Renewed flooding in Sri Lanka kills 11, affects 1.05 million

By: Dr. Jeff Masters , 10:21 AM GMT on February 07, 2011

Share this Blog
4
+

Renewed flooding in Sri Lanka due to heavy monsoon rains has killed at least 11 people and inundated the homes of 1.05 million people over the past week. The floods occurred over the central, north, and east portions of the island, and have the potential to devastate the rice crop and cause hundreds of millions in damage. Many of the areas affected were also hard-hit by January's 100-year flood, which killed 43 people, affected over 1 million people, and did at least $500 million in damage. Those floods destroyed 21% of Sri Lanka's rice crop. Heavy rains from the annual northeastern monsoon are common in the region from December through February, but this year's rains have been enhanced by the strong La NiƱa event occurring in the Eastern Pacific. According to the United Nations, the rains in January in Sri Lanka were the heaviest in nearly 100 years of record keeping. The flood that resulted was a 1-in-100 year event, according to The U.N. Global Disaster Alert and Coordination System. Rainfall at Batticaloa, Sri Lanka, during the 42-day period December 1 - January 12 was 1606 mm (63"), which is about how much rain the station usually receives in an entire year (1651 mm, or 65".) Satellite estimates of rainfall over Sri Lanka for the first week of February show that up to 12 inches (300 mm) of rain has fallen. The latest rainfall forecast from the GFS model projects that a tropical disturbance (91B) near Sri Lanka will bring an additional 1 - 3 inches of rain to the flood area this week, so the flood waters will be slow to recede.


Figure 1. AP video of the latest flooding in Sri Lanka.

Jeff Masters

Reader Comments

Comments will take a few seconds to appear.

Post Your Comments

Please sign in to post comments.

or Join

Not only will you be able to leave comments on this blog, but you'll also have the ability to upload and share your photos in our Wunder Photos section.

Display: 0, 50, 100, 200 Sort: Newest First - Order Posted

Viewing: 175 - 125

Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5Blog Index

Quoting caneswatch:
Two questions, this should stump someone here:

1. The Turkey Point Nuclear Power Plant was hit by the severe part of Hurricane Andrew and yet, it wasn't significantly damaged and a bigger disaster was avoided. How so?

2. From Wiki:

The highest recorded surface gust, within Andrew's northern eyewall, occurred at the home of a resident about a mile from the shoreline in Perrine, Florida. During the peak of the storm, a gust of 212 miles per hour (341 km/h) was observed before both the home and anemometer were destroyed. Subsequent wind-tunnel testing at Clemson University of the same type of anemometer revealed a 16.5% error. The observed value was officially corrected to be 177 miles per hour (285 km/h).

Since Andrew was so powerful, what if it was 212 mph?
It is my belief that there were gusts over 200 mph during Andrew, and probably higher. If my long term memory still works, I believe one of the giant stacks there was demolished because of structural damage. Those are not cheap. I drove right by the plant after the hurricane. The destruction in that area was so bad, It taxes satisfactory verbal description .
Member Since: September 27, 2007 Posts: 1 Comments: 20493
Quoting caneswatch:
Two questions, this should stump someone here:

1. The Turkey Point Nuclear Power Plant was hit by the severe part of Hurricane Andrew and yet, it wasn't significantly damaged and a bigger disaster was avoided. How so?

2. From Wiki:

The highest recorded surface gust, within Andrew's northern eyewall, occurred at the home of a resident about a mile from the shoreline in Perrine, Florida. During the peak of the storm, a gust of 212 miles per hour (341 km/h) was observed before both the home and anemometer were destroyed. Subsequent wind-tunnel testing at Clemson University of the same type of anemometer revealed a 16.5% error. The observed value was officially corrected to be 177 miles per hour (285 km/h).

Since Andrew was so powerful, what if it was 212 mph?


Member Since: September 10, 2007 Posts: 0 Comments: 10972
Quoting hydrus:
Good evening Gro...With a name like Imodium, one might not think so.

