Heartland Institute documents reveal strategy of attacks against climate science

By: Dr. Jeff Masters , 3:15 PM GMT on February 17, 2012

Share this Blog
67
+

Documents illegally leaked from the Heartland Institute, one of the most active groups engaged in attacking the science of climate change, provide an unprecedented look into how these groups operate. The story was broken Tuesday by DeSmogBlog, a website dedicated to exposing false claims about climate change science. The documents reveal that donors to Heartland included oil billionaire Charles Koch, and Heartland has spent several million dollars over the past five years to undermine climate science. Tens of thousands of dollars are slated to go this year to well-known climate contrarians S.Fred Singer, Craig Idso, and Anthony Watts of the Watts Up With That? website. Naturally, the leaked documents have lit up the blogosphere, but none of the revelations are particularly surprising. The U.S. has a very successful and well-funded climate change denial industry, primarily funded by fossil fuel companies, that has spent hundreds of millions of dollars over the past few decades on a PR campaign against climate change science. I made a lengthy post on the subject in 2009 called, The Manufactured Doubt industry and the hacked email controversy. I won't say more here, but getenergysmartnow.com has compiled a long list of blogs that have interesting posts on the Heartland Institute affair for those interested in following this story.



Eight books challenging the Manufactured Doubt industry
Important scientific findings should always be challenged with the goal of finding flaws and improving our scientific understanding. But there's nothing a scientist hates more than to see good science attacked and the reputations of good scientists smeared in name of protecting corporate profits or ideology. A number of scientists have fought back against the recent unfounded assaults on climate change science by publishing books calling attention to the Manufactured Doubt industry's tactics and goals. Anyone priding themselves on being a open-minded skeptic of human-caused global warming should challenge their skepticism by reading one of these works. I thought so highly of Unscientific America, Merchants of Doubt, and Climate Coverup, that I donated 50 copies of these books to undergraduates at the University of Michigan last year. Here's a short synopsis of eight books published in the past three years defending climate change science against the attacks of the Manufactured Doubt industry:

Merchants of Doubt: How a Handful of Scientists Obscured the Truth on Issues from Tobacco Smoke to Global Warming, by Naomi Oreskes and Erik Conway. If you're going to read one book on the attacks on climate science, this should probably be the one--Dr. Oreskes, a history professor at UC San Diego, was voted climate change communicator of the year in 2011. A review of Merchants of Doubt and a video of her defending her book against skeptics is at climateprogress.org, my favorite website for staying current on the politics of climate change. From the review: "Make the journey with them, and you’ll see renowned scientists abandon science, you’ll see environmentalism equated with communism, and you’ll discover the connection between the Cold War and climate denial. And for the most part, you’ll be entertained along the way."

Climate Cover-up: The Crusade to Deny Global Warming, by desmogblog.com co-founders James Hoggan and Richard Littlemore. The main author, James Hoggan, owns a Canadian public relations firm, and is intimately familiar with how public relations campaigns work. It's another fascinating and very readable book.

Unscientific America: How Scientific Illiteracy Threatens our Future, by science writer Chris Mooney. He writes a blog focusing on science communication called the intersection. This is a fantastic book, and should be required reading for all college science majors.

Climate Change Denial: Heads in the Sand, by Haydn Washington and John Cook. John Cook writes for one of my favorite climate science blogs, skepticalscience.com, which focuses on debunking false skeptic claims about climate science. The book does a great job debunking all the classic climate change denial arguments.

Doubt is Their Product: How Industry's Assault on Science Threatens Your Health, by George Washington University epidemiologist David Michaels, who now heads the Occupational Health and Safety Administration (OSHA). This meticulously-researched book has just one chapter on climate change, and focuses more on tobacco and hazardous chemicals. About the the tobacco industry's Manufactured Doubt campaigns, Michaels wrote: "the industry understood that the public is in no position to distinguish good science from bad. Create doubt, uncertainty, and confusion. Throw mud at the anti-smoking research under the assumption that some of it is bound to stick. And buy time, lots of it, in the bargain". The title of Michaels' book comes from a 1969 memo from a tobacco company executive: "Doubt is our product since it is the best means of competing with the 'body of fact' that exists in the minds of the general public. It is also the means of establishing a controversy".

