this post was submitted on 11 Jul 2025
645 points (99.5% liked)

News

35915 readers
2863 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil

Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.

2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.

Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.

3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.

Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.

4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.

Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.

5. Only recent news is allowed.

Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.

6. All posts must be news articles.

No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.

7. No duplicate posts.

If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.

8. Misinformation is prohibited.

Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.

9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.

All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.

10. Don't copy entire article in your post body

For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
JonsJava@lemmy.world
gedaliyah@lemmy.world
little_cow@lemmy.world
jeffw@lemmy.world
enu@lemmy.world
rjc@lemmy.world
Tenthrow@lemmy.world
645
U.S. rocked by four 1-in-1,000-year storms in less than a week (www.nbcnews.com)
submitted 7 months ago by babysandpiper@sopuli.xyz to c/news@lemmy.world
77 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Climate change is making severe storms both more common and more intense.

First the river rose in Texas. Then, the rains fell hard over North Carolina, New Mexico and Illinois.

In less than a week, there were at least four 1-in-1,000-year rainfall events across the United States — intense deluges that are thought to have roughly a 0.1% chance of happening in any given year.

“Any one of these intense rainfall events has a low chance of occurring in a given year,” said Kristina Dahl, vice president for science at the nonprofit organization Climate Central, “so to see events that are historic and record-breaking in multiple parts of the country over the course of one week is even more alarming.”

It’s the kind of statistic, several experts said, that is both eye-opening and likely to become more common because of climate change.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] yucandu@lemmy.world 51 points 7 months ago (4 children)

Fun fact, the reason we all call it "climate change" and not "global warming" was because the George W Bush administration directed NASA to do so, as they deemed it less "scary" to the public:

In interviews, Republican politicians and their aides said they agreed with the strategist, Frank Luntz, that it was important to pay attention to what his memorandum, written before the November elections, called ''the environmental communications battle.''

In his memorandum, Mr. Luntz urges that the term ''climate change'' be used instead of ''global warming,'' because ''while global warming has catastrophic communications attached to it, climate change sounds a more controllable and less emotional challenge.''

Also, he wrote, ''conservationist'' conveys a ''moderate, reasoned, common sense position'' while ''environmentalist'' has the ''connotation of extremism.''

President Bush's speeches on the environment show that the terms ''global warming'' and ''environmentalist'' had largely disappeared by late last summer. The terms appeared in a number of President Bush's speeches in 2001, but now the White House fairly consistently uses ''climate change'' and ''conservationist.''

https://www.nytimes.com/2003/03/02/us/a-call-for-softer-greener-language.html

What drives me insane is how everyone on the left just... went along with it. Now we retroactively rewrite history and claim that they were always separate terms with entirely different distinct meanings. And knowing that so many highly educated, inquisitive, independent thinking people didn't think to question that or look into that, it frightens me.

[–] Catoblepas@piefed.blahaj.zone 57 points 7 months ago (3 children)

While the Bush administration certainly had (very obviou$) reasons for trying to downplay it, I also remember at least some scientists at the time arguing that climate change was a better term because people are particularly stupid about the term global warming when it paradoxically results in some places having a greater number of and more extreme cold events.

Ex: every time some dumbfuck Republican brought a snowball into Congress to talk about how global warming is fake because look here’s snow!!

[–] baronvonj@lemmy.world 17 points 7 months ago

I also remember at least some scientists at the time arguing that climate change was a better term because people are particularly stupid about the term global warming when it paradoxically results in some places having a greater number of and more extreme cold events.

That's how I recall the term climate change coming into favor, too.

[–] Wahots@pawb.social 5 points 7 months ago

That snowball guy finally died last year, thank God. Too bad it wasn't from a flood or hurricane.

[–] chunes@lemmy.world 15 points 7 months ago (1 children)

The left went along with it because they were tired of all the "then why is it so cold in winter?" comments from the stupid half of the family tree.

[–] KairuByte@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 7 months ago

We still get that now. As if cold things can’t exist when it’s hotter.

[–] BilboBargains@lemmy.world 6 points 7 months ago

Good to know! They should have been a little more creative and called it something familiar and snappy like Sport Utility Environment or Gas Guzzler.