Hurricane forecasts vs. global warming

[Abacouple]

Climate change flap may end expert's hurricane forecasts | Chron.com - Houston Chronicle (http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/front/5736103.html)

[SamFamAustin]

Goodness Dr. Gray is an irritable cuss! If you don't support him 100% he'll fly into a rage, cuss, and throw things - well proverbially of course but you get the picture. His temper is legendary. It's all about measurements versus climate and hurricane modeling. He hates modeling! Shaman and medicine men he calls them.

Unfortunately ... 'oh no Mr Bill' ... weathermen, climatologists, and hurricane experts have about 40 good models and another 60 experimental or outdated ones. In fact, a bunch of your taxpayer money went to huge super-computers located in Boulder (University or Colorado Atmospheric Research, UCAR) and Florida State University (in conjunction with the National Hurricane Center, NHC). Mr Bill, however, uses a very small database for 13 parameters that will fit on a regular old PC.

But fear not! None of the predictions really work! The best is probably done by the NHC in May and it goes downhill from there. Even Dr. Emmanuel of MIT confessed he was wrong about his climate theory, at least the extreme parts of it. So let's not make fun of ... 'oh no Mr Bill'!
-sams

[Sapelo Son]

I use “global warming” just like I use “religion”, and that is, to get through the day. I, unlike some, don’t need to know the age of the earth or when time will end.

When “global warming” is in effect, I’m headed to the beach!





Amen......

[SamFamAustin]

LOL, some of the Earth is warming and some is cooling and the science really isn't all that solid yet. Interestingly ... the hurricane boys and girls are now doing an excelling job on the 5-day forecasts and nail the target more often than they miss. Hot-dog they're good.

Well, except as DrRalph noted, landfall is like plus or minus 60 miles, I mean come on who really knows where those whirly-girlies are going? That's why the graphics show a cone where the hurricane could be, rather than a big red arrow saying "Little Town of Stuart, You Are Toast." :D
-sammie

[Island Daze]

it is all horshe**** and speculation and thr real raeson is advertising and the fear factor.Pesonally i could give two ****s how many storms there are or where they hit as long as they do not affect me or GTC.Selfish yes but in all honestly not.

[SamFamAustin]

ye, you're getting close, Island Daze, it's all about the money. They call it "carbon pricing." For all of what them Al Gore people say, we're going a pretty good job already at carbon pricing!

Looked at the price of fuel, electricity, bread, or stuff like that lately? Whoa, I don't need more regulations to make them more expensive.

As a scientist I do believe there is a global warming component because that's pure physics. But there are competing forces including my favorite, "global dimming." It means that as Sammie gets dumber, the world could get colder. :D

[Abacouple]

In my opinion (for what it's worth), the climate change/global warming is natural, cyclical, and not man-caused (what's the latest? 1 degree in 100 years?...yeah, we're doomed). We owe it to our sensibilities to be conservationists and not reckless and wasteful, but everything we do is not destroying the environment. Nature balances, recovers and renews itself with much more skill and thoroughness than man ever could. Are there disgusting examples of damage and waste? Of course. Are they the exception or the norm? I say the exception. All in all, this is overwhelmingly a beautiful world and will stay so by God's grace and not radical, Chicken-Little, alarmism.

[Sapelo Son]

Well said!

[dogfish]

Climate change is a completely natural process and if man were not on this earth the earth would still go through warming and cooling trends. However, our presence and our industrial activities do increase the rate of change and the amplitude of that change. 1 degree in 100 years is actually significant with respect the the global climate.

I commented on this because I am a meteorologist and have always had problems with Dr. Grey and his end of the world predictions. If you look at his beginning of the season forecast (comes out in May) you will see that this guy is about as accurate as someone taking the SATs without reading the questions. He "adjusts" his forecast every month of the season with the last "adjustment" coming in October. Now if you asked me to predict the total number of runs in a baseball game but allowed me to "adjust" that prediction every inning until the 8th I will look like some sort of baseball sage until you realize what I am actually doing.

The national weather service has better remote sensing and better equipment than they did many years ago. This has lead to many many storms being named and even being called hurricanes that would never have been named in the past. If you look at the duration of storms today they have dropped from 5 or 6 days down to around 3 days in recent years. That is not a huge drop but is a reflection of short duration storms getting classified as storms with new tools. Intense hurricane durations have gone up because these same tools have allowed hurricanes that never would have been classified as intense (cat 3 or higher) as intense even if it were only for a couple of hours.

Is there a correlation between more storms and global warming? Probably, but it would be measure on the scale of generations not years. Remember the dinosours suddenly disappeared from earth if you define suddenly as a period of several million years.

-Doug

[Abacouple]

Doug-

With your background, you may have an answer to this question: If the NWS's sensing equipment is better than it was in past years, is it possible that the temperature is now being measured more correctly than with the old equipment and even less (or more) has changed than many think? That is discounting the recent spoofs of allegedly improper placement of sensing equipment.

Just interested in a reasoned opinion from someone I'm sure knows more about it than I do.

Regards,

Chip

[DrRalph]

Folks, we'd like restrict this thread to hurricane prediction and meteorology. Unfortunately, the two major US political parties have opposite positions on global warming, and any discussion of such invokes partisan rhetoric, which we will avoid here. There are lots of venues on the 'Net whereby you can opine ad nauseum re global warming. We appreciate your cooperation.:)

[Wonkee]

Dr. Ralph I would like to respectfully request the removal of the words "Global Warming" from this thread. That is the catalist for the political aspect. As Glogal warning is a term coined and propigated by a Polititical figure. One cannot look at the Validity of the subject without first validating its source which is subject to proven inaccuries, and outright lies.

