Extreme weather and climate change: a new IPCC report

By: Dr. Jeff Masters , 3:48 PM GMT on November 18, 2011

Share this Blog
35
+

Extreme weather events are already being affected by human-caused climate change, and will increase in destructive power during the coming decades as huge cost, reported the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) today. The 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, concern over the possible impact climate change may already be having on extreme weather events like heat waves, floods, and droughts prompted the IPCC to release their first-ever Special Report on Managing the Risks of Extreme Events and Disasters to Advance Climate Change Adaptation (SREX). The SREX report was divided into two sections: how human-caused climate change has already affected extreme weather events, and predictions on how these events will change during the rest of the century. Here are some highlights on how the climate has already changed, according to the SREX report:

- Globally, cold days and nights have decreased, and warm days and nights have increased (90 - 100% chance).

- In many but not all regions of the globe, the length or number of heat waves has increased.

- Some areas have seen more intense and longer droughts, in particular, southern Europe and West Africa. However, droughts have become less frequent, less intense, or shorter in some areas, such as central North America and northwestern Australia.

- Heavy precipitation events have changed in some regions. There is at least a 2-in-3 probability that more regions have seen increases than decreases in heavy precipitation events.

- The historical data base on hurricanes and tropical cyclones is not good enough to tell if they have changed.

- The jet stream has shifted towards the poles, meaning that the tracks of rain-bearing low pressure systems have also shifted towards the poles.

- Rising sea levels have led to an increase in extreme coastal flooding events (66 - 100% chance).

- Damage from extreme weather events has increased. Increases in population and wealth, and the fact more people are living in vulnerable areas, is a major cause of this increase in damage. It is uncertain if climate change is partially responsible for the increase in damage.


Figure 1. Predicted return periods for 1-day extreme precipitation events that occurred, on average, only once every 20 years between 1981-2000. A decrease in return period implies more frequent extreme precipitation events (i.e., less time between events on average). For Eastern North America, a 1-in-20 year heavy rain event is predicted to become a 1-in-7 to 1-in-9 year event by the end of the century, according to these climate model predictions. The box plots show results for regionally averaged projections for two time horizons, 2046 to 2065 and 2081 to 2100, as compared to the late-20th-century, and for three different emissions scenarios--a scenario where humans emit relatively little CO2 and other heat-trapping gasses (B1, blue bars), and two higher-emission scenarios (A1B and A2, green and red bars). Humanity is currently on a pace to emit more CO2 than the highest emission scenario shown here. Results are based on 14 climate models that contributed to the 2007 IPCC report. The level of agreement among the models is indicated by the size of the colored boxes (in which 50% of the model projections are contained), and the length of the whiskers (indicating the maximum and minimum projections from all models). Values are computed for land points only. The “Globe” inset box displays the values computed using all land grid points. Averaged over all areas of the globe, a 1-in-20 year heavy rain event is predicted to become a 1-in-8 to 1-in-12 year event by the end of the century. Image credit: The IPCC Special Report on Managing the Risks of Extreme Events and Disasters (SREX), 2011.

Here are some highlights of the forecasts for the future from the 2011 SREX report:

- A 1-in-20 year hottest day is at least 66% likely to become a 1-in-2 year event by the end of the 21st century in most regions, except in the high latitudes of the Northern Hemisphere, where it is likely to become a 1-in-5 year event.

- For Eastern North America, a 1-in-20 year heavy rain event is predicted to become a 1-in-7 to 1-in-9 year event by the end of the century.

- For Eastern North America, a maximum high temperature that occurred only once every 20 years during 1980 - 2000 is predicted to occur between once every three years and once per year by 2100.

- Extreme high temperature readings that occur once every 20 years will increase by 1°C to 3°C (1.8°F - 5.4°F) by mid-21st century and by about 2°C to 5°C (3.6°F - 9°F) by late-21st century.

- It is at least 66% likely that the frequency of heavy precipitation or the proportion of total rainfall from heavy falls will increase in the 21st century over many areas of the globe. This is particularly the case in the high latitudes and tropical regions, and in winter in the northern mid-latitudes. There is medium confidence that, in some regions, increases in heavy precipitation will occur despite projected decreases of total precipitation in those regions.

