footage:

https://twitter.com/i/status/1690414307979169792

Hey Mike,

 Back at AmericanWx, I just got the 3rd response to my asking TheClimateChanger why he said there was a connection between CC and the Maui fire though TheCC still hasn't responded. It is the 2nd one from chubbs:

-----------------------

"A paragraph from Dr. Daniel Swain's blog (at end after discussion of upcoming weather on W coast):

As much as it might surprise some folks, the Hawaiian islands are no stranger to fire. Nearly all ignitions today are caused by human activities (though most are accidental). Wildfire risk is rising, especially on the dry sides of the islands (which, in some cases, receive an annual average precipitation similar to that of Los Angeles), due to a combination of unmanaged invasive grasses building up huge fuel loads on abandoned plantations and climate change–which is likely increasing the duration and severity of droughts on the lee sides of the islands and the intensity of wet-dry cycling of precipitation (which favors extra vegetation growth, and then rapid drying of that extra growth during high risk periods). Here, too, as in so many other places, subdivisions have been built and expanded that increasingly extend into high fire risk zones. In fact, in County of Maui planning documents, nearly all of Lahaina was characterized as being at high to extreme wildfire risk.

https://weatherwest.com/archives/29215

One other thought: We often hear  'CO2 is plant food', i.e. increased CO2 increases plant growth when conditions allow. This would also increase fire risk in areas like Hawaii with wet/dry season cycling."

Thanks much, Larry!

I found this incredible video from Dr. Daniel Swain, using a drone that actually shows how fast the fire was spreading.

North Kihei fire filmed at 11:30 PM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6W_Ra22W5SQ

I listened to alot of Dr. Swain's first video. When I get the chance, I'll listen to more of him.
I really like this guy, despite him being compelled to always identify climate change as a part of the reason in every case and not being able to see when it wasn't.

He's extraordinarily smart and informed on this topic, more than anyone I've ever listened to/read, no exception.

So despite my perception that he has this bias, that he ALWAYS claims climate change is a factor, from what I gather he is extremely credible and has a ton of profoundly significant points.

In my opinion, we are doing a tremendous injustice in this case in the media by associating this event with climate change.

Because it wasn't from climate change. The reasons have already been explained clearly here. If we want to learn lessons, to make positive changes so that events like this don't happen at other places, we must focus on THE REAL REASONS.

Cutting the use of fossil fuels and CO2 emissions, which is what the media is touting as a key solution here,  is NOT going to do a dang thing to protect vulnerable people in situations like this. It's worse than misleading. It's irresponsible and doesn't advocate for the push to allocate the effective resources to address the REAL problems.

Here's what would help a great deal:

These are my GENERAL suggestions:

1. Effectively identify the risk areas. Including those that seem far fetched but under the most anomalously dry and windy weather, have the fuel load to cause a massive fire, especially where people live.

2. Take actions to have a warning system in place……..like using tornado/severe weather warning sirens in the earliest stages of the event, so that people can evacuate in timely fashion.

3. Provide educational information so people understand the risk and know what to do.

4. Extremely important. Practice Mitigation. In higher risk areas, reduce vegetative fuel loads/ignition sources and use known principles that apply locally to each situation to reduce the risks.

5. Stop blaming climate change. It misleads and diverts attention and resources away from PROVEN strategies above that can be used to save lives.

 Managed Fires Can Help Mitigate the Risks Posed by Increasing Frequency of Wildfires

https://climatecheck.com/risks/fire/mitigation-guide-for-homeowners

Wildfire Mitigation and Adaptation Guide for Homeowners

climatecheck.com/risks/fire/mitigation-guide-for-homeowners

Hey Mike,

 At AmericanWx, I had said that "Chubbs" had responded to me (in a respectful manner) and copied that to here. Part of what he said was this:

"One other thought: We often hear  'CO2 is plant food', i.e. increased CO2 increases plant growth when conditions allow. This would also increase fire risk in areas like Hawaii with wet/dry season cycling.'"

