Back when Hurricane Irma was a Category-5 storm pounding Caribbean islands like Barbuda, Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Scott Pruitt hopped on the phone with CNN. The country was anticipating Irma’s landfall in Florida — which would follow less than two weeks after Hurricane Harvey inundated Houston — and CNN asked Pruitt if it was an appropriate moment to talk about the connection between climate change and hurricanes.

“To have any kind of focus on the cause and effect of the storm, versus helping people, or actually facing the effect of the storm, is misplaced,” Pruitt said. “To use time and effort to address it at this point is very, very insensitive to this [sic] people in Florida.”

Sure, you can argue that we should focus on the safety of our fellow man — even our Texan social media manager agrees. (Congressional Democrats are apparently on board, too.) Still, Harvey was the country’s worst deluge ever and Irma was the strongest hurricane ever to form in the Atlantic. And as a publication that’s focused on climate change, it’s hard for us to avoid seeing it as the culprit behind back-to-back hurricanes.

So we had two Grist scribes discuss whether it was a good idea for us to follow our instincts and shout“climate change is here” into the internet. Senior writer Nathanael Johnson had questions about how much of the destruction wrought by Harvey and Irma the science allows us to pin on global warming. And meteorologist-turned-journalist Eric Holthaus, a contributing writer at Grist, had answers.

An edited version of their conversation follows:

Nathanael Johnson: How much should we talk about climate change when reporting about disastrous storms like Harvey and Irma?

Eric Holthaus: Even though this is my beat, I have to admit I’m always a little unsure. I pump the brakes a bit: I want to make the link to climate change as forcefully as possible, but I absolutely don’t want to overstep the science. My working rule of thumb: Climate change increases the risk of damaging storms.

Asking if climate change “caused” Harvey or Irma — like one White House pool reporter did this week— is basically unanswerable. It’s like asking if a person’s alcoholism caused her to get into a particular car accident.

Nathanael: So how exactly does climate change relate to damaging storms?

Eric: First off, I think that’s an excellent way to phrase the question. Obviously if climate change is warming the atmosphere and increasing its capacity to hold water vapor, that’s going to relate to hurricanes somehow.

Nathanael: And it does, right? If it’s hotter, we’re going to get more water vapor, which I suppose could cause heavier rain?

Eric: Yep, the science is pretty clear here: For every degree Celsius (1.8 degrees Fahrenheit) that air warms, its capacity to hold water vapor increases by about 7 percent. That’s basic physics. It doesn’t mean it willhold that additional water vapor, but it can. And, often, especially in hurricanes, the air becomes 100 percent saturated with water vapor. If there’s more total water in a hurricane, it’s going to produce more rain.

Nathanael: So it sounds like climate change is most directly related to more water ending up in the wrong places during violent storms.

Eric: The clearest signals are that rising sea levels make coastal flooding worseand that the increasing intensity of heavy precipitation makes inland flooding worse. Coastal and inland flooding are the biggest killers resulting from hurricanes. These impacts are not trivial — even if the changes to sea levels and intense precipitation we’re seeing right now might not be as pronounced as they will be later in the century. This is what scientists mean when they say that the recent storms are harbingers of what’s to come.

Nathanael: When I think of hurricanes, I think of wind blowing down buildings. Is climate change likely to increase wind?

Eric: There is some evidence that, late this century, wind speeds themselves might increase. Or more exactly, the hurricanes that form are more likely to be stronger. We might have the same number of hurricanes, and some research suggests maybe slightly fewer total hurricanes. But those that do form will have a much better chance at developing into Category 4 or 5 storms. Both Harvey and Irma passed over ocean water that was much warmer than normal, which made it more likely that their intensity would strengthen. So even considering the uncertainties in the data and projections, it’s absolutely appropriate and critical to mention climate change as a factor in these storms.

Nathanael: So what question should journalists ask elected officials about climate change and natural disasters?

Eric: If there’s a best way to phrase a question on hurricanes and climate change to elected officials, it might be: “What efforts should we take to reduce the risk of hurricanes like these?” That sidesteps the chance that a climate change denier would just punt the question. It also goes to the heart of what we all want to know: “What’s it going to take to protect our society from extreme weather?”