[SamFamAustin]

I think the main distinction is between the weather, what is happening right now and being recorded and sometimes predicted a few days into the future, and climatology. Many people are confused about climatology, as it is a different science relating to (1) properties of certain air masses and (2) very long terms trends for those air masses that happen over many years.

One way to see this clearly is to compare average monthly temperatures to "climo," a 30-year average which is considered more stable over time. That's where you'll see big cold blue dots over the nations upper mid-section, such as one right over Half and Wonkee's houses. And, you'll see a big red dot over Sammy's house because we had a warmer winter - and perhaps some refried frijole beans.

Hurricane experts have to look at both the weather and climo over the land as well as the oceans. So in answer to Abacouple's question, it could be that ocean temperatures are not as widely used in figuring mean global temperatures.

What we're seeing today - and this could change - is that the sea surface temperatures in hurricane alley (10 to 25 degrees north in the Atlantic) are running a few degrees cooler than climo, meaning less of a chance of early season hurricanes because they lack the necessary fuel.

It should be pointed out that early season hurricanes do not generally form in hurricane alley, but rather are washed out cold fronts that stall along the US coastline. These always start out as cold-core storms which can develop "sub-tropical" cyclones. If the area of low pressure becomes closed off and rotates with a warm core with winds over 74 knots, it is named a true hurricane. Our area of South Texas is more prone to these early season storms than the typical ones that can form in hurricane alley and recurve to Florida and the Bahamas. Last year's Sub-tropical Storm Andrea was such as cold-core cyclone that formed near the Bahamas and yes they even happen as far north as the Carolinas.

It's interesting stuff and there are many exceptions to the rules, and it is amazing how little we know about hurricanes - possibly because by definition they are a chaotic event, seemingly like a random chance. An interesting factoid is that many hurricane experts and hydrologists are hired by the insurance industry - not just NOAA or the National Weather Service. Those risk numbers come out of detailed maps and risk assessments ... which have translated directly into any insurance premiums on your coastal property. Ouch!
-sam

[dogfish]

The global temperatures are developed from literally millions individual readings over each year. As a modeler I can tell you that the more data you have the more accurate you information will be. But there is also a point of diminishing returns on this. Even 100 years ago there were just heapin's of inidividual temperature measurements throughout the world. So I would have to say that if NOAA says that the temperature has increased by X amount over Y amount of years than you can take that to the bank (as long as Y is relatively long - 10s of years). There are also many other ways to look at global climate that I can not pretend to understand like analyzing the chemical composition of ice deposits that of 100s and 1000s of years old.

An interesting thing about global warming is that although the northern reaches will initially develop very mild winters once the polar ice caps have melted and there is no longer a salinity difference between the atlantic waters and the polar (and north atlantic) waters the ocean currents that are responsible for moving vast amounts of thermal energy like the Gulf Stream will slow and maybe even stop. This will cause the weather in the northern reaches (and southern in the southern hemisphere) to experience extremely cold and harsh winters. These cold and harsh winters will reform the polar ice caps over time and the salinity difference will restart the gulf stream and other salinity driven currents which will move heat away from the sweltering equator and deliver it to the frigid poles and then 400 years from now some governement will be worried about global cooling.

-Doug

[SamFamAustin]

Thanks Doug ... and may I add that what your talking about is called "polar melt-water" which happens all the time. At 1-2 degrees C, maybe 33-35 F, that melt-water is very dense and sinks to the bottom of the ocean.

And circulates the globe.

You can find polar melt-water in the deep troughs off Hawaii or even off the Bahamas. We're talking about very deep water of several miles, and in general the circulation is cut off from the Gulf of Mexico by the Gulf Stream Loop Current. One enterprising company in Hawaii is manufacturing bottled polar melt-water from several miles deep in the ocean, which requires little treatment.
-sam

[BahamaAngie]

Sammie, you are so knowledgeable, like an encyclopedia but I guess now it would be like a computer. I guess encyclopedias are outdated.

[DrRalph]

Dr. Ralph I would like to respectfully request the removal of the words "Global Warming" from this thread. That is the catalist for the political aspect. As Glogal warning is a term coined and propigated by a Polititical figure. One cannot look at the Validity of the subject without first validating its source which is subject to proven inaccuries, and outright lies.

I understand your frustration, I have received comments from several members who are not happy with how we are managing this discussion. I learned a long time ago that you can ruin a good relationship through a heated exchange over politics or religion, hence our policy. This thread addresses Dr. Gray and how meteorologists predict the severity of tropical storms during a given time-frame. The related technical discussion addresses the impact of climate and sea surface temperatures. It is regrettable that the term "global warming" has become a buzzword for partisan conflict, but in the context of its use in the thread, we'll let it stand.

Again, we understand the concept is controversial, and would offer you a host of other web and media outlets whereby you can address the partisan aspects. I think we're going to leave that term in the remaining posts and simply ask that we not associate it with a political figure or ideology. We appreciate you cooperation and understanding.

[Abacoparrott]

Ralph, If I had used the term "worldwide temperature increase" would my posts have been deleted?? Ken:D

[Wonkee]

A man is being critisized for refusing to accept a concept that is not proven, and has more holes than a sieve, why becuase it is not popular, and is taking away from the colleges Media time when it is all about the bottom line.
What better way to make money than to buy "Carbon Futures" to offset the Carbon that is being released. So it is basically buying stocks of companies that use "Carbon Reduced" methods. Then start a world wide panic by developing a concept based on few facts, many that can not be duplicated, http://www.cfactcampus.org/index.php?option=com_docman&task=doc_view&gid=6&Itemid=61 "one of hundred of sources you can look at" or proven, a bunch of video that was stolen from a CGI company, Used in "The Day After Tomorrow" story broke by ABC, then tell them the only way to stop it is to stop using products that put of carbon. so they will buy products from the suggested list of companies that are "Carbon Friendly"
So I'll now take my lashes and put myself in time out for this subject.