I was thinking that as well.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Two questions, this should stump someone here:

1. The Turkey Point Nuclear Power Plant was hit by the severe part of Hurricane Andrew and yet, it wasn't significantly damaged and a bigger disaster was avoided. How so?

2. From Wiki:

The highest recorded surface gust, within Andrew's northern eyewall, occurred at the home of a resident about a mile from the shoreline in Perrine, Florida. During the peak of the storm, a gust of 212 miles per hour (341 km/h) was observed before both the home and anemometer were destroyed. Subsequent wind-tunnel testing at Clemson University of the same type of anemometer revealed a 16.5% error. The observed value was officially corrected to be 177 miles per hour (285 km/h).

Since Andrew was so powerful, what if it was 212 mph?
Member Since: October 8, 2008 Posts: 14 Comments: 4553
If anyone is interested. Not brand new, but an interesting read on solar irradiance from past cycles :)

ftp://ftp.ngdc.noaa.gov/STP/SOLAR_DATA/SOLAR_IRRADIANCE/ACRIM3/ACRIM%232002GL016038%20Secular%20tot al%20solar%20irradiance%20trend%20during%20solar%20cycles%2021%E2%80%9323.pdf

Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Grothar:


So the Imodium really does work?
Good evening Gro...With a name like Imodium, one might not think so.
Member Since: September 27, 2007 Posts: 1 Comments: 20493
Quoting JFLORIDA:


Drought is a longer term absence of moisture.

BTW its amusing you cant even get the climate right:





I see moderate drought in the south. Not the east. Also the US situation is not the world situation.

Again.

World WV is documented up by as much as 4 percent. So again you are completely incorrect levi.


When did I ever speak of the "world" or the entire global climate? Please tell me that. You're putting words in my mouth again, and I don't appreciate it.
Member Since: November 24, 2005 Posts: 635 Comments: 26547
Quoting Grothar:


So the Imodium really does work?

hehehehhhh.
Nice weather again today.
Max temp 88f
20 mph winds easterly (big waves, to 12 feet in open waters)
Occasional showers.
Great visibility.
Bliss!
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting pottery:

Sorry, I got called away...
But, LOL!


So the Imodium really does work?
Member Since: July 17, 2009 Posts: 69 Comments: 25345
Quoting Grothar:


I remember that night well. Some were a little too relentless. We all goof up sometimes. I did once in 1962. J/K You're doing OK, Levi, but open your mind to all possibilities. When I would give my students debate subjects, I would always assign a subject to which they did not believe and made them argue the pro side and vice versa. It worked out well. They learned much more from arguing the opposite side since it made them more open to argument. It is commendable that you have a strong stance. However, there always exists the other side may have some credence as well. When I was 20, I thought I knew everything. That didn't actually happen until I was 40. LOL


I understand. However, I think there are more than enough people on the "other side," don't you? More than enough. I think I'll just chill over here on the other side of the class for a while and try to keep it balanced, something that is becoming very difficult to do.
Member Since: November 24, 2005 Posts: 635 Comments: 26547
Quoting Grothar:


Come on, pot, we have vast forests left. See below.

Quoting GeoffreyWPB:


Imodium A-D works for me.
Quoting hydrus:
Dont eat so many pretzels..Wuzup Pott.

Sorry, I got called away...
But, LOL!
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Levi32:


This is true, but if it is questionable I always check their legitimate sources at the bottom of their page first. And yes, that is something I failed to do before posting when I checked what the mass of the Earth's atmosphere was. I didn't double-check until after the fact, and look at what that got me into that day.


I remember that night well. Some were a little too relentless. We all goof up sometimes. I did once in 1962. J/K You're doing OK, Levi, but open your mind to all possibilities. When I would give my students debate subjects, I would always assign a subject to which they did not believe and made them argue the pro side and vice versa. It worked out well. They learned much more from arguing the opposite side since it made them more open to argument. It is commendable that you have a strong stance. However, there always exists the other side may have some credence as well. When I was 20, I thought I knew everything. That didn't actually happen until I was 40. LOL
Member Since: July 17, 2009 Posts: 69 Comments: 25345
Quoting beell:
From an operational meteorology perspective, PW is usually derived from the lowest 400 or 500 mb of atmosphere.