Nathanael: That’s good. I saw a study suggesting that weather events don’t do anything to change the minds of climate skeptics. Is it useful to hammer this point during storms?

Eric: It’s irresponsible not to mention the quickly increasing number of people and amount of property in harm’s way. Whatever signal we’re seeing in storms is probably dwarfed by the sheer amount of destruction even relatively weak hurricanes can do these days because of society’s complete neglect of the risks. We’re making this problem much more damaging than it ever has been before.

Nathanael: So even if people don’t have a come-to-Jesus moment about the reality of climate change, they still have to come to grips with the fact that we are building in places that are going to flood?

Eric: Yep, these problems are related. The storms themselves are getting worse, but we’re also still building the same old way, which is putting more people and property at risk. Acknowledging and acting on climate change requires us to rethink almost everything, and in this case, it should give us a chance to imagine a world where heavier rain and rising seas are able to do their thing without us getting in the way. We know these effects are going to continue. It’s best for us to plan on rebuilding our cities with that in mind.

(GRIST)

Chelsea Manning has condemned Harvard after the university revoked her visiting fellowship following criticism from CIA Director Mike Pompeo and other agency officials.

“This is what a military/police/intel state looks like,” Manning tweeted early Friday, adding she thinks the Ivy League university’s reaction is akin to the CIA determining “what is and is not taught at Harvard.”

Harvard’s Kennedy School of Politics announced Wednesday Manning was invited to speak to students for a day as a “visiting fellow.”

Chelsea Manning’s invitation to speak at Harvard’s Kennedy School was rescinded after protests from current and former members of the CIA.TWITTER/CHELSEA MANNING

Manning was imprisoned in 2010, and in 2013 she was sentenced under the Espionage Act to 35 years in prison for leaking nearly 1 million classified and sensitive diplomatic cables and documents about the Iraq War to the transparency group WikiLeaks. But she was released from a military jail in May after her sentence was commuted by former President Barack Obama.

Current and former CIA members were outraged by the news of her fellowship and protested the move Thursday.

CIA Director Mike Pompeo called Manning an “American traitor” in a letter to the school abruptly canceling a talk he was about to give there. “My conscience and duty to the men and women of the Central Intelligence Agency will not permit me to betray their trust by appearing to support Harvard’s decision with my appearance at tonight’s event,” Pompeo wrote.

Related: Chelsea Manning reveals why she leaked secret military documents in first interview since release

Former CIA Deputy Director Michael Morell resigned as a Senior Fellow at Harvard Kennedy school in protest. “Unfortunately, I cannot be part of an organization that honors a convicted felon and leaker of classified information,” Morell wrote in his resignation letter.

In an interview with ABC News’ Nightline co-anchor Juju Chang soon after her release, Manning said she leaked the documents because “I have a responsibility to the public.”

The documents revealed the U.S. failed to investigate serial detainee abuse and torture by Iraqi police and soldiers, as well as 15,000 previously unknown civilian deaths during the Iraq War, sometimes at the hands of U.S. soldiers.

After the CIA’s outrage, the Dean of Harvard Kennedy School, Douglas W. Elmendorf, released a statement withdrawing his invitation to Manning. “I now think that designating Chelsea Manning as a Visiting Fellow was a mistake,” he said. “I see more clearly now that many people view a Visiting Fellow title as an honorific, so we should weigh that consideration when offering invitations,” he added.

Manning, he said, was invited to spend a day at the Kennedy School to meet with students and give a talk that may ask “hard questions and challenge what she has said and done.”

“Any determination should start with the presumption that more speech is better than less,” Elmendorf wrote. “In retrospect, though, I think my assessment of that balance for Chelsea Manning was wrong.”

In response, Manning tweeted, “honored to be 1st disinvited trans woman visiting Harvard fellow,” accusing the school’s decision of chilling “marginalized voices under CIA pressure.”

Early this year Wikileaks was found by key American intelligence agencies to have played a role in Russia’s efforts to sway the 2016 election to candidate Donald Trump. Last year the group released large batches of emails stolen from the Democratic Party and candidate Hillary Clinton’s election campaign.

