Preliminary IPCC report predicts increased weather extremes

By: Dr. Jeff Masters , 2:26 PM GMT on November 03, 2011

Share this Blog
24
+

There is at least a 2-in-3 probability that climate extremes have already worsened because of human-caused releases of heat-trapping gases like carbon dioxide, and some types of extreme weather events will increase in the coming decades as huge cost, says a preliminary draft of an international climate report leaked to the Associated Press (AP) this week. The Nobel Prize-winning United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) issues reports on the state of the scientific knowledge of climate change every six years, with the next full report due out in 2013. However, the IPCC is working on a special report detailing the evidence that extreme weather events may be increasing due to climate change, and how we might best prepare for the coming increase in these costly and dangerous events. The IPCC Special Report on Managing the Risks of Extreme Events and Disasters (SREX) is due to be released later this month, after a meeting in Uganda, where diplomats will recommend changes to the preliminary document leaked to AP. The IPCC requires that all countries agree unanimously on the content of the official reports, so the language of the leaked report may undergo considerable change. In the AP article, University of Victoria climate scientist Andrew Weaver, who was not among the authors, is quoted as saying that the report was written to be “so bland” that it may not matter to world leaders. With the diplomats free to make changes to the report, I think it is likely that the already bland SREX report will be further watered down. Despite all the objections one hears about the extreme and dire predictions of the IPCC, the science in these reports is actually very conservative and watered down, due to the requirement that the language must be approved by every country (including oil producing nations such as Saudi Arabia.) So, it should grab our attention that the preliminary draft of the SREX report predicts that some regions of the world might suffer extremes so severe as to leave them "increasingly marginal places to live", heat waves could peak at 5°F hotter by 2050 and 9°F hotter by 2100, and intense single-day rainstorms that happen only once every twenty years now will happen up to once every five years by 2100. I'll have more on the SREX report after its official release.

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: 103 - 53

Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4Blog Index

Quoting AstroHurricane001:


The northern Cold PDO shows up nicely, except for a warm extention of the Kuroshio Current that is cutting it off via warm water. However the anomaly suggests strong Alaska and Pacific storms this winter.
it will be hard for el nino to form if the PDO is cold and negative. this summer it tried and failed. we shall see this spring but climatology favor el nino to form in 2013 but anything can change and enso is very unpredictable
Member Since: August 23, 2011 Posts: 0 Comments: 1291
Quoting sar2401:
Regarding the shellfish article, a commentor on this story asks exactly the same question I was going to ask:

"So lemme get this straight. A gas that comprises less than 1% of the atmosphere has caused 80% of earth's surface, with a volume 10 times the size of all visible land masses, to turn so acidic, it is killing sea life?

There is no doubt the oceans have their acidic cycles. To link it to AGW is a quantum leap of unbelievable proportion."


Given the little I know about chemistry and physics, it seems totally unbelievable to me that man-made CO2 could be causing the rise in acidity that's being seen off this relatively small section of the coast of British Columbia. Unless the laws of dilution and the way concentration calculations are done have changed since I went to college, it's literally impossible for man to produce enough CO2 to cause a rise in acidity in the entire ocean. I would be looking for another, more local cause, rather than world-wide AGW.

Every 24 hours, our burning of fossil fuels pumps at least 40 trillion liters of CO2 into the atmosphere. That's caused atmospheric CO2 to climb to its highest level in 15 to 20 million years, and that has upset the natural balance that has long existed. And that CO2 doesn't simply vanish; it's accumulating, and roughly 40% of it goes into the oceans. In a year's time, then, we humans in effect pump 12 gigatons of CO2 into the ocean. Now, there is a lot of water on the planet--but that's a lot of carbon dioxide for sensitive fish and corals to dfeal with.
Member Since: November 8, 2009 Posts: 4 Comments: 13457
101. AstroHurricane001
11:08 PM GMT on November 03, 2011
Quoting wunderweatherman123:


enso as of today. Mondays nino 3.4 was reported to be -1.1C which is a moderate la nina. same like last years at the time only a little weaker. Question is by the time june 2012 comes will we miss ANOTHER el nino for the 3rd year in a row... el nino forms every 2 to 7 years and june 2009 was the time the last one began and april 2010 was the last time an el nino ended. will 2012 be the lucky year in which el nino forms? we will have to find out. Starting December, Ill start making Pre-season tropical updates and once the season begins actual tropical updates :P


The northern Cold PDO shows up nicely, except for a warm extention of the Kuroshio Current that is cutting it off via warm water. However the anomaly suggests strong Alaska and Pacific storms this winter.