[DrRalph]

Guys, we're just trying to run a web site here, and keep everyone reasonably happy; help us out, please.

[SamFamAustin]

The energy contained in a single Category 4-5 Hurricane is bigger than the largest atom bomb ever set off. Basically, the job of a hurricane is to equalize thermal heat up to 600 feet deep in the ocean and throw it up to over 15,000 to 20,000 feet in the air. Dr. Jeff Masters noted that on one Hurricane Hunter flight, the outside temperature at 500 feet was 82 degrees F and at 10,000 feet was nearly the same in the eye. The normal lapse rate is about 3.5 degrees per thousand feet so the temperature should have been 47 degrees F. Wow!

I'm still learning but that energy from the ocean doesn't just come from the surface, but a pool of water about 600 feet deep. In other words, the top water could be 84 degrees F but unless it was mixed down very deep, it would not make a big impact on a large storm. That explains why many hurricanes start dying at they approach the land in shallow waters, as they don't have the fuel from deep water heat content.

It also explains why sometimes the Bahamas gets nailed by intense hurricanes because very deep water with a very warm layer that surrounds the island chain. Let's not remember those, OK?

But the fascinating part is that hurricanes can cause cooling! After they pass with those gigantic waves and heavy winds, the ocean is mixed up where the water is several degrees cooler. Any heat that was pumped up from the ocean was sent up into the stratosphere, away from the lower layer where we live (the troposphere). This can help explain why some hurricanes that follow the exact track as a previous one, within weeks, can cause the second hurricane to die off and blow out towards sea as a "fish storm."

I keep learning and Dr. Gray is a huge authority on the subject, looking at things like El Nino and La Nina on the lower West Coast of the Pacific to see how those temperatures and wind sheer affect the Atlantic Basin. In other words, the heated top layer of water in the Pacific can impact what happens in the Atlantic's hurricane alley. The effect of those heated waters of certain temperatures and mixing depths depends on something called ocean oscillation, which seems to have various cycles of its own - and nothing to do with ...

Like the Fonz, I just can't say it!
-sam

[Abacoparrott]

I think most of us can agree that we all appreciate and respect the Dodge Cruising Guide and the information it provides. I imagine that most of us also respect the intellect and wisdom of Steve Dodge, publisher of the Guide and professor of History at a midwestern University.

On page 51 of the 2008 Abaco Cruising guide...I quote.."The present islands were built up higher than the rest of the banks when sea level was up to 100' higher than it is today. When the earth cooled and the polar ice caps re-formed, sea level declined leaving the limestone islands." hmmmm, it seems to me that the sea level rose 100' waaaayy before we had automobiles, factories, etc. I wonder what caused it then?

Thank you Mr Dodge.:D

Ken

[SamFamAustin]

Ah, veddy interesting. There have been several major episodes studied over the years, a field of research called paleo-climatology. Large volcanoes can cool the Earth. Magnetic poles shifted. Comets hit the Earth (talk about a bad day!). The sun flared or not. Different algae bloomed - a huge new frontier about algae and its effect on climate, brought to you by blue-green slime! Dinosaurs burped & farted. Plants decomposed.

None of it man-made, measured in centuries and millennia. I think the one that Mr. Dodge is referring to is the Cretaceous Period - or was it the Centozoic? I ain't going to Google it. That's when glaciers covered a good part of northern America, melted, formed the Mississippi, and drained down into the seas. Later, water levels dropped about 400 feet due to evaporation and such - the ocean used to come all the way past Austin, Texas, 400 miles inland. The shallow waters help great numbers of algae (remember them?) than when they died, formed calcium carbonate deposits we know today as limestone karst, which can be hollowed to form caves, blue holes, and the like. Cool, huh?

There was a good discussion on another thread about oil deposits under some of these limestone outcroppings, know as "reefs." The guy was a much better geologist than I could ever pretend to be. I'm just a Paleo-Dude. Translated, it means "old man." :D

[BahamaAngie]

Very interesting Sammie.

[Abacoparrott]

I KNEW we could trust 'ol Sammie to come up with some thought-provoking info.......never fails.....Ken:D

[PELLUCID]

According to the latest interpretations of ice cores and ocean sediments, the earth has been going through warm phases of about 10,000 years and cools phases of about 90,000 years for the past 800,000 years. Prior to that, the cool/warm phases were on a 40,000 year cycle through at least the past 3 million years or so.

You can google "Milancovitch Cycle" for all you care to read on the subject. The latest EPICA ice core drilling project in the Antarctic will attempt to retrieve million-year-old ice to test the theory that slowly declining CO2 levels are respsonsible for the shift from 40K to 100K cool/warm cycles, with an attendant increase in extremes between the two.

There is abundant evidence throughout the Bahamas of the +2 meter highstand that occurred during the previous interglacial, the Eemian, which was somewhat warmer than the present, the Holocene. During the Eemian, trees covered Siberia to the edge of the Arctic ocean.

There is somewhat scantier evidence here, and in Bermuda, that the Eemian ended in a rapid sea level rise from +2 meters to +6 meters. What evidence there is suggests this highstand lasted only a few centuries. It may have provided enough extra moisture over the northern high latitudes to increase snowfall and precipitate the last ice age.