The anomaly chart is labeled "Surface PW". Not sure how that is measured but would expect it to be a low value given the dry, somewhat stable surface air that has been the rule over the gulf coast. There is moisture present but not much at/near the surface.

Just a thought.


I don't know, but an extremely small fraction of the atmosphere's total water vapor content is contained above 500mb (~6km).

Member Since: November 24, 2005 Posts: 635 Comments: 26547
Quoting Grothar:



Go to bed!


No.........
Member Since: October 8, 2008 Posts: 14 Comments: 4553
With respect to our Sun, this item got into position and started beaming back goodies yesterday.

http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/stereo/main/index.html

Pretty cool stuff, live no less :)



135--- 2% of what when?
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Grothar:



I do when I agree with it. I don't go with Wiki when I disagree. It's just the way I am. I think I have see you quote Wiki once or twice.


This is true, but if it is questionable I always check their legitimate sources at the bottom of their page first. And yes, that is something I failed to do before posting when I checked what the mass of the Earth's atmosphere was. I didn't double-check until after the fact, and look at what that got me into that day.
Member Since: November 24, 2005 Posts: 635 Comments: 26547
Quoting Xyrus2000:


Do we really need to go over the difference between weather and climate AGAIN.

Anyone who is directly attributing the past couple of winters worth of heavy snow events to global warming doesn't know what they are talking about. YOU CANNOT DO THIS. Nor are climate scientists doing it. They can speculate and hypothesize, but two years is not climatologically significant. Neither is five years, or even ten years. If in 20 years we see the 2010 decade as the start for more extreme weather, then we can say that these storms were INFLUENCED by climate change.

This is a point also made repeatedly by Dr. M. There is not enough data over the past ten years to definitively declare that extreme weather events are a result of global warming.

Also, Al Gore was making a general comment about what climate scientists expect to happen as the globe warms. He was not referring to the recent snow storms in particular.

I'm also pretty sure you know Levi, that you don't need continuous record moisture to generate a massive snow dump, anymore than you need it for big floods. If you usually get 6 inches of water equivalent precip in the winter, you could only get 4 inches and still wind up with 4 8"+ snow events. However, in order to get that you need an atmosphere capable of hanging on to that much moisture.


No mention of the 60-year reanalysis graph? I see no global warming-induced moisture increase there.

And saying that they don't attribute these recent winters to global warming is bologna. They always bring it up whenever some major weather event happens. A couple years ago (before the record snowfall winters) I heard nothing but stories from climate scientists about snow disappearing.
Member Since: November 24, 2005 Posts: 635 Comments: 26547
Quoting caneswatch:


LOL, good one.



Go to bed!
Member Since: July 17, 2009 Posts: 69 Comments: 25345
156. beell
From an operational meteorology perspective, PW is usually derived from the lowest 400 or 500 mb of atmosphere.

The anomaly chart is labeled "Surface PW". Not sure how that is measured but would expect it to be a low value given the dry, somewhat stable surface air that has been the rule over the gulf coast. There is moisture present but not much at/near the surface.

Just a thought.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting caneswatch:


LOL, good one.


The power of suggestion. Be back in a minute.
Member Since: September 10, 2007 Posts: 0 Comments: 10972
Quoting hydrus:
I thought precipitable water is what happens after a case of beer...


You are getting that confused with "panic mode"
Member Since: July 17, 2009 Posts: 69 Comments: 25345
Quoting hydrus:
I thought precipitable water is what happens after a case of beer...


LOL, good one.
Member Since: October 8, 2008 Posts: 14 Comments: 4553
Quoting Levi32:


American Meteorological Society is an unknown source? And you really are gonna go with Wiki on this one?



I do when I agree with it. I don't go with Wiki when I disagree. It's just the way I am. I think I have see you quote Wiki once or twice.
Member Since: July 17, 2009 Posts: 69 Comments: 25345
From the NOAA glossary.....