(Newsweek)

A college guard who accidently shot himself sparked a campus-wide manhunt in Minnesota after telling police he had been attacked by a "black man in a hoodie."

Police arrested Brent Patrick Ahlers, 25, following the incident on Tuesday night at St. Catherine University in St. Paul, CBS News reported.

Ahlers shot himself in the shoulder while on duty but told police that he had been attacked by a man he confronted in a wooded area of the campus. Dozens of officers then combed the campus for the suspect, provoking alarm when they failed to track down the gunman.

He later confessed he had brought his gun onto campus without permission and was afraid of losing his job if college authorities learned of its existence. He was arrested and is now facing a misdemeanor charge for falsely reporting a crime.

St. Paul Police Department officer Mike Ernester said the false shooting report created tension and concern on the university premises. "It had basically 1,800 students held captive in their dorm rooms," Ernester said. "It had residents of the community fearful that a suspect was on the loose and they could be victimized at any moment."

University President Becky Roloff said: "While we are distressed and saddened that this incident occurred, we are relieved that no other members of the community were injured."

Roloff later confirmed in a written statement that Ahlers had been fired from his job: "He is no longer an employee of the University effective today, September 14.

"I want to be clear that St. Catherine University strongly condemns racial discrimination, racial stereotyping, and racial profiling of any kind. The statements attributed to the former employee concerning the race of an alleged suspect are deeply troubling and do not reflect our values."

Neighbor Lisa Clarks told Minneapolis new site City Pages, “The idea there were all these cops swarming around, looking in alleys and looking for a black male.... Everyone was so on edge and high-alert.

"When someone taps into realistic public shootings, things that seem to pop up too frequently, it’s a real concern that people have.

"I was angry that he subjected the entire neighborhood to this huge police presence, that people were afraid being out and about...and that he took it past that, into tapping into people’s racism."

(Newsweek)

China has limited access to a nature reserve on its border with North Korea after mysterious seismic shakes at the rogue nation's nuclear test site were detected less than 10 minutes after it launched a missile earlier this month.

Beijing reportedly closed the site over fears that underground detonations by the North Koreans at a facility near Punggye-ri could lead to rockslides and even trigger an eruption of the active volcano Mount Paektu, which is sacred to North Korea and located right on the border between the two countries.

The notices from Chinese authorities, restricting access to the Changbaishan National Nature Reserve, were posted on China’s state-regulated analog to Twitter Weibo, South Korea’s Donga Ilbo newspaper reported Thursday. It covers a radius of around 70 miles from the Punggye-ri test site.

"For the safety and convenience of travelers, we have temporarily closed the southern tourist zone of Changbai Mountain," read the message from Chinese authorities, translated by UPI. "Officials are thoroughly investigating the safety of the tourist area." The area will remain closed to the public until "the potential risks disappear," it said.

Weibo comments expressing fears over Pyongyang’s nuclear testing began disappearing from the social media platform, users noted. Beijing’s online censors often erase content unfavorable to the state’s agenda from the platform.

Besides radioactive risks—which could be contained inside the test facility—the shock of a large blast could disturb mountains in the Changbai range, including Paektu, an active volcano that last erupted in 1903.

A new article in scientific journal Nature’s Scientific Reports states that “an underground nuclear explosion test near an active volcano constitutes a direct threat."

It could “disturb the magma chamber of a volcano, thus accelerating the volcanic activity,” scientists argue.

For an individual nuclear detonation to do serious damage to the volcano, previous research shows, the blast would need to be at least 100 kilotons, which the explosion earlier this month was estimated to be.

The findings come as seismologist experts work to determine the impact of the blast on the environment around it, including the cause of a mysterious and significant, albeit weaker, second shake detected minutes after the nuclear blast. Researchers are debating a range of possibilities, from a possible tunnel collapse to a landslide or a rock splintering inside nearby Mount Mantap.

“This is an interesting mystery at this point,” Göran Ekström, a seismologist at Columbia University in New York City, told Nature.

The U.S. Geological Survey estimated the second burst of seismic energy, only eight and a half minutes after the detonation, had a magnitude of 4.1; the detonation itself registered at 6.3. While satellite images do show signs of structural collapse, the movement of rock more closely resembles a landslide.

(Newsweek)