- Heavy rainfalls associated with tropical cyclones are at least 66% likely to increase with continued warming, and the maximum winds will increase. The total number of these storms is likely to remain about the same or decrease.

- There is medium confidence that droughts will intensify in the 21st century in some seasons and areas. Southern Europe and the Mediterranean region, central Europe, Central North America, Central America and Mexico, northeast Brazil, and southern Africa are at particular risk.

- In some regions, the main driver for increased damages from extreme weather events will not be climate change, but increases in population and wealth and vulnerability.

Intoducing climatecommunication.org
For those of you seeking detailed information on the research linking extreme weather events to climate change, I recommend a new website dedicated to improving communication of climate change information to the public, media, and policy makers, climatecommunication.org. The group is led by Susan Joy Hassol, a veteran climate change communicator, analyst, and author known for her ability to translate science into English, making complex issues accessible to policymakers and the public. Climatecommunication.org has put together an overview of extreme weather and climate change that I find a helpful resource when I am looking for the latest research results on the subject. I serve on their advisory board, along with a number of leading climate scientists.


Figure 2. Still image of the Bangkok, Thailand floods of October - November, 2011, as seen on the inaugural episode our new bi-monthly Extreme Weather video series.

Wunderground launches new Extreme Weather video series
Wunderground now features a new, twice-monthly Extreme Weather video series from GREEN.TV, with the latest reports and analysis on extreme weather around the world. From droughts to hurricanes to blizzards to flooding, Extreme Weather will cover the story and the science behind the events to try to understand their causes and consequences. The Extreme Weather series is sponsored by Vestas, the world's leading wind turbine manufacturer. The inaugural episode, launched yesterday, features video of the great Thailand flood, destructive floods in Italy, the $3 billion Northeast U.S. snowstorm of October 29 - 30, the massive Bering Sea, Alaska blizzard of November 9, the Texas drought, and the launch of a new polar-orbiting weather satellite. Look for a new video every two weeks on our Climate Change Videos page.

Resources
For those of you who haven't seen it, my top "must-read" post of 2011 is called, 2010 - 2011: Earth's most extreme weather since 1816?. Back in June, I went through the ridiculous barrage of extreme weather events the planet saw in 2010 and early 2011, and concluded: But it is highly improbable that the remarkable extreme weather events of 2010 and 2011 could have all happened in such a short period of time without some powerful climate-altering force at work. The best science we have right now maintains that human-caused emissions of heat-trapping gases like CO2 are the most likely cause of such a climate-altering force.

Wunderground's climate change blogger, Dr. Ricky Rood, has some thoughtful observations on the communication of the extreme weather/climate change link published in earthzine magazine titled, Changing the Media Discussion on Climate Change and Extreme Weather.

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: 112 - 62

Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17Blog Index

Quoting Cotillion:


Thanks for those links, I was wondering a bit myself about the first one.

At the worst scenario, seems we could end up as an anti-Azolla event (at least in a short term, geologically speaking, way).


Also might be interested in RealClimate's post on a paper that discusses "Climate Change Commitments"
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/201 0/03/climate-change-commitments/
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Member Since: September 10, 2007 Posts: 0 Comments: 11425
110. HadesGodWyvern (Mod)
RSMC Miami: National Hurricane Center
Tropical Cyclone Outlook
4:00 PM PST November 18 2011
====================================

Showers activity associated with a low pressure system located about 475 miles south southwest of the Gulf of Tehuantepec has become a little better organized this afternoon. Environmental conditions appear conducive for the low to become a tropical depression during the next couple of days as it moves west to west northwest at 10-15 MPH.

Tropical Cyclone Formation Potential
===================================

There is a MODERATE chance of this disturbance to form into a tropical cyclone within the next 48 hours
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting ScottLincoln:


No, didn't say they disregard correlation. I said that the "correlation=causation" is not an argument used by climate scientists. Correlation was discovered in data, physical properties were studied, and hypothesis were created that described how the correlation might be due to physical processes. It wasn't that the correlation proved a causation, it was the known physical characteristics of greenhouse gases.