"PWAT
Precipitable Water - measure of the depth of liquid water at the surface that would result after precipitating all of the water vapor in a vertical column over a given location, usually extending from the surface to 300 mb.
"

Precipitating can mean any non-vapor form of water falling to the ground. I'm pretty sure I know my basic meteorological terms up and down.
Member Since: November 24, 2005 Posts: 635 Comments: 26547
Quoting Grothar:


Unknown source

Precipitable water is the depth of the amount of water in a column of the atmosphere if all the water in that column were precipitated as rain. As a depth, the precipitable water is measured in millimeters or inches.

I thought precipitable water is what happens after a case of beer...
Member Since: September 27, 2007 Posts: 1 Comments: 20493
Like this?


Member Since: July 17, 2009 Posts: 69 Comments: 25345
Quoting DontAnnoyMe:


LOL best sitcom ending, ever.

Evening, folks.


Ka-Ching!
Member Since: September 10, 2007 Posts: 0 Comments: 10972




We have Cypress Swamps to Pine Forest to Large Oaks Older than America easily..
and Xmas trees too.
Member Since: July 3, 2005 Posts: 420 Comments: 127543
Quoting Grothar:


Unknown source

Precipitable water is the depth of the amount of water in a column of the atmosphere if all the water in that column were precipitated as rain. As a depth, the precipitable water is measured in millimeters or inches.



American Meteorological Society is an unknown source? And you really are gonna go with Wiki on this one?
Member Since: November 24, 2005 Posts: 635 Comments: 26547
Quoting Levi32:
By the way, I'm sure most of you have seen or heard of this story, which is the same explanation we've been hearing from most climate scientists regarding all the snow in the U.S. the past couple of winters. Dr. Masters also supported the idea of heavier snows due to increased moisture around the U.S. from a warming world.

Al Gore - "In fact, scientists have been warning for at least two decades that global warming could make snowstorms more severe. Snow has two simple ingredients: cold and moisture. Warmer air collects moisture like a sponge until it hits a patch of cold air. When temperatures dip below freezing, a lot of moisture creates a lot of snow."

This quote comes from his blog.

Well, it's kind of funny how the winter so far has been much drier than normal in the eastern United States:

Dec 1st-Feb 4th Precipitable Water Anomalies:



If you're wondering about last winter, where the east coast received record annual amounts of snow, it was dry then too:

Dec 2009-Feb 2010 Precipitable Water Anomalies:



Of course, colder air means less moisture in general, so if you're wondering if atmospheric moisture is increasing around the eastern United States and contributing to increased snowfall, here's the NCEP reanalysis graph of DJF precipitable water over the eastern U.S. and the immediately surrounding Atlantic waters for the last 60 years.




Do we really need to go over the difference between weather and climate AGAIN.

Anyone who is directly attributing the past couple of winters worth of heavy snow events to global warming doesn't know what they are talking about. YOU CANNOT DO THIS. Nor are climate scientists doing it. They can speculate and hypothesize, but two years is not climatologically significant. Neither is five years, or even ten years. If in 20 years we see the 2010 decade as the start for more extreme weather, then we can say that these storms were INFLUENCED by climate change.

This is a point also made repeatedly by Dr. M. There is not enough data over the past ten years to definitively declare that extreme weather events are a result of global warming.

Also, Al Gore was making a general comment about what climate scientists expect to happen as the globe warms. He was not referring to the recent snow storms in particular.

I'm also pretty sure you know Levi, that you don't need continuous record moisture to generate a massive snow dump, anymore than you need it for big floods. If you usually get 6 inches of water equivalent precip in the winter, you could only get 4 inches and still wind up with 4 8"+ snow events. However, in order to get that you need an atmosphere capable of hanging on to that much moisture.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Levi32:


No.