The Hockey Stick and the Climate Wars: Dispatches from the Front Lines, by climate scientist Dr. Michael Mann. Dr. Mann is the originator of the much-debated "hockey stick" graph of global temperatures over the past 1,000 years, which looks like a hockey stick due to the sharp increase in temperatures in recent decades. This book just came out last week, and I hope to write a review on it this spring. Dr. Mann is one of the main contributors to my favorite web site for staying current on climate change research, realclimate.org. John Cook of skepticalscience.com wrote a review, calling it "an eye-opening account of the lengths the opponents of climate science will go to in their campaign to slander climate scientists and distract the public from the realities of human caused global warming."

Fool Me Twice: Fighting the Assault on Science in America by Shawn Lawrence Otto. I haven't had a chance to read this one yet, but it looks interesting. A review by Katherine O’Konski of Climate Science Watch called the book "a fascinating look at the status of science in American society."

The Inquisition of Climate Science, by Dr. James Lawrence Powell, a geochemist with a distinguished career as a college teacher, college president, museum director, and author of books on earth science for general audiences. I haven't read it, but John Cook of skepticalscience.com wrote a review, calling it "a must-read for anyone who wishes to understand the full scope of the denial industry and their modern day persecution of climate science."

Have a great weekend, everyone! I'll be taking a few vacation days next week, and wunderground meteorologist Angela Fritz will probably be doing most of the blogging for me during the coming week.

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: 130 - 80

Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32Blog Index

Quoting tampahurricane:
Will this sever weather make its way down into the tampabay area?


Don't quote me on it but not looking at the moment like Tampa Bay will get any severe weather tommorow based on the current tragectory. Anything could happen though if the low really deepens and dips a little further South tommorow on the way to the Eastern Seaboard........ Keep tuned to your local NWS tommorow.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Link
Quoting ShenValleyFlyFish:
SO what does it mean? What is the chance of severe weather not happening? Teach this old dog a new trick. Stats has always been my Achilles heal.


It's a couple things that distinguishes it.

It's a measure of the bias in probability above equal chance, not the probability itself.

Second, it applies to an area within 50 miles, I think, of the town, station, or region for which the forecast is given. It varies depending on the type of weather being forecast.

Although I'm not sure how those numbers are calculated.

Example:



Clearly, in this graphic "50%" does not mean there's a 50/50 chance, since the neutral gray actually represents equal chance.

It also clearly doesn't represent a linear multiple of average temperature in any scale, as that would represent 150 degree weather, which is silly.

The colored graphics represent the likelihood of being biased above an even chance.



Now for example, when the Weather Channel puts out their new "Torcon" index, each point represents a 10% chance of having at least one tornado within a 50 mile radius of the forecast location.

That's just an example of how "percent" has a different meaning depending on the application and context.
Member Since: January 25, 2012 Posts: 33 Comments: 1520
For those along the Gulf keeping an eye of the pending low passage tommorow, here is a real good briefing package update from Tallahassee NWS this morning.

They are going to have an additional Webinar breifing this afternoon in a few hours (guess they are looking at the most recent model runs).

Tommorow would be a good day for all folks along the Gulf Coast to keep a NOAA Radio handy and keep a close eye on the weather.

Link
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting BobWallace:


With "Climategate" deniers took parts of emails out of context and attempted to make it look like climate scientists had said and done things which they had not.

I'm withholding my judgement on whether these leaked documents are accurate. There's some chance that they are faked, but it will take a little time to establish their accuracy.

If these documents are accepted as accurate then we can judge for ourselves what has been going on within the Heartland Institute, if they have been distorting for payment. If they are operating as a public relations firm for the fossil fuel industry.