----------------

In response, I just posted this to chubbs:

What do you mean by "wet/dry season cycling" and how does that relate to increased CO2? Thank you in advance.

------------

Mike,

 By the way, the poster who I originally replied to (The Climate Changer) has yet to respond and almost definitely never will as he read my reply to him and he's already made new unrelated posts in the thread.

Thanks much, Larry!

I covered that from the get go here:

https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/98093/#98102

"So unless you want to make a case that photosynthesis is killing the planet and that massively boosting global food production is bad for the human race..........then CO2's contribution to this fire is something that's a MUCH greater positive for life on this planet than the negative from the added wildfire fuel that increases the intensity of many wildfires."

++++++++++++++++

People that think this way are hopeless. They just look for reasons to blame climate change, with cherry picking and ignoring the big picture. They have no persective. Everything is about human caused climate change and the solution is to cut CO2 pollution causing it.

While completely ignoring profound reasons for this disaster that could have been very effectively managed and prevented if officials in HI responsible for managing fire risk and warning for actual fires HAD JUST DONE THEIR JOBS. The warning sirens that they test every month were never even used. 

I've had enough time to study this to know that those people are almost entirely responsible for this disaster. Blaming climate change is just absurd and completely counterproductive because it takes the blame off of the real reason, which makes it harder to learn a lesson so that we can apply it everywhere to save other lives because this won't be the last wildfire where risk management plays the key role in how bad it gets, including how many lives are lost.

These were my suggestions, moving forward:

https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/98093/#98213

Related to this one:

4. Extremely important. Practice Mitigation.  In higher risk areas, reduce vegetative fuel loads/reduce ignition sources and  use known principles that apply locally to each situation to reduce the risks.

  Added: This is an invasive, unwanted grass species. There is absolutely no reason that they couldn't have SPRAYED the grass on a massive scale(especially close to vulnerable areas) with a cheap herbicide like Round Up to kill it or greatly stifle its growth. ESPECIALLY ANYWHERE CLOSE TO POWER LINES!

How much money would it have cost to  cut huge swaths of the grass, closest to the neighborhoods that got obliterated?

A million times less costly than what just happened and extremely effective. These are NO BRAINER options to practice effective mitigation.

The tall, uncontrolled grass is what caused this tragic event.  You will never eliminate sources for fires, even though almost all of them are human caused.

+++++++++++

If somebody wants to debate the harm from climate change to coral reef systems.......they have some VERY solid scientific ground to stand on.

On the fire in Maui?  Absurd!!!

It's just a counter productive waste of biased rationalizing  by people obsessed with blaming climate change for everything because of their closed mindedness. Like a climate religion not objective science.

 It does much more harm than good in situations like this one which cause it to be that much more difficult to provide viable, effective solutions like the ones I gave.

Hey Mike,

 I got a polite reply from chubbs:

"I borrowed the term from Swain. Believe it merely refers to the  cycling between wet and dry seasons. Per link below, climate change intensifies the water cycle.  Wet seasons can become wetter and dry seasons dryer.

https://www.int-res.com/articles/cr_oa/c047p123.pdf

Here's an article by a local meteorologist on climate change impacts on Hawaii's precipitation

https://theconversation.com/hawaiis-climate-future-dry-regions-get-drier-with-global-warming-increasing-fire-risk-while-wet-areas-get-wetter-211379 "

---------------

 From 1st link:

ABSTRACT: There is a direct influence of global warming on precipitation. Increased heating leads to greater evaporation and thus surface drying, thereby increasing the intensity and duration of drought. However, the water holding capacity of air increases by about 7% per 1°C warming, which leads to increased water vapor in the atmosphere. Hence, storms, whether individual thunderstorms, extratropical rain or snow storms, or tropical cyclones, supplied with increased moisture, produce more intense precipitation events. Such events are observed to be widely occurring, even where total precipitation is decreasing: ‘it never rains but it pours!’