As of yet, it will be difficult to tell whether 2012 is more likely to be a La Nina or El Nino year for the tropics.
Member Since: August 30, 2008 Posts: 8 Comments: 2835
100. sar2401
11:07 PM GMT on November 03, 2011
Quoting Neapolitan:

That's fine--so long as they aren't teaching our children, or running for political office.


OK, I'm confused, Neapolitan. Are saying that only teachers who believe in AGW (or ACC, I guess) should be teach our kids or only teachers that don't believe in it should be teaching our kids? Assuming that teachers of science are teaching settled issues of science as fact, and unsettled issues as theory, are you suggesting some kind of litmus test for teachers that depends on their beliefs rather than how and what they teach?
Member Since: October 2, 2004 Posts: 0 Comments: 13127
99. AstroHurricane001
11:06 PM GMT on November 03, 2011
Quoting reedzone:
One more storm...


One more comment...
Member Since: August 30, 2008 Posts: 8 Comments: 2835
98. wunderweatherman123
11:05 PM GMT on November 03, 2011


enso as of today. Mondays nino 3.4 was reported to be -1.1C which is a moderate la nina. same like last years at the time only a little weaker. Question is by the time june 2012 comes will we miss ANOTHER el nino for the 3rd year in a row... el nino forms every 2 to 7 years and june 2009 was the time the last one began and april 2010 was the last time an el nino ended. will 2012 be the lucky year in which el nino forms? we will have to find out. Starting December, Ill start making Pre-season tropical updates and once the season begins actual tropical updates :P
Member Since: August 23, 2011 Posts: 0 Comments: 1291
97. reedzone
11:04 PM GMT on November 03, 2011
One more storm...
Member Since: July 1, 2008 Posts: 13 Comments: 7340
96. Articuno
11:01 PM GMT on November 03, 2011
Quoting reedzone:
One more storm...

Please..
Member Since: October 22, 2011 Posts: 0 Comments: 2293
95. reedzone
11:00 PM GMT on November 03, 2011
One more storm...
Member Since: July 1, 2008 Posts: 13 Comments: 7340
94. AstroHurricane001
10:59 PM GMT on November 03, 2011
Quoting sar2401:
Regarding the shellfish article, a commentor on this story asks exactly the same question I was going to ask:

"So lemme get this straight. A gas that comprises less than 1% of the atmosphere has caused 80% of earth's surface, with a volume 10 times the size of all visible land masses, to turn so acidic, it is killing sea life?

There is no doubt the oceans have their acidic cycles. To link it to AGW is a quantum leap of unbelievable proportion."


Given the little I know about chemistry and physics, it seems totally unbelievable to me that man-made CO2 could be causing the rise in acidity that's being seen off this relatively small section of the coast of British Columbia. Unless the laws of dilution and the way concentration calculations are done have changed since I went to college, it's literally impossible for man to produce enough CO2 to cause a rise in acidity in the entire ocean. I would be looking for another, more local cause, rather than world-wide AGW.


Humans have contributed several hundred billion tonnes of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere and other feedbacks like peat bog fires and melting permafrost have contributed more. Acidity has changed by about 0.1 on the pH scale IIRC, and projections involving current concentrations suggest it may decline to the 7.0-7.9 range within the next two hundred years. What else can be responsible for ocean acidification, for example do volcanoes emit enough carbon into the oceans to change the global acidity on a trend-line basis?

PS. Maybe the acidification is only occurring at the surface, as the carbon dioxide isn't required to mix evenly throughout all ocean layers. Some species of jellyfish respond dramatically to slight changes in ocean temperature, acidity, salinity, turbidity, nutrients etc. by reproducing in the bilions, and exactly that is occurring in various areas worldwide.

Both global environmental change and localized dead zones in the ocean have caused large disruption to its ecosystem, and I've heard of one study claiming the oceans will be 'depleted' by 2048.
Member Since: August 30, 2008 Posts: 8 Comments: 2835
93. Articuno
10:59 PM GMT on November 03, 2011
Quoting capelookout:

NHCISALWAYSWRONG made posts earlier today but they have been deleted by admin. And dabirds posts are still out there...some of them anyway.