Unlike the earlier set of emails which were not released for all to read these documents are on line right now. There is no attempt to pull bits out of context and create a fiction.


Just FYI:

The Heartland Institute has indicated that the Financial reports were 'stolen' and are thus presumed to be legitimate. They are all you really need to read.

The only document that is being claimed to be 'faked' is the "memo" on strategy and that's only because it appears to have been scanned rather than be a printout of an actual document.

No matter. Even without that document, the financial documents speak for themselves and contains more than enough 'strategy' details to conclude rightly that the Institute is hell bent on manufacturing doubt and even taking the creationist route and injecting that doubt into the classroom.

DeSmogBlog said it best:
"In the meantime, how about everybody take a moment to look away from the shiny penny in the magician's left hand and concentrate instead on the 100 pages of damning evidence falling out of his right sleeve."
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Will this sever weather make its way down into the tampabay area?
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting VAbeachhurricanes:
Here is my only issue with this post, when "Climategate" happened Dr. Masters made a post stating how the hacked emails were just Climate Change denialist trying to hide the truth and twisting words. Now when these are released, which is basically a carbon copy just to the other side it is "see they know what they are doing exactly what we thought they were! denialists!"


With "Climategate" deniers took parts of emails out of context and attempted to make it look like climate scientists had said and done things which they had not.

I'm withholding my judgement on whether these leaked documents are accurate. There's some chance that they are faked, but it will take a little time to establish their accuracy.

If these documents are accepted as accurate then we can judge for ourselves what has been going on within the Heartland Institute, if they have been distorting for payment. If they are operating as a public relations firm for the fossil fuel industry.

Unlike the earlier set of emails which were not released for all to read these documents are on line right now. There is no attempt to pull bits out of context and create a fiction.
Member Since: February 22, 2011 Posts: 0 Comments: 1344
Quoting ShenValleyFlyFish:
SO what does it mean? What is the chance of severe weather not happening? Teach this old dog a new trick. Stats has always been my Achilles heal.


It is true that each area within a 25 mile radius has a 70% chance of not seeing severe weather, however if we take lets say 3 points within different radii, then you have to raise the 70% of the power of 3 so in this case it would be a 34% chance of severe weather not happening at all, or a 64% chance of severe weather happening at one of the 3 25 mile radii. Hope that helps :) Just raise the percentage you have to the power of how many different points you have.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting WxGeekVA:


I'm posting from my iPhone in English class while texting my girlfriend and listening to music.... :D Anything>English 100% of the time! (at least for me...). Plus my English teacher is a crazy old man...
This might explain why we rank where we do on international education scales. Sorry to tell you this but it is still more valuable to be able to communicate in English than in Texteeze. Personal cell phones banned in most entry level workforce positions. Quel horreur! Oh the humanity!
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Good Day. Lots of folks, includng weather channel, have hyped the pending storm a bit but it remains a wait and see acording to the models runs coming out over the next 24 hours. For many of us along the Gulf coast, here is hoping that it will not be a major severe weather event of any kind for us although the real problems may lie down the road for the folks in the NE from snow. I am more concerend at the moment about how the "real" severe weather/tornado season will pan out in a few months given the mild winter down in the South and quickly heating temps by March and April. But for now, I will cetainly take whatever needed rain the event brings us.

As far as the GW issues, I staying out of that one for the time being ............. :)
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
I enjoy cloudy days
I enjoy rainy days
I enjoy foggy days
I enjoy snowy and icee days
I enjoy severe weather days

I always get excited about these...

I HATE SUNNY DAYS
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting VAbeachhurricanes:
Here is my only issue with this post, when "Climategate" happened Dr. Masters made a post stating how the hacked emails were just Climate Change denialist trying to hide the truth and twisting words. Now when these are released, which is basically a carbon copy just to the other side it is "see they know what they are doing exactly what we thought they were! denialists!"