--------------

From 2nd link:

We found that in the wet windward areas of Hawaii, rainfall is projected to increase substantially. That includes increasingly frequent extreme downpours. On the other hand, rainfall is predicted to decrease substantially over much of the rain shadow regions.

-------------

I've got more to add soon.........

Thanks, Larry!

I'm very familiar with Kevin Trenberth. He has great credentials but like many in his position, is convinced his global climate models have all the right hand picked mathematical equations to represent the physics of the atmosphere and they can't possibly be wrong. So he assumes that models trump the observations/emperical data of the REAL world(which he ignores).

Trenberth: 5. UNDERSTANDING MODEL PROJECTIONS"

If he looked at the objective drought indicators, drought has DECREASED slightly around the world BECAUSE OF climate change. I agree with him that it should also increase heavy rain events from the 7% increase in moisture, especially at the higher latitudes. 

History going back centuries shows that global cooling increases drought and reduces precipitation. Global warming decreases global drought and increases precipitation.

Their theory is that a 1 deg. C increase in temp will dry things out more in the dry places during the dry seasons. I'm sure that's happens in SOME places. But the empirical data  looking at the big picture shows that  the 7% increase in moisture in the air, from added precipitable water that evaporates from the oceans is offsetting that. 

The wetter places are getting wetter and the drier places......are also getting wetter and all places are getting greener. That's what always happens when you warm the planet.

But these people will always believe that 2+2=5, no matter how many times you show them it's 4.

New Studies Find No Global Drought Trend Since 1902…Global Flood Magnitudes Decline with Warming

Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) is claimed to intensify hydrological processes. Data analysis indicates it does not.

From the NoTricksZone

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2023/08/15/new-studies-find-no-global-drought-trend-since-1902global-flood-magnitudes-decline-with-warming/

With regard to drought, the global trends indicate there has actually been a de-intensification of meteorological (climate-related) drought from 1959-2014 relative to to 1902-1959. 

“The results revealed that: 1) meteorological drought in most climate regions intensified during 1902–1958 but showed a wetting trend during 1959–2014.”

metmike: From your 2nd link:

"I am a meteorologist at the University of Hawaii, and I have worked with colleagues to develop sophisticated computer climate simulations that project local rainfall changes over the 21st century."

++++++++++++++

There's that 2+2=5...........climate model religion that ignores observations.

It is a solid meteorological fact that rains have DECREASED in HI since around 1990. In fact, I showed you all the data related to that at the top. This is important empirical data to take note of. So is this being caused by climate change? Maybe, but most places in the world are getting wetter and few drier from climate change. Why would the same thing have the opposite impact in HI?

This study below tells us its from natural variation. Alarmists minimize weighting of natural variation and increase weighting for climate change causes. Even heavy snow and extreme cold are from climate change.

Diagnosing Hawaii’s Recent Drought

          01 Jul 2022

https://journals.ametsoc.org/view/journals/clim/35/13/JCLI-D-21-0754.1.xml

https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/69258/

++++++++++++++++++++++

metmike: However, we are constantly bombarded with junk/misleading science like this:(I could copy dozens of articles just like it).

As if no places ever saw an increase in drought before manmade climate change happened.

 +++++++++++++

During the decade of 1930's, much of the US was under extreme drought(and wildfires burned several times more acres). .......from natural cycles.

Today, the natural cycles that caused that no longer exist. Everything extreme, got that way with the assistance of climate change. 

Profoundly ironic in all this is that climate change is helping TO PROTECT US from extreme droughts.

Events like this below when the planet was 1 deg. C cooler and had 130 ppm less CO2 are MUCH LESS likely because of man made climate change. 2+2=4 science.