If the user was banned wouldn't it say banned instead of the error just listed?
Member Since: October 22, 2011 Posts: 0 Comments: 2293
92. AstroHurricane001
10:56 PM GMT on November 03, 2011
Quoting Neapolitan:

I didn't say all "skeptics" were "pro-pollution", now did I? No; only those who will doubtlessly lambaste even the watered-down SREX report as "alarmist" propaganda. Those who are in that group know who they are, as do those who are not.


It appears that all accusations and labels only serve to exponentially amplify the level of mutual rhetoric so that everybody's ears remain closed.
Member Since: August 30, 2008 Posts: 8 Comments: 2835
91. Neapolitan
10:55 PM GMT on November 03, 2011
Quoting chrisale:
If you don't believe in Anthropogenic Climate Change fine... don't believe in it.

That's fine--so long as they aren't teaching our children, or running for political office.
Member Since: November 8, 2009 Posts: 4 Comments: 13457
90. washingtonian115
10:53 PM GMT on November 03, 2011
Quoting capelookout:

NHCISALWAYSWRONG made posts earlier today but they have been deleted by admin. And dabirds posts are still out there...some of them anyway.
Hmmmm dabirds you say?.Hey if memory serves me correctly wasn't there a Teenage girl last summer on the blog by the name of BaltimoreBirds that annouced her whole name on the blog with her middle name being something like Deseray?.I'm just making an observation maybe it could be them trying to come back?.You know just like how JFV makes it obvious it's him with his user names.
Member Since: August 14, 2010 Posts: 10 Comments: 16406
89. AstroHurricane001
10:52 PM GMT on November 03, 2011
Quoting DallasGumby:

It's not clear that there is anything mankind can do to affect climate change, much less that there is anything government can do "to mitigate the harm" from climate change. And, there's certainly no evidence that anything government might do wouldn't make the "harm" worse.

Historical precedents suggest that when governments try to manipulate the economy, starvation and mass unemployment often result.


Perhaps control isn't the right procedure here. Both the economy and the climate are vastly complex and partly self-regulating phenomena that can only be nudged, not fully controlled.
Member Since: August 30, 2008 Posts: 8 Comments: 2835
87. sar2401
10:44 PM GMT on November 03, 2011
Regarding the shellfish article, a commentor on this story asks exactly the same question I was going to ask:

"So lemme get this straight. A gas that comprises less than 1% of the atmosphere has caused 80% of earth's surface, with a volume 10 times the size of all visible land masses, to turn so acidic, it is killing sea life?

There is no doubt the oceans have their acidic cycles. To link it to AGW is a quantum leap of unbelievable proportion."


Given the little I know about chemistry and physics, it seems totally unbelievable to me that man-made CO2 could be causing the rise in acidity that's being seen off this relatively small section of the coast of British Columbia. Unless the laws of dilution and the way concentration calculations are done have changed since I went to college, it's literally impossible for man to produce enough CO2 to cause a rise in acidity in the entire ocean. I would be looking for another, more local cause, rather than world-wide AGW.
Member Since: October 2, 2004 Posts: 0 Comments: 13127
86. Articuno
10:41 PM GMT on November 03, 2011
Quoting CybrTeddy:


Ever seen someone with an avatar called ''NHCISALWAYSWRONG'' post a reasonable, sensible post?

Nope.
Nobody with the name even exists...
it just says:
Error!

This user does not appear to have a WunderBlog.
Member Since: October 22, 2011 Posts: 0 Comments: 2293
85. Neapolitan
10:40 PM GMT on November 03, 2011
Quoting PensacolaDoug:


There are lots of us who understand that during the last 40 years or so that the earth has indeed gotten warmer. Some of us are just not convinced that it is all mans fault. I personally believe we own a piece of it, just how big a piece is still to be determined. I do get a little aggravated by posts such as the one above that lump anyone who doen't buy into the whole "party-line" as "pro-pollution". That doesn't advance the debate, It only riles.