Why do you suppose that is?
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
I believe, I believe, I believe..
Member Since: July 3, 2005 Posts: 421 Comments: 127566
Quoting VAbeachhurricanes:
Here is my only issue with this post, when "Climategate" happened Dr. Masters made a post stating how the hacked emails were just Climate Change denialist trying to hide the truth and twisting words. Now when these are released, which is basically a carbon copy just to the other side it is "see they know what they are doing exactly what we thought they were! denialists!"


That's right. Because the climategate emails were nothing but a million word dump where the denialists blogs had a field day taking comments out of context and out of meaning and slandering scientists who were, in the end, found by multiple reviews to be completely innocent of any wrongdoing.

This current scandal is a very specific set of documents detailing very specifically programs and and people the HI support and for what purposes.

In short, there is no denying the denial industry is what it is. The financial reports are there for all to see.

If you don't see the difference between the two then you simply have not allowed yourself to look.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
116. wxmod
Lying to change a political outcome is nothing new. Heartland hiring so called lobbyists and bloggers to promote the continued use of oil and coal products is what all big businesses do. But it's an ugly thing to do in this case, because the whole world is going to take a dive because of these hired liars. If you are a hired liar, consider that you are a patsy, destroying the world for your kids just to keep a few Sheik billionaires rolling in gold. If you can justify that to yourselves, I hope you have the chance to outlive your kids, to watch them shrivel for lack of food and water. I hope you have a chance to be the last person on Earth, sitting on a rock in the desert until you burn to death. There really is a hell...right here on Earth. I hope you find it.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Here is my only issue with this post, when "Climategate" happened Dr. Masters made a post stating how the hacked emails were just Climate Change denialist trying to hide the truth and twisting words. Now when these are released, which is basically a carbon copy just to the other side it is "see they know what they are doing exactly what we thought they were! denialists!"
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Humanity's downfall.

Hey, if we can measure it, we can maybe "Control it".

Wel, dat approach hasnt worked out well atall'.
Member Since: July 3, 2005 Posts: 421 Comments: 127566
Quoting TropicalAnalystwx13:

a 30% chance of Severe Weather does not mean that there is a 70% chance it will not occur. It means there is the potential for a relatively significant severe weather outbreak.

Man, what got into everybody tody? It's Friday! Enjoy it like me!

[posted from school]
SO what does it mean? What is the chance of severe weather not happening? Teach this old dog a new trick. Stats has always been my Achilles heal.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
A wunderful shout out to the Sen. from Oklahoma on his er, position last December.


Senator Inhofe to U.N. Climate Change Conference: Nobody Cares

And they wonder why the US is slipping in the wrong direction.

I give thee, "BS on Earth", reincarnated.

Someone might want to notify the Sen. as to the US Military plan's to cope with "Climate Change"

DoD PDF 2011


I.1.A DoD Reliance on Energy
The U.S. military's reliance on energy and fossil fuels in particular poses four broad security
challenges. First is the growing operational risk to forces deployed around the globe. Attacks on fuel
convoys and fixed energy supplies in Afghanistan, Iraq, and surrounding countries already demonstrate
the vulnerability of our current supply networks, and future adversaries likely will possess additional
capabilities to target logistics and fuel infrastructure with even greater lethality. A second challenge is
the security of petroleum distribution networks. Most petroleum products are transported by sea, and
much of this trade passes through vulnerable chokepoints such as the Strait of Hormuz and the Straits of
Malacca. Piracy, political instability and military action can threaten the free flow of energy through
these vital channels. Additionally, the trend over the last thirty years to migrate refinement of petroleum
products to fixed locations outside our country's borders increases vulnerability of usable petroleum
products to physical attack, political unrest and commercial mismanagement at governmentally
controlled facilities. Energy supply vulnerability is, therefore, a strategic as well as a tactical threat. A
third challenge is the price volatility of a valuable commodity such as petroleum. Political instability and
tightening global oil supplies within some oil-producing nations create significant price volatility, raising
our costs and making budget and acquisition decisions more difficult. The effects of these costs are
significant, both in terms of the billions of dollars the nation sends overseas and in the geostrategic
consequences. The challenge will increase as the growing demand for energy particularly in Asia
places pressure on projected oil production and refining capacity.