The IPCC discusses their emission scenarios here:
http://www.ipcc.ch/ipccreports/sres/emission/inde x.php?idp=0

A nice summary of how those various scenarios are expected to change sea level and global temperatures can be found here:
http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg1/ en/spmsspm-projections-of.html

These are by no means the only places where you can find good information about the scenarios, just the first ones I was able to dig up for you to start with.


Thanks for those links, I was wondering a bit myself about the first one.

At the worst scenario, seems we could end up as sort of an anti-Azolla event (at least in a short term, geologically speaking, way).
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting sar2401:
Wait, you're saying that climate scientists completely disregard that things they find by correlation may have no causational relationship but still be true?


No, didn't say they disregard correlation. I said that the "correlation=causation" is not an argument used by climate scientists. Correlation was discovered in data, physical properties were studied, and hypothesis were created that described how the correlation might be due to physical processes. It wasn't that the correlation proved a causation, it was the known physical characteristics of greenhouse gases that caused a prediction in how the environment would react. The scientific method isn't just about applying some linear best-fit to a scatterplot of data in excel and saying "oh wow, I found an R^2 of 0.9! This proves causation!" - it's about the why, and about using that why to predict future behavior.

Quoting sar2401:
I will have to read the IPPC report again. Can you direct me to the parts where they hypothesize the effects of no CO2 emmissions and decreasing CO2 emmisions? I was unable to find it, but I may have missed it somehow.


The IPCC discusses their emission scenarios here:
http://www.ipcc.ch/ipccreports/sres/emission/inde x.php?idp=0

A nice summary of how those various scenarios are expected to change sea level and global temperatures can be found here:
http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg1/ en/spmsspm-projections-of.html

These are by no means the only places where you can find good information about the scenarios, just the first ones I was able to dig up for you to start with.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Please ignore climate change skeptics, maybe even run them off. Science while not perfect does not have an attitude. When you listen to the minority of scientist on this topic and a topic with trend supporting the majority opinion you’re just a heretic.

Anyway, since this is tropic blog when active, I don't remember seeing a larger area of interest.


Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting jonger1150:


I agree with the poster who had his comment removed. Is this website the biggest AGW shill site on the web or what?

I'm a 10 year premium member and I'm close to canning my subscription.


Reporting climate science is "shilling?" Hmm...I hear the darnedest things on the internet.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting jonger1150:


Really... tell me how that 1C temp increase over 100 years has affected your life?


Just the last few decades have aged me greatly! I shudder to think what will happen in 100 years.

If you prefer a straight answer, it's forced me to research the topic of AGW and adjust where I'll retire and how I'll plan for my children's future. It is they who will begin to bear the real brunt of AGW.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting jonger1150:


I agree with the poster who had his comment removed. Is this website the biggest AGW shill site on the web or what?

I'm a 10 year premium member and I'm close to canning my subscription.

Dr. Master's blog is a Weather blog. In case you are wondering...

"The state of the atmosphere at a place and time as regards heat, cloudiness, dryness, sunshine, wind, rain, etc."

Climate is part of weather, and therefore, relevant to this blog. Dr. Masters has post about Climate Change for years and years. In fact, his very first blog entry was about Earth Day.

Getting upset because he is posting about Climate Change isn't fair to Dr. Masters. If you don't like the blog, there are thousands of others to browse.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
103. j2008
Quoting TropicalAnalystwx13:
We should watch for STS Tammy to form sometime between the end of the week and Tuesday or so. Many of the models strengthen it to what looks like a hurricane, which to me, is unbelievable.

Hurricanes in November,that would be a fun statement especially since Sean (I believe was a hurricane) and future Tammy could be a hurricane......I love this season, you never seem to know what is going to happen next.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Who is this Masters guy? Doesn't he realize this is an extreme weather blog and not a climate change blog! He needs to read the rules!

(that was sarcasm)
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting jonger1150:


I agree with the poster who had his comment removed. Is this website the biggest AGW shill site on the web or what?

I'm a 10 year premium member and I'm close to canning my subscription.