I didn't say all "skeptics" were "pro-pollution", now did I? No; only those who will doubtlessly lambaste even the watered-down SREX report as "alarmist" propaganda. Those who are in that group know who they are, as do those who are not.
Member Since: November 8, 2009 Posts: 4 Comments: 13457
83. PensacolaDoug
10:27 PM GMT on November 03, 2011
Scottlincoln! Are you a marxist?
Member Since: July 25, 2006 Posts: 0 Comments: 551
82. washingtonian115
10:25 PM GMT on November 03, 2011
Quoting CybrTeddy:


Ever seen someone with an avatar called ''NHCISALWAYSWRONG'' post a reasonable, sensible post?
I think the name is funny.Lol.
Member Since: August 14, 2010 Posts: 10 Comments: 16406
81. PensacolaDoug
10:23 PM GMT on November 03, 2011
Quoting ScottLincoln:


For starters, I'm not sure comparing the United States to Soviet Russia is particularly accurate. And it's not a matter of "dictating" activity, it's a matter of stopping subsidies for the sources of our problems and subsidizing the solutions to speed the system. It requires our leaders to actually be able to say the terms "enhanced greenhouse effect" and "global climate change" instead of just weakly alluding to them. It's a matter of reducing habitation in areas likely to experience the worst changes and building our infrastructure not with past statistics in mind, but with likely climate statistics of the next 100 years. It's also a matter of not encouraging population growth as a "strength" of our country.

There are so many ways the government could act to mitigate the harm from climate change. It is clear that it can be done, because in many ways actions are being taken, just in the opposite direction.


So lets see, forcibly move people from their own private property and only allow some people to have children or do like the Chineese and outlaw more than 1 child per couple? You realize its a crime to have a younger sibling in China don't you?
Member Since: July 25, 2006 Posts: 0 Comments: 551
80. CybrTeddy
10:22 PM GMT on November 03, 2011
Quoting Articuno:
And they would be trolls, how?


Ever seen someone with an avatar called ''NHCISALWAYSWRONG'' post a reasonable, sensible post?
Member Since: July 8, 2005 Posts: 259 Comments: 23566
79. Articuno
10:19 PM GMT on November 03, 2011
And they would be trolls, how?
Member Since: October 22, 2011 Posts: 0 Comments: 2293
78. washingtonian115
10:19 PM GMT on November 03, 2011
Why do trolls always come up with the most catchiest,craizies,and funniest user names??
Member Since: August 14, 2010 Posts: 10 Comments: 16406
76. DallasGumby
10:12 PM GMT on November 03, 2011
Quoting chrisale:
If you don't believe in Anthropogenic Climate Change fine... don't believe in it

It's not an issue of belief. That's a religious concept. It's an issue of proof. Those advocating for AGW and government involvement in mitigating the alleged effects of AGW have an obligation:
1. To prove (not theorize) what the problem is AND its cause,
2. To prove the problem is actually harmful,
3. To prove their solution actually will mitigate the harm and to what extent AND will not cause more harm along the way - in other words, that it will be both effective and cost-effective.

None of those has been proven. We have a theory - a potentially valid theory, but a theory that seems to have been contradicted by the last 11 years. And, in the face of that theory, what is being asked is a wholesale upheaval of the economies of the world, at the cost of trillions of dollars, with the certainty that there will be harmful effects to many around the globe, for a result that is not shown to be significantly better than what is theorized to happen.
Member Since: August 22, 2007 Posts: 0 Comments: 376
74. PensacolaDoug
10:10 PM GMT on November 03, 2011
Quoting Neapolitan:
Of course, even the heavily watered-down SREX report, which scientists will rightfully lament as practically toothless, will nevertheless be lambasted by pro-pollution types as "alarmist" propaganda.

And in the meantime, humanity will face increasingly profound climate-driven challenges... :-\

Thanks, Dr. Masters.


There are lots of us who understand that during the last 40 years or so that the earth has indeed gotten warmer. Some of us are just not convinced that it is all mans fault. I personally believe we own a piece of it, just how big a piece is still to be determined. I do get a little aggravated by posts such as the one above that lump anyone who doen't buy into the whole "party-line" as "pro-pollution". That doesn't advance the debate, It only riles.
Member Since: July 25, 2006 Posts: 0 Comments: 551
73. washingtonian115
10:01 PM GMT on November 03, 2011
Quoting TropicalAnalystwx13:

Just below Category 5 intensity.
I guess Dora was really an explorer?
Member Since: August 14, 2010 Posts: 10 Comments: 16406
72. TropicalAnalystwx13
9:56 PM GMT on November 03, 2011
Quoting Tropicsweatherpr:
EPAC Hurricane Dora report is up with peak intensity at 135kts.