Greatest climate crisis in history 1876-1878.   50 million died, 3% of the global population. 1876-1878 was shortly after the Little Ice Age ended with the  global temperature 1 deg. C cooler than this and CO2 at 130 parts per million less than this. Climate and the Global Famine of 1876–78 https://journals.ametsoc.org/view/journals/clim/31/23/jcli-d-18-0159.1.xml During the late nineteenth century, a series of famines affected vast parts of Asia, causing mortality on a scale that would be unthinkable today (Davis 2001). Of these, the so-called Global Famine lasting from 1876 to 1878 was the most severe and widespread in at least the past 150 years (Hasell and Roser 2018; Gráda 2009; Davis 2001). The Global Famine inflicted acute distress upon populations in diverse parts of South and East Asia, Brazil, and Africa, with total human fatalities likely exceeding 50 million. These famines were associated with prolonged droughts ...

   metmike:             We are living in an age with the best weather/climate in 1,000 years, since the last time it was this warm(Medieval WARM Period).  The beneficial CO2 levels are the highest in over 1 million years, thanks to burning fossil fuels.

It's the only reason that we can feed anything close to 8 billion mouths in the world. CO2=+26% plant growth in addition to the best weather/climate for growing crops since we've tracked the weather.

Oh, wait. That extra CO2 caused the invasive grasses In HI, (that they ignored as an extremely dangerous fire hazard-AND DID NOTHING), to grow faster.........so CO2 is pollution that's killing the planet and this is just another reason for us to eliminate fossil fuels.

And CNN laments over the lack of other media sources blaming climate change for the Maui disaster!

WOW!

News outlets went all in on Maui fire coverage. But did they miss a key part of the story?    

https://www.cnn.com/2023/08/15/media/maui-fire-coverage-climate-change-reliable-sources/index.html

News organizations could take a page out of their playbook for covering politics, where singular events are often tied to broader trends.

+++++++++++

Not only do they do this already, but they hit the nail on the head in treating this like politics.

Climate science in today's world has very little authentic science in it. It's about politics, crony capitalism, CORRUPTED science and dishonest media sensationalism for ratings and activism. There are plenty of misled, sincere environmentalists that have had their intelligence stolen by the junk science/DISinformation. 

There is over 100 trillion at stake the next few years, globally for the gatekeepers and those elites with the right positions.

The average person loses out(where do you think that money will come from?). The poor are hurt the most by far.  

 Hey Mike,

 Continued from before, here was a reply I just gave to chubbs (I think it's pretty good):

-----------

"Thanks. In Swain's article, he says:

'climate change–which is likely increasing the duration and severity of droughts on the lee sides of the islands and the intensity of wet-dry cycling of precipitation (which favors extra vegetation growth, and then rapid drying of that extra growth during high risk periods).'

Then you restated Swain's idea of wetter wet seasons and drier dry seasons.

 But then I read this from your last link about expected changes on Hawaii, itself, due to CC written by Kevin Hamilton:

'We found that in the wet windward areas of Hawaii, rainfall is projected to increase substantially. That includes increasingly frequent extreme downpours. On the other hand, rainfall is predicted to decrease substantially over much of the rain shadow regions.'

 So, to recap, Swain is suggesting wetter wet seasons and drier dry seasons. But Hamilton is instead suggesting wetter windward areas and drier leeward areas.

 So, Swain implies CC causes Lahaina to have both wetter winters (causing increased vegetation) and drier summers (causing more fire danger due to more fuel available that dries out in summer).

 But Hamilton is implying CC causes both winter and summer to be drier at Lahaina. So, per Hamilton, there actually isn't the increased fuel at Lahaina due to wetter winters.

  So, Swain (wetter) and Hamilton (drier) are literally on opposite sides on how CC affects Lahaina winter rainfall.

-----------------

 Mike, I'll post here any reply he gives.