Really? Why now? What's changed? Dr. Masters has been writing occasional blog entries dealing in whole or in part with climate change for almost six years now. What's suddenly happened to make you threaten withdrawal?
Member Since: November 8, 2009 Posts: 4 Comments: 13606
Invest 90E is slowly coming together, I believe it will probably attain tropical depression status in 24-36 hours or so.

TROPICAL WEATHER OUTLOOK
NWS NATIONAL HURRICANE CENTER MIAMI FL
400 PM PST FRI NOV 18 2011

FOR THE EASTERN NORTH PACIFIC...EAST OF 140 DEGREES WEST LONGITUDE..

SHOWERS ACTIVITY ASSOCIATED WITH A LOW PRESSURE SYSTEM LOCATED ABOUT
475 MILES SOUTH-SOUTHWEST OF THE GULF OF TEHUANTEPEC HAS BECOME A
LITTLE BETTER ORGANIZED THIS AFTERNOON. ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS
APPEAR CONDUCIVE FOR THE LOW TO BECOME A TROPICAL DEPRESSION DURING
THE NEXT COUPLE OF DAYS AS IT MOVES WEST TO WEST-NORTHWESTWARD AT
10 TO 15 MPH. THIS SYSTEM HAS A MEDIUM CHANCE...50 PERCENT...OF
BECOMING A TROPICAL CYCLONE DURING THE NEXT 48 HOURS.

ELSEWHERE...TROPICAL CYCLONE FORMATION IS NOT EXPECTED DURING THE
NEXT 48 HOURS.

$$
FORECASTER BEVEN
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Complex development situation.

TROPICAL WEATHER OUTLOOK
NWS NATIONAL HURRICANE CENTER MIAMI FL
700 PM EST FRI NOV 18 2011

FOR THE NORTH ATLANTIC...CARIBBEAN SEA AND THE GULF OF MEXICO...

A LARGE AND ELONGATED AREA OF CLOUDINESS AND SHOWERS CONTINUES OVER
THE CENTRAL ATLANTIC OCEAN APPROXIMATELY 800 MILES EAST AND
NORTHEAST OF THE LEEWARD ISLANDS. THIS ACTIVITY IS ASSOCIATED WITH
THE INTERACTION BETWEEN A SURFACE TROUGH...A TROPICAL WAVE...AND AN
UPPER-LEVEL LOW. SLOW DEVELOPMENT IS POSSIBLE AS THIS SYSTEM
DRIFTS GENERALLY NORTHWARD OVER THE NEXT COUPLE OF DAYS...AND IT
HAS A LOW CHANCE...20 PERCENT...OF BECOMING A SUBTROPICAL OR
TROPICAL CYCLONE DURING THE NEXT 48 HOURS.

ELSEWHERE...TROPICAL CYCLONE FORMATION IS NOT EXPECTED DURING THE
NEXT 48 HOURS.

$$
FORECASTER BEVEN
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting HuracanTaino:
Well if you have all those doubts , just an advice, at least, listen an analize,pay attention in an olistic, open minded way, without taking sides. Because as a non American,but a citezen of this planet, when I listen to the americans talk on this weather pattern or GW issues, is mostly an Ideology that fluorish, no a fair judgment to the scientific investigations and studies on this important matter, that involved the future of humanity. Because something is happening for sure. What is happening?. Who knows? we are all learning,nobody kmows for sure.


I'm not an American, either. I will say that ideologies are not fixed to just Americans or their politics. Biases are inherent everywhere, not limited to one country or one people.

I don't have an agenda (at least not on this topic particularly), I'm largely neutral to the debate. The argument that (A)GW doesn't exist usually boils down to either all the measurements are all wrong, some fanciful conspiracy/hoax that everyone's in on or the data collection is over too short a timeframe. On the other hand, there are still some questions on the 'pro' argument that remain unanswered. I also get nonplussed, with occasional irritation, when declarations are made about 'saving the planet'.

Not that I particularly care to be convinced either way as in some ways I view the debate outside of academic circles to be beside the point. If I think that something from either 'side' deserves scrutiny or qualification then I'll sometimes throw it out there.