Link

Just below Category 5 intensity.
Member Since: July 6, 2010 Posts: 113 Comments: 31451
70. chrisale
9:49 PM GMT on November 03, 2011
If you don't believe in Anthropogenic Climate Change fine... don't believe in it.

But you can't deny this:

ShellFish Article

Shellfish that have been raised for the restaurant industry in California for over 60 years cannot be raised in their natural ocean pens because the water has become too acidic.

Why is it too acidic? Atmospheric CO2 concentrations.

How many times do we have to bludgeon the deniers with facts before they finally give in???

"Bill Dewey, spokesman for Seattle-based Taylor Shellfish said producers who used to rely on natural recruitment have been forced to seed those areas with hatchery-raised larvae mature enough to withstand the ocean altered pH levels.

We had periods of a couple of years in the past when it was bad, but to have it for seven years in a row is unprecedented, he said.

Taylor, the largest producer of farmed shellfish in the U.S., owns Fanny Bay Oysters in Baynes Sound and several other B.C.-based shellfish farms.

Oyster production in the Pacific Northwest dropped by 60 per cent in 2008 and 80 per cent in 2009, but bounced back over the past two years, due mostly to intensive seeding, Mr. Dewey said."
Member Since: July 15, 2005 Posts: 0 Comments: 63
69. Some1Has2BtheRookie
9:48 PM GMT on November 03, 2011
Quoting dabirds:
Very happy we had that Wed. rainout, only had to take Fri. off to attend Game 7, Carp got to pitch, and who knows what would have happened in Game 6 if played in off/on rain. Pure pandamonium after the game, but of the good kind. Hard to find a cab to get back to the hotel at closing time. Glad I went, but think I'll celebrate our 12th at home next time.


In the end, STL played a good game. Great series! Never a dull moment!
Member Since: August 24, 2010 Posts: 0 Comments: 4737
68. MTWX
9:42 PM GMT on November 03, 2011
Severe Storms on the docket for next week...

BY MON/D5...MODELS ARE IN GOOD AGREEMENT BRINGING THE UPPER TROUGH
AND LEADING EDGE OF HEIGHT FALLS ACROSS THE FOUR CORNERS STATES AND
INTO THE SRN HIGH PLAINS BY MON AFTERNOON. LOW PRESSURE IS FORECAST
TO DEEPEN OVER THE TX PANHANDLE AREA...WITH SLY FLOW INTENSIFYING
THROUGH THE DAY AND OVERNIGHT WITH A 50+ KT LLJ AND AT LEAST LOWER
60S F DEWPOINTS INTO OK. THE GFS SHOWS A WARM FRONT ALONG THE KS/OK
BORDER...BUT THE ECMWF SUGGESTS THIS FEATURE WILL BE MUCH FARTHER N
INTO NRN KS/SRN NEB. WHILE THE NRN EXTENT OF ANY SEVERE THREAT MAY
BE IN QUESTION...IT APPEARS LIKELY THAT SEVERE STORMS WILL OCCUR
OVER PORTIONS OF WRN OK AND NWRN TX NEAR THE DRYLINE. HERE...STEEP
LAPSE RATE PROFILES SHOULD EXIST. WHILE INSTABILITY WILL NOT BE
PARTICULARLY LARGE WITH ONLY NEAR 60 DEWPOINTS...SHEAR PROFILES WILL
BE QUITE FAVORABLE FOR SUPERCELLS DURING THE AFTERNOON AND EVENING.
A FEW TORNADOES ALONG WITH HAIL AND WIND WILL BE POSSIBLE.
OVERNIGHT...A COLD FRONT WILL EVENTUALLY MOVE INTO CNTRL OK AND TX.
IT IS POSSIBLE MORE CONVECTION WILL OCCUR ALONG THIS FRONT...BUT THE
PRIMARY THREAT WILL LIKELY BE WITH DIURNAL SUPERCELLS.

BY TUE/D6...MODELS START TO DIVERGE WITH THE ECMWF LIFTING THE UPPER
LOW/JET MAX NEWD MUCH QUICKER THAN MANY OF THE MREF MEMBERS. EVEN
WITH THESE DIFFERENCES...STRONG SWLY FLOW ALOFT WILL EXIST ATOP MID
TO UPPER 60S F DEWPOINTS AND FORCING ALONG THE COLD FRONT AND
DRYLINE. THUS...SOME RESIDUAL SEVERE THREAT IS LIKELY FROM E TX INTO
AR AND LA WITH THE MAIN THREAT DAMAGING WINDS AND A FEW TORNADOES.