---------------

**Edit: I just got chubbs' civil answer:

"Yes, they do not appear to be consistent. I would go with the local expert Hamilton. Swain may be wrong or I could have misinterpreted what he means by wet-dry cycling. It could be that the rain shadow areas are getting less frequent rain but when it does rain the rain is heavier. Increased precipitation intensity even in areas that receive less rain is mentioned in the abstract of the first reference I provided."

Hey Mike,

 Here in the SE US I've noticed a significant rise in dewpoints and associated average morning lows over the last few decades in the summer. This has to be due to GW induced warmer SSTs. Since the SE US has flow off the warm ocean to our south a larger % of the time in summer than other seasons, the influence of SSTs is higher then.

 Here's something I've been wondering about. We both know that many climate researchers believe that AGW induced CC leads to more intense droughts. (I know you disagree as you said data doesn't support this.) We know that their idea is that higher temperatures lower RH, which leads to less rainfall overall. I understand that premise. No debate on that.

 But here's my concern based on my experiences here. Aren't there also warmer dewpoints that come along with GW during seasons when air predominantly flows off the ocean as a result of the warmer SSTs that were already caused by GW? If air temps rise but also dewpoints rise, might RHs actually stay about the same in areas where and when flow off the ocean dominates?

 So, I can understand the idea of dry areas not influenced much by ocean flow possibly becoming drier due to lower RHs. But what about areas that have ocean influence during certain or all times of year? Could it be that those areas aren't having much of an increase in drought, if any?

 Also, is it possible that dewpoints everywhere are rising? IF so, are they rising as fast as temperatures? For example, world temps have increased ~2-3 F due to AGW. Have dewpoints increased by that much or by a smaller amount? If the increase has been the same, then average RH wouldn't have dropped. But if by a smaller amount, then average RH would have dropped this leading to increased drought.

---------------

**Edit: Please go back up one post to make sure you read the brand new reply from chubbs to my last post to him that I just edited in at the end.

Larry,

I was starting to get frustrated, having to repeat the same things over and over in response to your person's comments.........then, you just made my day with your last post.

Thank you for having your thinking cap on and using personal observations, along with critical thinking instead of just believing the mainstream narratives about drought.

Absolutely dew points are higher in most places. This is the major reason why global drought has decreased slightly NOT increased DESPITE models predicting that drought will increase and the majority of people that follow models (almost like a religion)   are convinced that drought will increase. But they will continue to be wrong.

Thanks to your point and photosynthesis, I'll explain exactly why they continue to be wrong.

You might remember we had a poster here, WxGrant, who was a television meteorologist from MO.

The 2 of us had some wonderful discussions on weather.

I copied the link to this one which your post jogged my memory about. You'll love it:

                Corn and climate change            

                            13 responses |         

                Started by metmike - Dec. 6, 2018, 10:43 a.m.            

https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/18987/

https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/18987/#19020

This is why I say that climate change is helping to protect us from weather/climate like the Dust Bowl, a decade with numerous years of extreme drought and the hottest weather in U.S. history by an extremely wide margin. 

It's not just the atmosphere holding more moisture and dew points being higher.

The world is massively greening up by every measure. Even deserts are greening up.

CO2 increasing by 130 ppm has led to plants growing 26% faster/bigger......EVERYWHERE, not just the Midwest.

The Midwest has sort of been a real world laboratory to demonstrate an amplified version of the impact of the increase in EVAPOTRANSPORATION from the massively greening up world. 

The higher the CO2 is, the  greater the vegetation/plant growth, the greater the evapotransporation, the higher the dew points, the more the rainfall.

If you hold all things the same but increase the dew point by a few degrees, there will always be more rain days and heavier rains, even with warmer temperatures.

Evapotranspiration only happens in the growing seasons. For the tropics, this is year round. The farther north you go, the shorter the time frame/growing season but once plants come out of dormancy, evapotranspiration kicks in.
im thinking that evapotranspiration might not be as big of a deal on an island surrounded by water. But if the water is warmer…the dew points WILL BE higher.

but let’s expand the conversation to being profound and include evapotranspiration with respect to the climate models and drought.