From the AMS Glossary:

"precipitable water (Or precipitable water vapor.) The total atmospheric water vapor contained in a vertical column of unit cross-sectional area extending between any two specified levels, commonly expressed in terms of the height to which that water substance would stand if completely condensed and collected in a vessel of the same unit cross section."


Unknown source

Precipitable water is the depth of the amount of water in a column of the atmosphere if all the water in that column were precipitated as rain. As a depth, the precipitable water is measured in millimeters or inches.

Member Since: July 17, 2009 Posts: 69 Comments: 25345
Quoting GeoffreyWPB:


It was just a dream. I think I'm really an Inn Keeper in Vermont.


LOL best sitcom ending, ever.

Evening, folks.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting GeoffreyWPB:


Imodium A-D works for me.


Another piece of the puzzle.
Member Since: July 17, 2009 Posts: 69 Comments: 25345
Quoting Grothar:
I thought precipitable water graphs were pertaining to rain, not snow.


No.

From the AMS Glossary:

"precipitable water (Or precipitable water vapor.) The total atmospheric water vapor contained in a vertical column of unit cross-sectional area extending between any two specified levels, commonly expressed in terms of the height to which that water substance would stand if completely condensed and collected in a vessel of the same unit cross section."
Member Since: November 24, 2005 Posts: 635 Comments: 26547
Quoting pottery:
Good post on the Amazon, Pat.
Sadly, one has to read down to the bottom to find the part about the destruction of the forest cover there.
It is the Primary reason for the problem there, IMO.
Trees make rain.

As a matter of interest, the USA has 2% of it's original forest cover left...


Come on, pot, we have vast forests left. See below.

Member Since: July 17, 2009 Posts: 69 Comments: 25345
Quoting pottery:

No wonder I feel twisted-up, sometimes....
Dont eat so many pretzels..Wuzup Pott.
Member Since: September 27, 2007 Posts: 1 Comments: 20493
Quoting pottery:

No wonder I feel twisted-up, sometimes....


Imodium A-D works for me.
Member Since: September 10, 2007 Posts: 0 Comments: 10972
Quoting hydrus:
We are all related in a way. Our D.N.A. is almost identical. There are minute differences, but all of our D.N.A.looks like this..

No wonder I feel twisted-up, sometimes....
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
I thought precipitable water graphs were pertaining to rain, not snow.
Member Since: July 17, 2009 Posts: 69 Comments: 25345
Good post on the Amazon, Pat.
Sadly, one has to read down to the bottom to find the part about the destruction of the forest cover there.
It is the Primary reason for the problem there, IMO.
Trees make rain.

As a matter of interest, the USA has 2% of it's original forest cover left...
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting GeoffreyWPB:


I have to believe in evolution also. If I refuted it and went with the Adam and Eve scenario, that would mean I would be related to you.
We are all related in a way. Our D.N.A. is almost identical. There are minute differences, but all of our D.N.A.looks like this..
Member Since: September 27, 2007 Posts: 1 Comments: 20493
Amazon Drought May Have Bigger Impact On Global Warming Than U.S. Does In A Year
Amazon Drought



First Posted: 02/ 7/11 08:55 AM Updated: 02/ 7/11 09:24 AM


RIO DE JANEIRO (Reuters/Stuart Grudgings) - A widespread drought in the Amazon rain forest last year was worse than the "once-in-a-century" dry spell in 2005 and may have a bigger impact on global warming than the United States does in a year, British and Brazilian scientists said on Thursday.

More frequent severe droughts like those in 2005 and 2010 risk turning the world's largest rain forest from a sponge that absorbs carbon emissions into a source of the gases, accelerating global warming, the report found.

Trees and other vegetation in the world's forests soak up heat-trapping carbon dioxide as they grow, helping cool the planet, but release it when they die and rot.

"If events like this happen more often, the Amazon rain forest would reach a point where it shifts from being a valuable carbon sink slowing climate change to a major source of greenhouse gases that could speed it up," said lead author Simon Lewis, an ecologist at the University of Leeds.