It is possible, but by no means proven, that human-caused global warming will do the same thing in a few centuries. Northern hemisphere glaciation is caused more by snowfall patterns than by temperature changes. Paradoxically, if global warming melts all of the ice in the Arctic Ocean, there is a chance that the resulting increase in ocean evaporation will increase high latitude snowfall and form glaciers over Canada and Scandinavia. As water is transferred from ocean to glacier, the sea level slowly falls.

This would, over several millenia, transform today's Bahamian coral reefs into the edges of cliffs overlooking a much lower sea. Which has been the "normal" look of the Bahamas for several million years now.

To the best of my knowledge, all of what I have stated here is mainstream science. You can google any of the terms to get consensus and alternate opinions.

[HALF-A-HAMIAN]

The explanation to all, is in The Book.

[Wonkee]

Time out on my time out.......OK we are spending trillions to make sure that a Polar bear has a home in 1000 yrs. Meanwhile Gas prices Skyrocket, Half the world is Starving, People are being Massacared by the thousands, desease that can be cured with a simple 15 cent vaccine. I say Screw the Polar bear......Gasp. but wont it be sad when your Children only have the chance to see a Polar bear in a Book....Nope because if I keep spending all my money on the stupid bear then I wont be able to afford to have children, a safe place to raise them, or anything to feed them because the farmers are only growing fuel corn. WE need to worry about people first, take care of Our Species basic needs, then worry about a bear. Back in time out

[BahamaAngie]

I have to agree with you Wonkee, so I guess I will be in "time out" with you.

[Abacoparrott]

Watch out Doc.....might be a LOT of us in Time out:D :D Ken

[SamFamAustin]

LOL, good to know you're a human and have feelings! But err ... OK, back to climate and hurricanes. I found some of Pelllucid's comments quite interesting. Very slight changes in ocean circulation and heating can make a big difference in the number of hurricanes, as well as their intensity (low pressure) and size (miles in diameter). Currently we are in a cycle of high hurricane activity that started about 1995, and should continue a few more years. I don't know if this cycle has a name but is seems an accepted thang.

Interestingly, it could be global warming that ends the current high activity levels for hurricanes. This is conjectural on my part, but due to a freak of climatology, (1) the tropics will expand northward and tend to inhibit hurricanes, and (2) the northern tier of the US could actually get much colder. As these air masses collide we've already seen many tornadoes and huge thunderstorms - I think the US is up for a record-shattering year with tornadoes. Given that the action is shifting northward, several hurricane experts conclude that large, destructive hurricanes could be more likely along the middle and upper Eastern Seaboard. Yep, an uneducated guess but there's some thinking behind it.

Look out North Carolina and New Jersey!

There have been some big ones, such as the Great Hurricane of 1938 which cut Block Island in half and breached the barrier islands along Long Island in many places. They have happened although not as frequently, as most large cyclones tend to steer way off Nantucket and Newfoundland. The "Perfect Storm" was an example of a retrograde low that wandered east to west instead of the opposite direction as would be expected. It wasn't a tropical storm at the time but does show that storms can go in unexpected directions and intensities. Good book by the way, for you weather nuts.
-sam

[BahamaAngie]

Geez Sammie, that's a scary thought! We very rarely have anything like that. In the sixties or early seventies, they would get a very slight twister going through a street on the beach side. That was what they called it one year and that is the only thing I can remember. Except for lousy weather, we have always felt NJ to be one of the safer states! Oh My!

[SamFamAustin]

Well calm down, they are rare as chicken's teeth. But I remember two more recent tropical storms that came close to New England, one in 1973 or so and one in the 90's. The 1973 one was a near-miss but we had +75 knot winds on Montauk and Block Island. We had a few small boats like dinghies and sailboats so we swamped them at their moorings - can you imagine swamping a perfectly good boat on purpose? Well after taking off the little motors and checking them the next day, it proved to be a smart move. All the other boats had drifted anchor quite a bit or were solid gone!

Un-swamping a boat is another story and you'll have a buy me a Sands Beer for that one. ;)

[BahamaAngie]

Okayyyy, what is a "Sands Beer"? In the seventies we had a hurricane hit but we just ended up with tons of seaweed which we had to bag up like leaves and I do NOT remember anything in the 90's except a bad Northeatern in I believe it was December 1992. The bay was up to our patio doors just about. When we first moved here we thought that weather was soooo cool, now it is just a nuisance.

[SamFamAustin]

Sands is a newly licensed Bahamian beer made for a guy named Sands, of course ... not the stuff on a beach. My family prefers it to Kalik, as it has a wonderful micro-brewery taste instead of what is more like Corona. It depends on if you like a full-bodied beer or more of a lighter summertime "lawnmower beer." :eek:

And as to that stinky seaweed, some of the best potatoes, turnips, and vegetables are grown with seaweed used as a fertilizer ... the old timers used to farm seaweed by the truckload. On the French coast of Brittany they still do it the old fashioned way. You can wash off a potato and eat it like an apple, they are that good! :cool:
-sammie

[BahamaAngie]

I always thought Kalik reminded me of Corona. I am really not a beer drinker sometimes with a good sandwich, I like a Bud or something like that but it has to be a draft. I guess, I like a lighter tasting beer???

We have NOT had the seaweed like we use to I guess cause we haven't really had any storms lately but yeah, I agree, I think it helps in growing veggies.

[Charlotte Couple]

I prefer the Crustacean Period, every Tuesday night from 7 til 10, when it's all-you-can-eat Crab Legs.

[BahamaAngie]

Where is that CC? Did I miss a posting? Sounds good.:)

[Charlotte Couple]

Just making a joke about all the references to the various geologic periods in this thread.