Member Since: July 3, 2005 Posts: 421 Comments: 127566
Quoting Chapelhill:
Some of the worst tornadoes (other than last April's)in NC have occured in the overnight hours. There seems to be a secondary maximinum for severe weather then.


Kinda seems to be similar here along the Gulf Coast near New Orleans, as well. Different from what I am used to in the midwest.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Dr. Masters: While fossil fuel companies may or may not be the primary contributors (money) to the denial industry as you put it. I see no evidence from the documents released that this is the case when it comes to the Heartland Institute. Contributions (money) from the fossil fuel industry (companies) seem to be extremely small.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting knochel:
So if a private company spends $5M to advocate the questioning of the science of global warming is in someway a sinister plot, how should we look at the billions spent by governments around the world promoting global warming in order to raise taxes on industries that don't fit their politics or subsidizing "green" companies such as Solyndra with tax payer dollars. At least the Koch brothers are using their own money; the US government is borrowing money against my future grandchildren to support a theory (a term used by scientists to describe an idea that is not proven)that is being studied by scientists from both camps. A little context; consensus is from the Latin "feel together".


Let's get something straight. The Heartland Institute is not questioning the science of global warming. Period.

The Heartland Institute is attempting to create doubt about the science. They are trying to kill the message that we are doing significant harm to our planet and putting the future of our children at risk. And it's now clear that they are doing so because they are getting paid by fossil fuel industry interests.

We are screwing ourselves and those who follow us. A few people make large amounts of money from oil and coal and they do not want to see their business disrupted, even if it destroys the planet. They are no different from those who cook meth, knowing that it will destroy lives but putting personal gain before the welfare of others.

We've seen this before when the tobacco industry paid people, even doctors, to tell us that smoking wouldn't damage our health.

BTW, you don't know what "theory" means in scientific usage.
Member Since: February 22, 2011 Posts: 0 Comments: 1344
Im waiting for "R" Sen. Inhofe to "pop-in" with a retort any second too.


Ack!!!! : )
Member Since: July 3, 2005 Posts: 421 Comments: 127566
..seems the right minded have invaded the thread.

Gee, what's new in that world?

LoL
Member Since: July 3, 2005 Posts: 421 Comments: 127566
To all the people complaining about the post.

Get over it. Climate Change is the most important issue of the 21st century and Dr. Masters is of the clear (and correct) view that there are massive forces positioned against actually doing anything about it.

He is highlighting the fact that one of the major mouthpieces for the denial industry has been put under the spotlight. And no, nothing has been 'proven to be falsified'... only the Institute says one document, that it particularly doesn't like is and frankly I don't put much stock in that and it doesn't matter anyway since the verified financial records show clearly both the agenda and the pay offs.

So thank you, Dr. Masters, for keeping this on the frontburner and exposing all of your viewers to a continuing stream of facts on Hurricanes, on Severe Weather, and on Climate Change and Global Warming.

And by the way, for those who say he should be focusing on the danger of loss of life Severe Weather is posing to parts of the US today please do know that the denial industry is in fact enabling mass deaths and suffering to future generations due to rising sea levels, mass migrations, droughts and floods, and *more* severe weather.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Jrrtrollkien:


I would rather stick needles in my eyes.




Sooo...you'd rather be lied to all the time than to know the truth?