The study, published in the journal Science, found that last year's drought caused rainfall shortages over a 1.16 million square-mile (3 million square km) expanse of the forest, compared with 734,000 square miles (1.9 million square km) in the 2005 drought.

It was also more intense, causing higher tree mortality and having three major epicenters, whereas the 2005 drought was mainly focused in the southwestern Amazon.


As a result, the study predicted the Amazon forest would not absorb its usual 1.5 billion metric tons of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere in both 2010 and 2011. In addition, the dead and dying trees would release 5 billion metric tons of the gas in the coming years, making a total impact of about 8 billion metric tons, according to the study.

In comparison, the United States emitted 5.4 billion metric tons of carbon dioxide from fossil fuel use in 2009.

The combined emissions caused by the two droughts were probably enough to have canceled out the carbon absorbed by the forest over the past 10 years, the study found.

GREATER WEATHER EXTREMES

The widespread drought last year dried up major rivers in the Amazon and isolated thousands of people who depend on boat transportation, shocking climate scientists who had billed the 2005 drought as a once-in-a-century event.

The two intense dry spells fit predictions by some climate models that the forest will face greater weather extremes this century, with more intense droughts making it more vulnerable to fires, which in turn could damage its ability to recover.

Under the more extreme scenarios, large parts of the forest could turn into a savannah-like ecosystem by the middle of the century with much lower levels of animal and plant biodiversity. Although human-caused deforestation in Brazil has fallen sharply in recent years, scientists say the forest is still vulnerable.

A crucial question is whether the droughts are being driven by higher levels of greenhouse gases or are an anomaly, Lewis said. If they are driven by global warming, a vicious cycle of warmer temperatures and droughts could conceivably lead to a large-scale transformation of the forest over a period of decades.

"You could quite rapidly move to a much drier Amazon with less forest there," Lewis told Reuters.

The research was a collaboration among scientists at the University of Leeds and the University of Sheffield in Britain and Brazil's Amazon Environmental Research Institute.

(Editing by Will Dunham)

Copyright 2011 Thomson Reuters.
Member Since: July 3, 2005 Posts: 420 Comments: 127543
Quoting Grothar:


That would only work if we were the same species.

Brilliant!
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Jedkins01:



That's very odd, because we have had periods of very high precipitable water over the last several weeks (anywhere from 1.50 to around 2.00 inches) which is way above normal for the dry season here. Which has resulted in periods of beneficial rain.


Not according to the operational analysis since January 15th. Where are you getting those anomalies?



Member Since: November 24, 2005 Posts: 635 Comments: 26547
Quoting GeoffreyWPB:


I have to believe in evolution also. If I refuted it and went with the Adam and Eve scenario, that would mean I would be related to you.


That would only work if we were the same species.
Member Since: July 17, 2009 Posts: 69 Comments: 25345
Quoting Grothar:


I have to believe in evolution. I look at pictures of me 20 years ago and look at myself now, and say, "What have you evolved into???" It would be hard to think that the human race will never be more than it is now. That in itself is a horrible thought. We can do better than this.


I have to believe in evolution also. If I refuted it and went with the Adam and Eve scenario, that would mean I would be related to you.
Member Since: September 10, 2007 Posts: 0 Comments: 10972
Quoting Levi32:
By the way, I'm sure most of you have seen or heard of this story, which is the same explanation we've been hearing from most climate scientists regarding all the snow in the U.S. the past couple of winters. Dr. Masters also supported the idea of heavier snows due to increased moisture around the U.S. from a warming world.

Al Gore - "In fact, scientists have been warning for at least two decades that global warming could make snowstorms more severe. Snow has two simple ingredients: cold and moisture. Warmer air collects moisture like a sponge until it hits a patch of cold air. When temperatures dip below freezing, a lot of moisture creates a lot of snow."

This quote comes from his blog.