SOME THREAT MAY LINGER INTO WED/D7 MAINLY ACROSS LA AND MS...BUT THE
MOIST AXIS WILL BEGIN TO NARROW WITH STORMS DRIVEN MAINLY BY THE
COLD FRONT AS PERHAPS THE LOW DEPARTS TOWARD THE N.
Member Since: July 20, 2009 Posts: 23 Comments: 1392
67. Tropicsweatherpr
9:36 PM GMT on November 03, 2011
EPAC Hurricane Dora report is up with peak intensity at 135kts.

Link
Member Since: April 29, 2009 Posts: 75 Comments: 14007
66. sar2401
9:35 PM GMT on November 03, 2011
Quoting StormTracker2K:


That could be the wave the GFS developes in the long range also some help from MJO could fire up one more system.



OK, if you say so. The GFS has been trying to develop every swirl in the tropics this year. I guess we'll see if they're right on this one.
Member Since: October 2, 2004 Posts: 0 Comments: 13127
65. DallasGumby
9:34 PM GMT on November 03, 2011
Quoting ScottLincoln:


There are so many ways the government could act to mitigate the harm from climate change. It is clear that it can be done, because in many ways actions are being taken, just in the opposite direction.

It's not clear that there is anything mankind can do to affect climate change, much less that there is anything government can do "to mitigate the harm" from climate change. And, there's certainly no evidence that anything government might do wouldn't make the "harm" worse.

Historical precedents suggest that when governments try to manipulate the economy, starvation and mass unemployment often result.
Member Since: August 22, 2007 Posts: 0 Comments: 376
64. sar2401
9:30 PM GMT on November 03, 2011
Quoting ScottLincoln:


For starters, I'm not sure comparing the United States to Soviet Russia is particularly accurate. And it's not a matter of "dictating" activity, it's a matter of stopping subsidies for the sources of our problems and subsidizing the solutions to speed the system. It requires our leaders to actually be able to say the terms "enhanced greenhouse effect" and "global climate change" instead of just weakly alluding to them. It's a matter of reducing habitation in areas likely to experience the worst changes and building our infrastructure not with past statistics in mind, but with likely climate statistics of the next 100 years. It's also a matter of not encouraging population growth as a "strength" of our country.

There are so many ways the government could act to mitigate the harm from climate change. It is clear that it can be done, because in many ways actions are being taken, just in the opposite direction.


Scott, the old Soviet Union just used blunt force to attempt to succeed in their five year plans, and failed with every one of them. Stopping what you believe are subsidies for bad things and giving subsidies for what you believe are good things are a nicer way to do state planning, but it's still state planning, and it's likely to fail if a majority of the people aren't on board with the ideas. The fact that you feel leaders can't use terms like "enhanced greenhouse effects" shows the majority of the population, right or wrong, are not on board with AGW and are not willing to make forced changes in their lifestyles because a group of politicians and scientists think they should.

It's not clear to me that the government is encouraging population growth in the US. The most prosperous segments of our society have a birth rate which has already fallen below replacement levels. Prosperity tends to automatically control the levels of children couples have, so increasing the prosperity of our country and the world will accomplish the goal of slowing population growth with no government regulations.

Proponents of AGW also have to be careful about saying how accurately they can predict future changes. After the hurricane season of 2005, many AGW proponents used that horrible year as a template of the future, predicting more and larger hurricanes every year thereafter. It's now six years later and that prediction has not come true. One can dicker about the number of "named" storms over the past six years, but the fact remains that we haven't been attacked by a never ending string of killer hurricanes like we were in 2005. Thus, when AGW proponents predict, with apparently great confidence, that they actually know what the average temperature will be in 2050 or 2100, those scary predictions from 2005 come back to haunt them. It's hard to believe a person or group can be wrong for six straight years but right about what will happen 40 or 90 years from now.
Member Since: October 2, 2004 Posts: 0 Comments: 13127
63. MTWX
9:25 PM GMT on November 03, 2011
Quoting GTcooliebai:
Your welcome, that's too bad you missed it. Now I'll tell you something about the "Storm of the Century" I was 5 at the time playing outside in the porch, when suddenly my mom said it got pitch black outside, next thing you know she grabbed me and pulled me inside because things were just flying around outside, when the storm passed our neighborhood was in a mess, fences blown down, trees down, roof shingles had come off, and my uncle's gutter from the other street blew off and ended up in my street. Our street was literally impassable and blocked off, my dad was working at the same time and they wouldn't even let him into the street.