If yours is the attitude of our civilization, then Heaven help us.
Member Since: January 25, 2012 Posts: 33 Comments: 1520
Quoting knochel:
So if a private company spends $5M to advocate the questioning of the science of global warming is in someway a sinister plot, how should we look at the billions spent by governments around the world promoting global warming in order to raise taxes on industries that don't fit their politics or subsidizing "green" companies such as Solyndra with tax payer dollars. At least the Koch brothers are using their own money; the US government is borrowing money against my future grandchildren to support a theory (a term used by scientists to describe an idea that is not proven)that is being studied by scientists from both camps. A little context; consensus is from the Latin "feel together".


There certainly is a difference if one group is shown to be intentionally telling lies to distort the facts and confuse people.

Being a skeptic because you aren't yet convinced by the evidence, or have a legitimate alternate theory is one thing.

It is quite different to intentionally falsify knowledge, or confuse people about the reliability and interpretation of data due to corrupt political or financial motivations.



Lately, it comes as little surprise to me that the ultra conservatives, on which ever spectrum you want to measure them as such, are the ones behind the lies and misinformation.


If the Coal companies have a complaint against solar and wind companies taking advantage of government incentives, why don't they invest in solar and wind and compete?

The answer is a bit more complicated than that. With a few exceptions, the fossil fuel industry simply does NOT want individuals, small businesses, or even corporations to be able to make cheap energy of their own, by any means.

They have an energy monopoly, and want it to stay that way, and from their point of view, the best way to continue to enslave everyone else is to stick with coal and oil, since the sheep must always come back for more.

If we had cheap energy in which much of our energy came from private wind and solar units on our houses and businesses, which last for several decades or even a generation, and pay for themselves several times over in their expected life times, then the energy monopolies would go bankrupt.


Like any good crime lord, their whole life motivation is to "protect their turf" by undermining any advancement in energy technology and infrastructure.
Member Since: January 25, 2012 Posts: 33 Comments: 1520
101. MTWX
Somebody get Pat a Fresca stat!!! Got to go donate blood, be back after SPCs 1730 outlook is posted...
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
I've read every one of those books Dr. Masters mentioned (save the new one by climate change powerhouse Michael Mann), but I can't recommend Oreskes' book enough. Merchants of Doubt is well-written, thoroughly-researched, and chock-full of interesting, relevant, and infuriating facts. If you would rather not hear the truth, or if believe a Big Energy corporatacracy is the way to go, you'll not be happy with the book. But everyone else will get a lot out of it.

IMHO, the ones by Hoggan, Mooney, and Otto are particularly good. But if you really want to know what's going on--and what's going wrong in the world of science today, you could do worse than read any one of them.

Thank you for the excellent post, Dr. Masters. And enjoy your mini-vacation...
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting WxGeekVA:


I'm posting from my iPhone in English class while texting my girlfriend and listening to music.... :D Anything>English 100% of the time! (at least for me...). Plus my English teacher is a crazy old man...


Mine is a bald old woman....
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
""

its a bit wet
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting VAbeachhurricanes:



It's not gonna be ordinary :( ITS GONNA BE AWESOME
The Doc is right.It is going to be ordinary.I'm only expected to get 4 inches nothing that special really and it ruined my weekend plans.Why that S.O.B of a storm....
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Gotta run...you all have fun Debating Climate Change....let me know when i need to build may Ark I want my family safe also.
Member Since: September 2, 2007 Posts: 178 Comments: 20439
Quoting TropicalAnalystwx13:

a 30% chance of Severe Weather does not mean that there is a 70% chance it will not occur. It means there is the potential for a relatively significant severe weather outbreak.

Man, what got into everybody tody? It's Friday! Enjoy it like me!

[posted from school]


I'm posting from my iPhone in English class while texting my girlfriend and listening to music.... :D Anything>English 100% of the time! (at least for me...). Plus my English teacher is a crazy old man...
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
94. MTWX
Quoting VAbeachhurricanes:


People in mississippi melt in the snow I thought?

Us northern people transplanted here, just get a case of beer and park our butts in lawn chairs near the busiest intersections, and point and laugh when it snows/ices here!
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting NavarreMark:


Can you cook good SOS. Be nice to have some before the parade tomorrow. Hope the rain isn't to bad.