Well, it's kind of funny how the winter so far has been much drier than normal in the eastern United States:

Dec 1st-Feb 4th Precipitable Water Anomalies:



If you're wondering about last winter, where the east coast received record annual amounts of snow, it was dry then too:

Dec 2009-Feb 2010 Precipitable Water Anomalies:



And if you're wondering if atmospheric moisture is increasing around the eastern United States and contributing to increased snowfall, here's the NCEP reanalysis graph of DJF precipitable water over the eastern U.S. and the immediately surrounding Atlantic waters for the last 60 years.





That's very odd, because we have had periods of very high precipitable water over the last several weeks (anywhere from 1.50 to around 2.00 inches) which is way above normal for the dry season here. Which has resulted in periods of beneficial rain.
Member Since: August 21, 2008 Posts: 0 Comments: 7272
Quoting Patrap:
Bill Nye on America's "horrible" science education

Cory Doctorow at 7:51 AM Sunday, Feb 6, 2011




Popular Mechanics interviews Bill Nye the Science Guy on the state of US science education (Nye: "It's horrible."). He's anxious that science education ramps up too late ("Nearly every rocket scientist got interested in it before they were 10.") and, of course, that teachers are intimidated out of teaching the good science of evolution and other controversial subjects:

They're doing their job but they're under tremendous pressure. The 60 percent who are cautious--those are the people who are really up against it. They want to keep their job, and they love teaching science, and their children are really excited about it, and yet they've got some people insisting they can't teach the most fundamental idea in all of biology. There's the phrase "just a theory." Which shows you that I have failed. I'm a failure. When we have a theory in science, it's the greatest thing you can have. Relativity is a theory, and people test it every which way. They test it and test it and test it. Gravity is a theory. People have landed spacecraft on the moon within a few feet of accuracy because we understand gravity so well. People make flu vaccinations that stop people from getting sick. Farmers raise crops with science; they hybridize them and make them better with every generation. That's all evolution. Evolution is a theory, and it's a theory that you can test. We've tested evolution in many ways. You can't present good evidence that says evolution is not a fact.


I have to believe in evolution. I look at pictures of me 20 years ago and look at myself now, and say, "What have you evolved into???" It would be hard to think that the human race will never be more than it is now. That in itself is a horrible thought. We can do better than this.
Member Since: July 17, 2009 Posts: 69 Comments: 25345
Quoting flsky:

Actually, March and April are our least rainy months. It will be interesting to see if this changes this year.


Last year March and April were extremely wet, Florida is not immune to heavy rain in the driest months. Much of North and Central Florida had as much rain in March and April as what typically occurs in June and July.

Generally the dry season are either extremely dry(less than an inch). Or surprisingly wet, which averages out to around 2.50 inches.
Member Since: August 21, 2008 Posts: 0 Comments: 7272
By the way, I'm sure most of you have seen or heard of this story, which is the same explanation we've been hearing from most climate scientists regarding all the snow in the U.S. the past couple of winters. Dr. Masters also supported the idea of heavier snows due to increased moisture around the U.S. from a warming world.

Al Gore - "In fact, scientists have been warning for at least two decades that global warming could make snowstorms more severe. Snow has two simple ingredients: cold and moisture. Warmer air collects moisture like a sponge until it hits a patch of cold air. When temperatures dip below freezing, a lot of moisture creates a lot of snow."

This quote comes from his blog.

Well, it's kind of funny how the winter so far has been much drier than normal in the eastern United States:

Dec 1st-Feb 4th Precipitable Water Anomalies:



If you're wondering about last winter, where the east coast received record annual amounts of snow, it was dry then too:

Dec 2009-Feb 2010 Precipitable Water Anomalies:



Of course, colder air means less moisture in general, so if you're wondering if atmospheric moisture is increasing on average around the eastern United States and contributing to increased snowfall, here's the NCEP reanalysis graph of DJF precipitable water over the eastern U.S. and the immediately surrounding Atlantic waters for the last 60 years.


Member Since: November 24, 2005 Posts: 635 Comments: 26547

Viewing: 175 - 125

Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5Blog Index

Top of Page

About

Jeff co-founded the Weather Underground in 1995 while working on his Ph.D. He flew with the NOAA Hurricane Hunters from 1986-1990.