If you use renewables and recycle more without throwing tons and tons of junk in the atmosphere, then that can only be a good thing. If it 'solves' anthropogenic global warming, then awesome. If it doesn't because it is a climatic process beyond our control or some other explanation, then hey, we've made a better planet anyway. Win-win.

It only gets more complicated should we move beyond that into more challenging techniques with obvious side effects if it is believed to be merited.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Birthmark:

And I'm tired of living though human caused climate change. Imagine how I must feel!


Really... tell me how that 1C temp increase over 100 years has affected your life?

Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Birthmark:

And I'm tired of living though human caused climate change. Imagine how I must feel!


I agree with the poster who had his comment removed. Is this website the biggest AGW shill site on the web or what?

I'm a 10 year premium member and I'm close to canning my subscription.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting LowerCal:
Spaceflight Now | Breaking News | Veteran Landsat 5 satellite on the brink of failure
....
Launched in March 1984, Landsat 5 has outlived its three-year design life nine times. Landsat 5 collected imagery in the aftermath of the Chernobyl nuclear reactor accident and the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, plus countless other natural disasters.
....
An interruption in the Landsat program could harm research into climate change, ice fields, the carbon cycle and operational interests in agriculture, land use and resource management.

The Landsat program has kept a constant vigil over Earth since the launch of Landsat 1 in 1972. The constellation's 39-year legacy provides a robust archive of data at the fingertips of scientists.


Amazing that old piece of junk has lasted this long. At least we have Landsat 7, albeit with some flaws, still up there, and Landsat 8 should launch In January, so we'd better cross our fingers and hope it makes it to orbit and works OK.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Spaceflight Now | Breaking News | Veteran Landsat 5 satellite on the brink of failure
....
Launched in March 1984, Landsat 5 has outlived its three-year design life nine times. Landsat 5 collected imagery in the aftermath of the Chernobyl nuclear reactor accident and the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, plus countless other natural disasters.
....
An interruption in the Landsat program could harm research into climate change, ice fields, the carbon cycle and operational interests in agriculture, land use and resource management.

The Landsat program has kept a constant vigil over Earth since the launch of Landsat 1 in 1972. The constellation's 39-year legacy provides a robust archive of data at the fingertips of scientists.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting StormTracker2K:
Reno on Fire.



Unfortunately, this a common occurrence in the Reno/Carson City Area. From now until spring, they get strong downslope winds off the Sierra's. The problem, especially in Reno, is that they are building more and more homes in the urban/rural interface, which makes defending these homes from a wild land fire almost impossible. I was living in Carson City a few years ago when we had a gigantic wildfire that burned down several hundred homes built up in the canyons, where the winds are the strongest and getting people and equipment in and out is the most difficult. It was only a lucky change in the wind that stopped the fire from getting into the west side of Carson City and burning a lot more homes and businesses. I wish building codes would start treating the urban/rural interface the way we treat flood plains, and start limiting building there. We already had the Oakland Hills Firestorm in 1991, when we lost over 3500 homes and 25 people killed. There are areas of the San Francisco Bay area and Los Angeles where a repeat of the conditions in the Oakland Hills will lead to tens of thousands of structures lost and hundreds dead.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Maybe they named it no name like the great little pub in the Keys!
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting ScottLincoln:


Which means...? The globe doesn't just warm up because it was colder at one point. There must be a physical mechanism by which the energy balance changes.




I mean that earth has cooled relative to when it was formed. The earth has cooled and warmed numerous times over the eons, which is why you can find evidence the Antarctic was once temperate and the Nothern United States was covered by huge glaciers for tens of thousands of years. What is your explanation for those physical mechanisms?
Red herring. Correlation=causation is not an argument used by climate scientists.




Wait, you're saying that climate scientists completely disregard that things they find by correlation may have no causational relationship but still be true? Surely you can't mean this, since finding a stastical relationship between correlation and causation is one of the foundations of the scientific method.