[SamFamAustin]

I like my Crustaceous stuff subjected to very high heat, with rising waters, and finished with melted butter. I can eat them like a veritable hurricane!

Along with the Moldavian Wine Period, it can be quite delightful, although I must confess I am sometimes hoppy for a beer. Sometimes I just "cap and trade" ... what the heck it's a night out on the town.

Don't forget to add your 15% Carbon Tax for good service!!! :D
-sammie

[BahamaAngie]

Well, we went to a place in Kauai that was a buffet and it had prime rib and huge crab legs and unlimited champagne. It was $50 pp but well worth it! What a great buffet, never got past the crab legs. Had 3 chocolate covered strawberries from a chocolate fountain. What a phenonomenal (sp?) meal.

It is cocktail time here! Cheers everyone!

[Sapelo Son]

I can't belive ya'll are still talkin' bout this stuff,,,,,,"It's global warmin' time" I'm headed out in 7 Days!!!!!!!!!!!!

Gettin' Toasted,
Sapelo Son

[Abacoparrott]

Hey Sap......some of us can talk about the same thang for daaays............:D :D ken

[Wonkee]

I prefer the Crustacean Period, every Tuesday night from 7 til 10, when it's all-you-can-eat Crab Legs.

One Question, Is the Crustacean period between Kalik-o-Clock, and Rum Thirty?

[SamFamAustin]

I would think so, Wonkee, which is followed by karaoke in the "Cretin-aceous" Period starting at 10:00. :D

p.s. Sapelo Son - just got reports of chicken dolphin, ling, and skipjacks coming in closer in the Gulf green water. Marlin and tarpon will follow in their wake. Let the global warming proceed! -sammie

[Sapelo Son]

Catch'em up Sammie .......go man, go! Pull'in out in a couple of days.........headed out for a couple of week's to do some research on the combined effects of "Global Warming", "Hawaiian Tropic" and the latest in "String Bikini" beach wear.............anything for science!

[Wonkee]

I was wondering if anyone here was going to be here in 40,000 years to make sure that this whole Global warming thing works out, or if it really is just part of the Natural cycle... It would suck to find out that we were part of a standard deviation, of + or _ 1 or 2 degree over 100 years of a 40,000 to 80,000 year high to low cycle. Not saying that we are treating our invironment right, but we are looking at data from 1/4000th or.00025 to 1/8000th or .000125 of the standard time duration.

[SamFamAustin]

You have a point that I debate the enviro-extremists with all the time. It is a well known fact that given ambient air temperatures over time, the temperature has jumped a whole bunch in certain areas such as the Arctic. So far nobody can answer "how much of that is man-made?"

Don't be fooled by global mean averages based on a bazillion temperature recordings of the air. Those change like you say, 0.02 degrees over a long time. That's stupid science, because in some places like Alaska and Siberia, the temperature rose like 8 degrees over just a few years, resulting in massive ice and permafrost melting.

At the same time, parts of the world are getting much colder. I bet in parts of Kansas you were 2 to 5 degrees below normal, right? I bet you couldn't wait the the trees to start blooming, right?

So it's best to call it "climate change" because that's always happening and always will. The big problem I see - and this is related to the discussion of climate change and hurricanes - is the role of the oceans and ocean currents. Those currents such as the Gulf Stream act as giant heat conveyor belts all the way to north, even keeping places like Sweden relatively warm. Has anybody looked at ocean currents to explain Climate Change in a definitive manner?

No that I know of, my friend. It is a huge area of speculation. The IPCC, a panel of the smartest climatologists in the world, couldn't even predict the warming of the Arctic. Doh, is it the water, too, those massive ocean currents? Are too many people peeing in the Gulf Stream or what? :D
-sammie

[Sapelo Son]

If that is the case Sammie then it surely isn't the IPCC, it must be the ICPP....

[PELLUCID]

"In the long run, we're all dead" -- economist J.K.Galbraith, responding to criticism that his predictions did not take a long enough view.

The Bahamas is a pleasant and benign spot now compared to what it was just a few thousand years ago. Take a look at the high sand dunes which have only recently turned to rock on a number of the windward cays. Imagine the sea level 25 feet lower than today, and the howling storms coming off the Atlantic which piled the dunes up. Of course, compared to the 100-foot walls of water that came rushing down the Columbia River as glacial lakes collapsed, perhaps it was not so bad.

The first people here must have asked themselves "We walked all the way across the Bering Strait for THIS???"

[SamFamAustin]

If that is the case Sammie then it surely isn't the IPCC, it must be the ICPP....

You see WHAT? :eek:

[Wonkee]

I just recal how when I was in Grade School, I was told that I would never graduate High School, and was going to be a no good that would never amount to anything. It was all based on how I preformed during a short period of time, and only according to a certian set of Criteria, that looked for a certian aspect of Intelegence. That Teacher was invited, yet declined to attend my College Graduation....If we only are looking for data that supports Climate Change, and only focus on those few specifics, and then when we have the data base all models, on the worst case scenero, then we will always see the worst case presented inconviently as the truth. The Autistic student I work with has many behaviors which one might find disturbing, and when he was last observed he displayed Violent tendencies, as he was in a very uncomfortable situation, based on the fact that strangers, were following him, and he has a severe dislike for people being in his personal space uninvited. Now they wrote a repot that said he needed to be secluded due to his violent nature and tendencies, however he has less than one violent behavior per School Quarter. which is less than many undiagnosed students. They were looking for a particular type of behavior, and when they saw that behavior they decided to take the most extreme view and say he was a danger to others. It was all based on information recorded on one short period of time, and assumed to be the norm. Same thing with the Climatoligist in many cases, they are looking for Variations of weather outside of a certian range, and when they find it they highlight it and draw a conclusion, the most extreme at that, on the data outside the normal rather than looking at all data sets.