Here's the thing. Global climate models DON'T have this dialed in. This is a huge reason for why they keep predicting more drought..........while we continue to have LESS drought.

The U.S. Cornbelt has had only 1 widespread severe drought that lasted thru much of the growing season since 1988 (2012 was the year). 

Historically, the Cornbelt averaged 1 severe widespread drought every 8 years or so.

In the 1930's, half of the years featured widespread severe droughts. 

This is not from a natural cycle or other reason. It's mostly because of climate change. We can thank farming for much of that, with the tightly packed rows of corn greatly amplifying the impact which is being experienced EVERYWHERE there are plants.

Again, those plants are growing 26% bigger/faster everywhere nd increasing evapotranspiration, which recycles moisture(returning as additional rains because of the increase in low level moisture, all things the same).

The increase in vegetation is also a negative feedback to increasing daytime readings.

As you noted, the night time/very early mornings are the time of day that is warmer vs 40 years ago. In the Midwest, in fact, its become extremely rare to have 100+ readings in the Summer.

Those lower daytime readings are also a factor in less drought. 

https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/45281/#47435

Those areas mentioned above have had below average rains this growing season. If not for the huge increase in CO2 the past 100 years, crop conditions would have deteriorated much more.  Increased CO2,  besides acting as atmospheric fertilizer also causes plants to be more water efficient.  They don't need to open their stomata as wide or as often to let CO2 in. As a result, they lose less water/moisture from evapotranspiration. Soybeans are a C3 plant. C3 plants benefit the most from the increase in CO2. 

Differences among Plant Functional Types in Response to Elevated CO₂

_{https://www.nature.com/scitable/knowledge/library/effects-of-rising-atmospheric-concentrations-of-carbon-13254108/}

The preceding discussion has presented the average effects of elevated CO₂, but obscures important patterns of difference in response among plant species. One of the most important determinants of species differences in response to elevated CO₂ is photosynthetic type. Most plant species (~90%) utilize a photosynthetic process known as C₃ photosynthesis. Other species use either of two physiologically distinct processes known as C₄ and CAM photosynthesis (Figure 2). C₄ plants include most tropical and sub-tropical grasses and several important crops, including maize (corn), sugar cane, sorghum, and the millets. There has therefore been considerably more research on the responses to elevated CO₂ in C₄ than in CAM plants.

Figure 2: Each plant species utilizes one of several distinct physiological variants of photosynthesis mechanisms, including the variants known as C3 and C4 photosynthesis.

Summary

"Current evidence suggests that the concentrations of atmospheric CO₂ predicted for the year 2100 will have major implications for plant physiology and growth. Under elevated CO₂ most plant species show higher rates of photosynthesis, increased growth, decreased water use and lowered tissue concentrations of nitrogen and protein. Rising CO₂ over the next century is likely to affect both agricultural production and food quality. The effects of elevated CO₂ are not uniform; some species, particularly those that utilize the C₄ variant of photosynthesis, show less of a response to elevated CO₂ than do other types of plants. Rising CO₂ is therefore likely to have complex effects on the growth and composition of natural plant communities."

++++++++++++++++

Larry, 

We should note below, what happens when they use modes that dial in the reality of photosythesis.

Look at the massive, continuous increase in the greening (leaf area) for our planet thru the year 2100.

This increase in greening from leaves,  also means an increase in evapotranspiration from those leaves, similar to but not as amplified as the U.S. Cornbelt.  

https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/69258/#69259

Global Green Up Slows Warming

https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/images/146296/global-green-up-slows-warming

"The paper’s authors reviewed more than 250 published articles that have used satellite data, modeling, and field observations, to understand the causes and consequences of global greening. Among the key results, the authors noted that on a global scale greening can be attributed to the increase of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. Rising levels of carbon dioxide increase the rate of photosynthesis and growth in plants."

metmike: Why isn't this paper, based on 250........let me repeat that number 250 published articles using the best technology known to science............getting much news coverage?