I will have to read the IPPC report again. Can you direct me to the parts where they hypothesize the effects of no CO2 emmissions and decreasing CO2 emmisions? I was unable to find it, but I may have missed it somehow.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
.."I cant believe they didn't name....
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Thanks to evidence found as part of the Atlantic hurricane database reanalysis project, there is a new record holder for the latest hurricane in a season to ever to strike the United States coastline.
The record now belongs to Hurricane Kate, which struck the Florida panhandle on November 21, 1985, as a Category 2 hurricane on the Saffir-Simpson Hurricane Wind Scale. The old record was held by a Category 1 hurricane which struck southwest Florida on December 1, 1925.
New observations were obtained that showed the 1925 system did not reach hurricane intensity, so it was officially downgraded to a tropical storm.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
that last picture of the fire shows it all... fire with traffic lights in front
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting jrweatherman:
I am fu***ng tired of dr. M ramming down our throats human caused climate change.


http://www.wunderground.com/blog/jrweatherman/add entry.html
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting jrweatherman:
I am fu***ng tired of dr. M ramming down our throats human caused climate change.

Well, its his blog, and you're a user of HIS site. So..if you don't like it, then leave.

The door's open.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting jrweatherman:
I am fu***ng tired of dr. M ramming down our throats human caused climate change.

And I'm tired of living though human caused climate change. Imagine how I must feel!
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Reno on Fire.

Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Wow Alaska is currently going through a server cold snap.Better them than me!!!!!.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting sar2401:


Me too. :) I'm really on the fence about this. There's no doubt the climate is changing, but it's done that since the globe cooled off.


Which means...? The globe doesn't just warm up because it was colder at one point. There must be a physical mechanism by which the energy balance changes.

Quoting sar2401:


There's also no doubt we've pumped an awful lot of crud into the atmosphere since the Industrial Revolution. I'm still not sure the correlation proves causation.


Red herring. Correlation=causation is not an argument used by climate scientists.

Quoting sar2401:


The IPPC predictions are also based on us not making any changes in what we are doing now, even though many steps are underway to reduce the CO2 footprint of humans.


No, not quite correct. The IPCC predictions are based on emissions scenarios. Each of these emissions scenarios is based upon a different set of actions by humans. There is a scenario where we continue business as usual. There are scenarios where we stop CO2 emissions today. And there are emissions scenarios where we slowly reduce our greenhouse gas emissions over the next couple decades. So far, we have been closely following the high-end scenario.

Quoting sar2401:


I'd really be interested to see how those numbers change if, for example, we were able to reduce CO2 emissions by 50% by the year 2100.


I believe the information you are looking for has been discussed in the most recent assessment report from the IPCC.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting hydrus:
When there is a large dip in the jet stream that reaches into or near the gulf, it can tap abundant moisture for storms. The "tilt" of the jet also plays a role with a severe outbreak. Negatively tilted troughs will normally produce more intense severe weather event than a positive tilt.


Quoting StormTracker2K:


That is the 500mb vorticity map. What your seeing there is a low forming in east TX and it could be strong with lots of divering winds but everything has to just right to get a severe wx outbreak.


Thanks! That helps.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting HurrikanEB:




I'm trying to get better at reading stuff like this. I'm pretty sure that it has something to do with the yellow extending into texas, but Can someone just explain exactly what this map depicts and how you can tell that it indicates a severe weather outbreak?


That is the 500mb vorticity map. What your seeing there is a low forming in east TX and it could be strong with lots of divering winds but everything has to just right to get a severe wx outbreak.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Some1Has2BtheRookie:


I do not believe that anyone, at this point, is trying to stop or reverse it. There are still serious attempts to not exasperate the problem.

Added

I think that fire is getting too hot. The kettle is going to boil over soon.

Should I throw another log on the fire?
Or head further south,Aruba!
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting HurrikanEB:




I'm trying to get better at reading stuff like this. I'm pretty sure that it has something to do with the yellow extending into texas, but Can someone just explain exactly what this map depicts and how you can tell that it indicates a severe weather outbreak?
When there is a large dip in the jet stream that reaches into or near the gulf, it can tap abundant moisture for storms. The "tilt" of the jet also plays a role with a severe outbreak. Negatively tilted troughs will normally produce more intense severe weather event than a positive tilt.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Neapolitan:

Well, of course not all charts and graphs are equal; it's much more fair to draw conclusions from an event with an 18-year duration than it is one that lasted just 10 or 11 months or so. But that's my point. Why highlight an 11-month decrease on a graph that otherwise shows a fairly steep increase over the past 220 months or so?