I can cook SOS the likes of which God ask's for seconds.

She's a big Biscuit Fan ya know?

: )
Member Since: July 3, 2005 Posts: 421 Comments: 127566


SPC AC 170617

DAY 2 CONVECTIVE OUTLOOK
NWS STORM PREDICTION CENTER NORMAN OK
1217 AM CST FRI FEB 17 2012

VALID 181200Z - 191200Z

...THERE IS A SLGT RISK OF SVR TSTMS FROM EXTREME SERN TX THROUGH
SRN PORTIONS OF THE GULF COASTAL STATES...

...SYNOPSIS...

A PROGRESSIVE SPLIT FLOW REGIME WILL CHARACTERIZE THE SYNOPTIC
PATTERN SATURDAY. PRIMARY FEATURE OF INTEREST IS CUTOFF UPPER LOW
LOCATED OVER THE NRN GULF OF CALIFORNIA AS OF LATE THURSDAY EVENING.
THIS FEATURE WILL ACCELERATE EWD IN RESPONSE TO AN UPSTREAM WAVE
APPROACHING THE PACIFIC NW. MODEL CONSENSUS IS THAT THIS TROUGH AXIS
WILL BE LOCATED FROM CNTRL TX INTO NERN MEXICO EARLY SATURDAY AND
WILL SUBSEQUENTLY ADVANCE INTO THE CNTRL GULF COAST STATES SATURDAY
NIGHT. CYCLOGENESIS WILL COMMENCE OVER SERN TX SATURDAY MORNING IN
VICINITY OF BAROCLINIC ZONE AND WITHIN DIVERGENT EXIT REGION OF
UPPER JET ROUNDING BASE OF THE TROUGH. THIS LOW WILL LIKELY DEEPEN
AS IT DEVELOPS NEWD INTO THE SERN STATES...REACHING AL OR GA LATE IN
THE PERIOD.

...GULF COASTAL STATES...

OBSERVATIONAL DATA INDICATE A RESERVOIR OF UPPER 60S DEWPOINTS OVER
THE CNTRL GULF SOUTH OF A QUASISTATIONARY FRONT. RETREATING HIGH
PRESSURE AND STRENGTHENING LLJ ASSOCIATED WITH DEVELOPING CYCLONE
SHOULD CONTRIBUTE TO INLAND ADVANCE OF THE FRONT INTO SRN PORTIONS
OF THE GULF COAST STATES. HOWEVER...ISENTROPIC ASCENT NORTH OF THE
WARM FRONT WILL RESULT IN AREAS OF WIDESPREAD CLOUDS AND RAIN EARLY
IN THE PERIOD FROM ERN TX INTO THE LOWER MS VALLEY WHICH COULD
POTENTIALLY LIMIT BOUNDARY LAYER DESTABILIZATION AND SLOW THE NWD
PROGRESS OF THE FRONT. NEVERTHELESS...AT LEAST WEAK INSTABILITY WITH
300-500 J/KG SBCAPE SHOULD DEVELOP INLAND DUE PRIMARILY TO NWD
ADVECTION OF HIGHER DEWPOINTS.

STORMS MAY INCREASE IN INTENSITY ALONG WARM CONVEYOR BELT AND
PRE-FRONTAL CONFLUENCE BANDS INITIALLY ACROSS SERN TX COASTAL AREA
WHERE WIND FIELDS AND VERTICAL SHEAR WILL STRENGTHEN WITH THE
APPROACH OF THE UPPER TROUGH. ACTIVITY WILL SUBSEQUENTLY DEVELOP
THROUGH THE GULF COASTAL STATES WARM SECTOR DURING THE DAY AND
OVERNIGHT WHERE MOISTENING BOUNDARY LAYER WILL CONTRIBUTE TO
POTENTIAL FOR NEAR SURFACE BASED CONVECTION. STRONG EFFECTIVE DEEP
SHEAR AND LARGE HODOGRAPHS ACCOMPANYING THE STRENGTHENING LLJ WILL
PROMOTE A RISK OF LEWP/BOWS AND EMBEDDED SUPERCELLS. DAMAGING WIND
AND ISOLATED TORNADOES WILL BE THE MAIN THREATS WITHIN THE EXPECTED
HIGH SHEAR/LOW CAPE ENVIRONMENT.