Agian, I do believe that we can do much more to protect our environment, from cleaner burning fuels, less pesticides, recycling, better water managment, and a thousand little things that are so Easy. I also believe that we have created Global hot spots due to the Refractive heat of cities, and large industrial areas. But do not feel that what we are doing is any more than nature has done in the past by itself. or will do in the future to "Cleanse" itself. Hurricanes to stabalize, water tempatured, as well as atmosphere, Floods to naturally replenish the soil, and many other natural occurances that ultimately help the earth to renew itself.

[PELLUCID]

Wonkee - what you describe, naturally, has a name -- "Confirmation Bias".

It's the tendency to interpret new information in a way that confirms one's prior beliefs. Wikipedia has plenty of links, and you can Google more: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias

I think it's one of the oldest human errors, and I find it quite useful in evaluating what others tell me.

[SamFamAustin]

That said, and a good point, what many experts in the field of climate see is a very clear correlation between CO2 atmospheric levels and temperature rise. So yes, some use inductive thinking or as you say cognitive bias but other see a very strong correlation. The strongest evidence comes from ice cores taken for the Arctic, which can be fairly well dated using very good science and advanced carbon dating techniques.

Unfortunately, correlation (A seems to happen with B most of the time) does not prove causation (A causes B all the time). Indeed, very few things and theories in theoretical science (as applied to applied engineering, etc.) can be proven with pure causation. It is perhaps one of the Seven Deadly Sins to confuse correlation with causation.

But let me press the case that since mankind has started burning all kinds of fossil fuels, which started in a big way in the latter 1800's with the Industrial Revolution, both CO2 levels and ambient temperatures have been rising when trended over the entire time period. Sure there are some peaks and valleys such as a very cold spell in the late 1940's but shoot a line over the data from 1880 to 2007 and it is conclusive: there is a very strong correlation here. To ignore that would be unscientific and bogus.
-sammie

[Abacoparrott]

According to info that I have read.....CO2 levels began rising 8,000 years ago.....3000 years later, a rise in methane. Annd, you're not gonna believe this, the scientist who discovered this blamed it on humans. It seems they cut down a few trees to make room to plant their crops! It also seems to me that if it can't be explained any other way then it MUST be humans. I guess that we are simply not supposed to be here.....:D

[Beer Baron]

I think Sap has it right... if da globe is warmin, to da beach we swarmin!!

[BahamaAngie]

I think Sap has it right... if da globe is warmin, to da beach we swarmin!!



Sounds good to this simpleton!;)

[SamFamAustin]

I can correlate with dat, mon!

[Wonkee]

Every time I am in a doctors office I am sick, but it dosnt mean the doctor is making me sick. Every day on the way to work there is Bumper to bumper traffic, and every day there is the same Yellow, and black Scion Xb it is his fault because Xb's always cause traffic jambs, Every time I get into water at the pool there is a fat kid and I get wet, So Fat kids are the reason I get wet at the pool. On everyone of these there is a 1:1 correlation, and the consistancy is 100% but I just chose a random factor that was consistant with my theroy that had a high corelation, it is not the Xb's fault, The Doctors, fault, it may be the Fat kids fault, but not likely... Correlation proves that two event happened at the same time.

[PELLUCID]

If you want more confirmation for your bias that global warming is bogus, here is an interesting article by an Australian who believes that the continued delay in the start of Solar Cycle 24 heralds a new solar minimun and an era of global cooling: http://www.warwickhughes.com/agri/Solar_Arch_NY_Mar2_08.pdf (http://www.warwickhughes.com/agri/Solar_Arch_NY_Mar2_08.pdf)

Be warned that it is not IPCC-approved mainstream science. "Barmy" I believe is the British term, but some of his stuff is worth reading.

Personally, I take a much more sanguine view than the alarmists. I think we've caused some warming, and we'll cause some more, but it will turn out to be a lot cheaper to deal with the consequences of warming than it will be to stop the warming. The IPCC has backed way off of its earlier predictions of runaway ice melting and sea level rise. There just isn't anything in the geologic record to support that happening, given the present land/ocean/ice configuration. Numeric models are useful tools, but they are always trumped by empiric evidence.

When I say "it will be a lot cheaper" what I mean is that it will free up resources to deal with more pressing problems. I'd much rather end malaria or tuburculosis or nutrient deficiency than global warming, personally. See http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121141221734512357.html?mod=opinion_main_comment aries for a good summary of why global warming is not at the top of my list of worries.

[SamFamAustin]

Who am I to diss any opinions? Personally, I thing there are two mindsets about climate change.

First is the "freaky weather" platform, which seems to hold true for the mid latitudes - and even tornadoes in central Colorado, which are very rare.

Then there is the entropy camp, which believes that weather will almost come to a standstill. If you've lived in Australia with their extreme drought you might agree. That area used to have some humongous storms!

Nobody can doubt that the climatology is changing here and there, and almost everyone has their own personal take on it. We are just some super-smart chimpanzees trying to make sense of something that ultimately, we will never know.

That makes the game fun!
-sammie

[Wonkee]

If you want more confirmation for your bias that global warming is bogus, here is an interesting article by an Australian who believes that the continued delay in the start of Solar Cycle 24 heralds a new solar minimun and an era of global cooling: http://www.warwickhughes.com/agri/Solar_Arch_NY_Mar2_08.pdf (http://www.warwickhughes.com/agri/Solar_Arch_NY_Mar2_08.pdf)

Be warned that it is not IPCC-approved mainstream science. "Barmy" I believe is the British term, but some of his stuff is worth reading.