I was in Plattsburgh NY for that one...

Here are a couple pictures from our yard..

Member Since: July 20, 2009 Posts: 23 Comments: 1392
62. LargoFl
9:09 PM GMT on November 03, 2011
Quoting Patrap:
co2now.org



389.00ppm



Atmospheric CO2 for September 2011

i doubt most of the countries in your pic there, have as strict pollution control laws as we here in most of the USA have...the world world, every country had better get on the ball, if...this global warming, man made global warming is a fact and true..rush bimbaugh says its a lie..go figure
Member Since: August 6, 2011 Posts: 4 Comments: 36856
61. sar2401
9:06 PM GMT on November 03, 2011
Woo-hoo, we finally got some rain in Central Alabama. Not much, at .16 inches, but at least it will settle the dust. Temperature dropped from 72 to 58 in the last hour, so I guess the cold front has gone thorugh as well.

Nice posting, GT. I remember most of those storms, especially the "Storm of the Century" in '93. My nephew was hiking the Appalachian Trail and got trapped in the Smokies by about 3 feet of snow. It took the NPS about three days to find and rescue all the hikers strung out along the trail. He was well prepared, though and none the worse for wear. He finally did make it all the way to Maine and the end of the trail on October 13, 1993. Quite a feat.

Ameister12, I guess I must be missing what you find interesting in that satellite pic. What are you seeing that drew your interest?
Member Since: October 2, 2004 Posts: 0 Comments: 13127
60. LargoFl
9:02 PM GMT on November 03, 2011
Quoting VAbeachhurricanes:
Nice deepening system over St. Louis right now.




this might be the weak cold front we here in florida are expecting friday..supposed to be a cool nice weekend after it passes us
Member Since: August 6, 2011 Posts: 4 Comments: 36856
59. airforceone
8:55 PM GMT on November 03, 2011
YAWN...Can't wait for next year's hurricane season.
Member Since: June 9, 2002 Posts: 0 Comments: 19
58. StormTracker2K
8:54 PM GMT on November 03, 2011
Quoting Ameister12:
This area is interesting.


That could be the wave the GFS developes in the long range also some help from MJO could fire up one more system.

Member Since: October 26, 2011 Posts: 0 Comments: 2651
57. StormTracker2K
8:52 PM GMT on November 03, 2011
Come on Friday! Been a long busy week.
Member Since: October 26, 2011 Posts: 0 Comments: 2651
56. Ameister12
8:52 PM GMT on November 03, 2011
This area is interesting.
Member Since: August 9, 2009 Posts: 10 Comments: 4898
55. dabirds
8:47 PM GMT on November 03, 2011
Quoting Some1Has2BtheRookie:


I think they were looking for another rain out before now. I know. They didn't plan for that too well either. :(
Very happy we had that Wed. rainout, only had to take Fri. off to attend Game 7, Carp got to pitch, and who knows what would have happened in Game 6 if played in off/on rain. Pure pandamonium after the game, but of the good kind. Hard to find a cab to get back to the hotel at closing time. Glad I went, but think I'll celebrate our 12th at home next time.
Member Since: August 23, 2011 Posts: 0 Comments: 722
54. dabirds
8:38 PM GMT on November 03, 2011
Quoting VAbeachhurricanes:
Nice deepening system over St. Louis right now.




We're actually on the backside of the low now, east of StL. East winds have shifted to north, temps holding at 50, until we lose cloud cover tonight. Slightly over an inch of precip. Is this to be the nor'easter Aussie was showing this morning?
Member Since: August 23, 2011 Posts: 0 Comments: 722
53. GeoffreyWPB
8:34 PM GMT on November 03, 2011
NYC-sized iceberg being born on Antarctica




Part of an 18-mile-long crack in the Pine Island Glacier ice shelf is seen from a NASA jet on Oct. 26.
Member Since: September 10, 2007 Posts: 0 Comments: 10972

Viewing: 103 - 53

Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4Blog 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.

Local Weather

Partly Cloudy
70 °F
Partly Cloudy