Because they don't want you to know this. 

From the projections: According to climate models, the future looks even greener. The second map shows what the green-up might look like in the future based on the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP5) climate model, under a scenario in which increases in greenhouse gases lead to almost 5° Celsius (9° Fahrenheit) of warming by the end of the 21st century. Specifically, it shows the predicted change in the growing season’s “leaf area index” from 2081-2100 relative to 1981-2000. The chart below the map shows the predicted changes by latitude. Notice that high latitudes in the Northern Hemisphere are still expected to change the most.

metmike: There is almost no chance we will see that amount of warming.

Cooling of US Midwest summer temperature extremes from cropland intensification

https://www.nature.com/articles/nclimate2825

Here we identify centennial trends towards more favourable growing conditions in the US Midwest, including cooler summer temperature extremes and increased precipitation, and investigate the origins of these shifts.

++++++++++++++++

Summer Climate Change in the Midwest and Great Plains due to Agricultural Development during the Twentieth Century    

https://journals.ametsoc.org/view/journals/clim/32/17/jcli-d-19-0096.1.xml       

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

I don't care how many global climate models tell us that climate change is increasing drought or how many really smart biased scientists that believe in the models tell us that climate change is increasing global drought or how many times they cherry pick dry places and try to use that as evidence(as if new droughts never emerged before human caused climate change)

THEY ARE WRONG!

Desertsgreening up from rising CO2 below:

https://phys.org/news/2013-07-greening-co2.html

     

                                

                   

           

Increased levels of carbon dioxide (CO2) have helped boost green foliage across the world's arid regions over the past 30 years through a process called CO2 fertilisation, according to CSIRO research.                                               

                       

                                                                                

In findings based on satellite observations, CSIRO, in collaboration with the Australian National University (ANU), found that this CO2 fertilisation correlated with an 11 per cent increase in foliage cover from 1982-2010 across parts of the arid areas studied in Australia, North America, the Middle East and Africa, according to CSIRO research scientist, Dr Randall Donohue.

++++++++++++

Considering the fact that models continue to be wrong about global drought increasing (which I proved as an authentic fact), if they can't even get the sign correct for drought increasing/decreasing for the planet, it's pretty absurd to be having a debate over whether global climate models can reliably predict the increase/decrease in rains over 1 island in the middle of the Pacific out to the year 2100.

One reason that you have 2 scientists contradicting each other on this is that the current models don't have enough skill to forecast this with precision.  Picking one scientist over the other  for whatever reason is equally absurd. 

I know exactly what its like when a meteorologist makes a weather forecast and WANTS to believe in the model his/her forecast is using to base it on.

Climate scientists and modelers are doing the exact same thing..........except, unlike the local meteorologist that wouldn't change their weather forecast for clear skies, even while looking at rain on the radar and pretending its not there..........who  has egg on their face. 

Climate scientists NEVER have to reconcile their bad predictions to the observations. 

Instead, as part of the hijacking of climate science, they control the narratives and the data reporting. They and the models are ALWAYS right (even when wrong) . Because they are infallible, they never need to adjust the models, except to make them hotter recently so they would scare more people into believing that we're killing the planet and need to act ASAP because human civilization is  gravely threatened.

ironically, the biggest threat comes from their solutions. I’ve mentioned the great harm that  wind turbines  and batteries do to the planet With the biggest impact of fossil fuels coming from greening the planet 26%.

we should appreciate them NOT telling us this scientific fact because it contradicts the narrative about the fake climate crisis.

pits impossible for most people to comprehend this because we NEVER hear that and are taught the opposite…that 2+2=5.

but you are different than most people and can use well developed critical thinking and gifted analytical skills to apply objective, authentic science instead of letting your intelligence get stolen by years of junk science rhetoric.