Personally, I take a much more sanguine view than the alarmists. I think we've caused some warming, and we'll cause some more, but it will turn out to be a lot cheaper to deal with the consequences of warming than it will be to stop the warming. The IPCC has backed way off of its earlier predictions of runaway ice melting and sea level rise. There just isn't anything in the geologic record to support that happening, given the present land/ocean/ice configuration. Numeric models are useful tools, but they are always trumped by empiric evidence.

When I say "it will be a lot cheaper" what I mean is that it will free up resources to deal with more pressing problems. I'd much rather end malaria or tuburculosis or nutrient deficiency than global warming, personally. See http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121141221734512357.html?mod=opinion_main_comment aries for a good summary of why global warming is not at the top of my list of worries.

Thank You Sir...That was my point with the Polar bear comments earlier, we have millions of things that are far more important that we are not dealing with. You know little things like Cancer, Heart desease, AIDS & HIV, Starvation...
About those Polar bears. I do not subscribe to Evolution on a large scale, I do not feel that animals will change species, or Family. But Isnt it part of the whole theroy that the Polar bears that are born in the sucessive generations as it "Warms" will have thinner fur, and develope new abilities in order to adapt to the change? I just remember that rabbit in the pictures of the science book, that starts out brown with a thin fur, and on the other side of the Gap is the rabbit that has a huge thick fur coat that is all white because it was caught on the side with all the snow, and cold... And then reading Darwin's "Theory" on evolution. which by the way he mentions that it was God that made it all possible. Where he shows how the Finches had to adapt, so they did. Nature Made the Dinosaurs Extinct not humans, and it was a natural event that killed them all...So just remember we can spend all our resoources trying to stop what nature will do eventually by its self, or we can take care of the people that are riding it out in the mean time.

[theKurp]

Thank You Sir...That was my point with the Polar bear comments earlier, we have millions of things that are far more important that we are not dealing with. You know little things like Cancer, Heart desease, AIDS & HIV, Starvation...
<snip>
So just remember we can spend all our resoources trying to stop what nature will do eventually by its self, or we can take care of the people that are riding it out in the mean time.

The rates of cancer and heart disease would decline dramatically if people just took care of themselves.

[Wonkee]

The rates of cancer and heart disease would decline dramatically if people just took care of themselves.

I agree completly, and I also feel that it is the individuals job to insure they do what is necessary.
At the same time I work in an Inner city school with an average income level that is less than 20k for 4 persons. they have a whole 5k a year each to feed, clothe Transport, insure, and supply the needs. Then throw in the fact that of those Children it is known that in our district that over 65% are living in home where there is Drug use and dependency problems. These Children are sitting in homes without power, without Water, and filled with Drugs. Many of these homes are Drug Labs, 14 homes were raided and shut down this school year, displacing 23 children. No one is taking care of these Children, until they are old enough to get out on thier own they are at the mercy of thier Parents. The Classroom that I work in is a Special Education room, it is there for Mental and Physically handicaped students. half of those students have Autism, Brought on by Birth or another cause it is not thier, or thier parents fault. We have 3 students this year that were born with Holes in thier Heart, and will most likely die before adulthood without a Transplant. One of my students from last year died from Childhood Lukemia this past month. And his sister whom his parents had in hopes of having a marrow donner has been diagnosed with Lukemia as well. In parts of Africa 1 out of 4 children are orphans because of AIDS. and they have a greater than 50% chance of dying of AIDS themselves.
My Favorite College Professor was diagnosed with a Geoblastoma multiforma type 4 brain tumor. He never smoked, or drank a single time in his life, He was at the Gym 5 days a week, He was a Certified Golf Teaching Pro who Golfed 6 days a week. The picture of health. Becaue he was in such good shape before the onset, he managed to live a full 7 months.
They spend Billions to reasearch something that we will never be able to stop,because it is part of the earths natural cycle, while Children, and people who have done all they can to prevent desease Die, because this weeks hot topic is "Polar Bears Endangered".

[SamFamAustin]

Thank you Wonkee - Craig - for the post. I hear lots of giant plans to "fix the world" but meanwhile, things in some urban and rural areas are truly horrendous, the US living itself like a third world country. Remember, I live right next to the famed Colonias of South Texas near the border, so I know bad when I see it as well. It is truly depressing.

And take carbon dioxide such as from power plants, refineries, and motor vehicles. For years carbon monoxide - a gas that can kill people - was "fixed" by turning carbon monoxide into carbon dioxide. If you look at air quality in the US, it is better than the last 30 years. But that's for ozone, carbon monoxide, and particulate (which most people just call smoke). On a rate basis, carbon dioxide emissions zoomed as a result.

Why? Well all fuel has a carbon content and if burned, most will end up as carbon dioxide and some hydrocarbon, carbon monoxide, and particulate would result in very small quantities. For example, diesel fuel is about 86% carbon content and over 97 percent of that carbon goes up the flume or out the pipes as carbon dioxide. Given the statistics, it is amazing that ozone, carbon monoxide, and particulate got ANY better over the least 30 years.

One of my professor associates recently told me that if you want to fix carbon dioxide emissions, you have to get rid of all those nice rules for ozone, carbon monoxide, and particulate. You just can't do both at once! All that energy spent on catalysts, scrubbers, electrostatic precipitators, and so forth just makes it worse.

But getting back to Wonkee, let me ask the question about 'who lives in the depressed areas around heavy industry?' One of the reasons I have a job is because some lawyers volunteered for some poor people in Wilmington near the Port of Los Angeles - and won. Those ships caused all kinds of pollution and the Wilmington population reflected it. Severe asthma was a leading problem - have you ever seen a kid turn blue from such an attack?