Here's a great animated graph from Skeptical Science that highlights what I'm talking about:

Ooops


So what? They both show the same deltaT. Find something else, please.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting StormTracker2K:
Here's the GFS below. This could be ugly!





I'm trying to get better at reading stuff like this. I'm pretty sure that it has something to do with the yellow extending into texas, but Can someone just explain exactly what this map depicts and how you can tell that it indicates a severe weather outbreak?
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting overwash12:
Not scoffing at anything,realistically is anything going to stop it? Whether or not it is man-made? We are not cutting back on coal,oil consumption. The population is increasing,doom is in the cards.


I do not believe that anyone, at this point, is trying to stop or reverse it. There are still serious attempts to not exasperate the problem.

Added

I think that fire is getting too hot. The kettle is going to boil over soon.

Should I throw another log on the fire?
Member Since: August 24, 2010 Posts: 0 Comments: 4758
Quoting ScottLincoln:


Virtually all indicators point toward an increasing rate of rise for sea level. Virtually all of the rise we have seen thus far has been due to thermal expansion. We've only begun to lose land ice mass (but this process is also accelerating and occurring faster than expected).

You may scoff at ~2.8mm/yr, but that rate is at the upper end of the range indicating an accelerating sea level rise, with multiple feet rise by the end of the century. This also assumes little contribution from Greenland and Antarctica...
Not scoffing at anything,realistically is anything going to stop it? Whether or not it is man-made? We are not cutting back on coal,oil consumption. The population is increasing,doom is in the cards.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting aburttschell:


Or then I suppose it could have said "Global Sea Level much lower than 200,000 years ago."



In other words you can take any sample size and interpret what you will; especially when dealing with relatively short periods of time.

Well, of course not all charts and graphs are equal; it's much more fair to draw conclusions from an event with an 18-year duration than it is one that lasted just 10 or 11 months or so. But that's my point. Why highlight an 11-month decrease on a graph that otherwise shows a fairly steep increase over the past 220 months or so?

Here's a great animated graph from Skeptical Science that highlights what I'm talking about:

Ooops
Member Since: November 8, 2009 Posts: 4 Comments: 13606
We should watch for STS Tammy to form sometime between the end of the week and Tuesday or so. Many of the models strengthen it to what looks like a hurricane, which to me, is unbelievable.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting stormpetrol:
watching the sw carib for next week
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting aburttschell:


Or then I suppose it could have said "Global Sea Level much lower than 200,000 years ago."



In other words you can take any sample size and interpret what you will; especially when dealing with relatively short periods of time.
so, you are saying that the earth will be swallowed by the sun... get a grip on scalar comprehension, and check back please...
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting overwash12:
So @ 2.8 mm sealevel rise per year= 1 ft. rise in 100 years. Unless,global warming increases it could accelerate at a much faster pace. I'll take an island in the South Pacific,where do I sign?


Virtually all indicators point toward an increasing rate of rise for sea level. Virtually all of the rise we have seen thus far has been due to thermal expansion. We've only begun to lose land ice mass (but this process is also accelerating and occurring faster than expected).

You may scoff at ~2.8mm/yr, but that rate is at the upper end of the range indicating an accelerating sea level rise, with multiple feet rise by the end of the century. This also assumes little contribution from Greenland and Antarctica...
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting TropicalAnalystwx13:
See these clouds off the coast? That shows how freaking cold it has been today here.



Get back on shore. This is no day to be offshore! LOL
Member Since: August 24, 2010 Posts: 0 Comments: 4758
See these clouds off the coast? That shows how freaking cold it has been today here.

Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting aburttschell:


Or then I suppose it could have said "Global Sea Level much lower than 200,000 years ago."



In other words you can take any sample size and interpret what you will; especially when dealing with relatively short periods of time.
You mean like arctic sea ice,(since 1979 satellite era)?
Member Since: Posts: Comments:

Viewing: 112 - 62

Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17Blog 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.