..DIAL.. 02/17/2012

CLICK TO GET WUUS02 PTSDY2 PRODUCT
Member Since: July 3, 2005 Posts: 421 Comments: 127566
Doing backflips trying to see if the rain will clear out... Endymion better roll
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
hey guys, sorry for the delay of not getting my post out and/or being here lol...

my frickin alarm clock didnt go off!!!!
Member Since: August 4, 2011 Posts: 46 Comments: 4481
Quoting JeffMasters:


I tend not to say much about a severe weather threat if SPC is putting it in the slight risk category. Also, the Virginia snow storm looks pretty ordinary. So, today was just about the climate change storm.

Jeff Masters

Slight risk days have the potential to be deadly and devastating (as you know). Anyways, with low clouds and drizzle across the area tomorrow morning, there will not be much in the way of instability, meaning that the hail threat will be low. However, with high wind shear, isolated tornadoes will definitely be possible. The Damaging Wind threat will be high.

Flooding is also a concern...Many areas are going to pick up 2-4", with localized 5" totals.

Anyways, I'm off to eat the disguisting lunch that this school overs. Later.
Member Since: July 6, 2010 Posts: 113 Comments: 31463


Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Er, JK,,this is a scientific entry.

But Feel free to hang out in the Ideology entry found in your wunderblog Directory sport.

You'll find it more to your lack of understanding as to the Scientific Method, as they are in tune with your er, "Philosophy".
Member Since: July 3, 2005 Posts: 421 Comments: 127566
Quoting Patrap:
I never take a post from someone and post here.

But in this case, Im going to make a extreme exception, because sometimes, its worth it to pass on the thoughts of another that are as profound as the words used to expound it.


Dr. Ricky Rood's entry




And you should not have posted this one as it is pure garbage. You climate alarmists have been sucked in.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting TropicalAnalystwx13:

Lol.

I have a free period right now...gotta go to lunch at 11:45.


Like she would buy that.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting MississippiWx:


You apparently have no grasp of how the percentages from the SPC and/or severe weather work.


True. The probabilities that you see on the graphics represent the probability of one or more events occurring within 25 miles of any point during the outlook period. This definition is used as the probability of severe weather at an given point is quite small. So over a large area a 30% chance leads to a pretty high severe weather chance since there will probably be severe weather within 50 miles of a point, (you can do the math to see what that probability is)
Member Since: February 11, 2012 Posts: 0 Comments: 9720
Quoting JeffMasters:


I tend not to say much about a severe weather threat if SPC is putting it in the slight risk category. Also, the Virginia snow storm looks pretty ordinary. So, today was just about the climate change storm.

Jeff Masters



Thanks Dr. Masters.....i just did not see it that way! Thats why i am a not an expert as you are sir....Sorry for my posts!
Member Since: September 2, 2007 Posts: 178 Comments: 20439
Quoting VAbeachhurricanes:


Im telling your mom

Lol.

I have a free period right now...gotta go to lunch at 11:45.
Member Since: July 6, 2010 Posts: 113 Comments: 31463
Quoting TropicalAnalystwx13:

a 30% chance of Severe Weather does not mean that there is a 70% chance it will not occur. It means there is the potential for a relatively significant severe weather outbreak.

Man, what got into everybody tody? It's Friday! Enjoy it like me!

[posted from school]


I think im the only school out right now :P
Member Since: Posts: Comments:

Viewing: 130 - 80

Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32Blog 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

Overcast
66 °F
Overcast