So I am a realist about these social and economic issues even though I wish that more nuclear, wind, solar, and water technology could replace a bunch of the power we demand for our dwellings, businesses, and vehicles. -sammie

[theKurp]

I hear you Wonkee, and I feel the same empathy you do. It all comes down to what is gained in return for dollars spent - or return on investment.

I'm not smart enough or informed enough to have a fully educated opinion, but what's been nagging me for years is how we have found money to fund the war in Iraq when all the things that you have mentioned continue to plague not only the people here in the U.S., but people worldwide.

I know it's simplistic for me to think in these terms but I can't help but think about the return on investment on the $500 billion spent so far on the war verses applying that same amount on the things that you have mentioned. Some estimates have the total price tag on the Iraq war going as high as $3 trillion before it's all over.

For me the bottom line is, which would have benefited humanity the most? Or taking even a more myopic view, which would have benefited the U.S. the most? I don't pretend to know the answer, but the question haunts me nonetheless.

[HALF-A-HAMIAN]

You must note, however, there have been no more attacks on US soil. True, we have lost a high number of troops, but considering the amount lost in one attack in NY, if we did not carry the fight to them, where would we be? Look at the number lost in Nam, when we weren't attacked. Should that money be spent supporting those volunteer troupes, who are making it possible for this discussion, or throw it at some spotted owls and polar bears? The liberal lean is animals over people, and people need their guidance to function. The people need to be lead, they need socialized medicine, they need to be taxed more, so they work more, to keep them out of trouble. They need to be.....lemmings! We need to take a more active role informing ourselves, and put in term limits...at the ballot box! Insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different outcome. Has there been any difference since YOUR elected Congressperson was first elected?

[Wonkee]

Some estimates have the total price tag on the Iraq war going as high as $3 trillion before it's all over.

Interesting facts. The US deficit is in the trillions, and we blame a war in Iraq...Check this out, and tell me where is our money going..

1. $11 Billion to $22 billion is spent on welfare to illegal aliens each year. http://tinyurlcom/zob77 (http://tinyurlcom/zob77)

2. $2.2 Billion dollars a year is spent on food assistance programs such as food stamps, WIC, and free school lunches for illegal aliens. http://www.cis.org/articles/2004/fiscalexec.html (http://www.cis.org/articles/2004/fiscalexec.html)

3. $2.5 Billion dollars a year is spent on Medicaid for illegal aliens. http://www.cis.org/articles/2004/fiscalexec.html (http://www.cis.org/articles/2004/fiscalexec.html)

4. $12 Billion dollars a year is spent on primary and secondary school education for children here illegally and they cannot speak a word of English! http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0604/01/ldt.0.html (http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0604/01/ldt.0.html)

5. $17 Billion dollars a year is spent for education for the American-born children of illegal aliens, know n as anchor babies.
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0604/01/ldt.01.html (http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0604/01/ldt.01.html)

6. $3 Million Dollars a DAY is spent to incarcerate illegal aliens. http://transcriptscnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0604/01/ldt.01.html (http://transcriptscnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0604/01/ldt.01.html)

7. 30% percent of all Federal Prison inmates are illegal aliens. http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0604/01/ldt.01.html (http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0604/01/ldt.01.html)

8. $90 Billion Dollars a year is spent on illegal aliens for Welfare & social services by the American taxpayers.
http://premium.cnn.com/TRANSCIPTS/0610/29/ldt.01.html (http://premium.cnn.com/TRANSCIPTS/0610/29/ldt.01.html)

9. $200 Billion Dollars a year in suppressed American wages are caused by the illegal aliens.
http ://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0604/01/ldt.01.html (http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0604/01/ldt.01.html)

10. The illegal aliens in the United States have a crime rate that's two and a half times that of white non-illegal aliens. In particular, their children, are going to make a huge additional crime problem in the US.
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0606/12/ldt.01.html (http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0606/12/ldt.01.html)

11. The National Policy Institute, "estimated that the to tal cost of mass deportation would be between $206 and $230 billion, or an average cost of between $41 and $46 billion annually over a five year period." http://www.nationalpolicyinstitute.org/PDF/deportation.pdf (http://www.nationalpolicyinstitute.org/PDF/deportation.pdf)

12. In 2006, illegal aliens sent home $45 BILLION in remittances back to their countries of origin. http://www.rense.com/general75/niht.htm (http://www.rense.com/general75/niht.htm)

13. "The Dark Side of Illegal Immigration: Nearly One Million Sex Crimes Comm itted by Illegal Immigrants In The United States!" http://www.drdsk.com/articleshtml (http://www.drdsk.com/articleshtml)

The total cost is a WHOPPING $338.3 BILLION DOLLARS A YEAR!!!
now multiply that by 5 the number of years we have been in Iraq...$or 1.6915 trillion....
Now add to that...Although no formal records are kept and numbers are based on police arrest, and prison records Illegal Immigrants kill an average of 12 people a day if correct that is 4,380 a year. since the war started 3/19/03 there have been 4080 deaths 3327 in combat and 506 in Afghanistan for a total of 4586 deaths over 5 years.
Illegals in 5 years have killed an estimated 21,900 people. more than the insurgents in Iraq.
Now tell me that the War in Iraq is why our deficet is so High.
and by the way throw the cost of Katrina, the California wildfires, Earthquakes, Tornados, over the the past 5 years....

[HALF-A-HAMIAN]

Gotta love documented facts!

[DrRalph]

Folks, this has now gone way past climate change, we specifically ask you to leave the War out of the Forum; this thread is done.