Moderate-strength Nor'easter may hit Sandy-devastated areas Wednesday

By: Dr. Jeff Masters , 4:16 PM GMT on November 02, 2012

Share this Blog
44
+

Storm-weary U.S. residents pounded by Superstorm Sandy may have a new storm to contend with next Wednesday: an early-season Nor'easter is expected to impact the mid-Atlantic and New England with strong winds and heavy rain. Our two top models, the European (ECMWF) and GFS (run by the National Weather Service), both predict that an area of low pressure will move off the coast of South Carolina on Tuesday evening. Once over the warm waters off the coast, the low will intensify, spreading heavy rains over coastal North Carolina on Tuesday night and Wednesday morning. The storm will accelerate to the north-northeast on Wednesday and pull in cold air from Canada. The storm is predicted to intensify into a medium-strength Nor'easter with a central pressure of 992 mb by Wednesday afternoon, when it will be centered a few hundred miles south of Long Island, NY. The European model, which did an exemplary job forecasting Hurricane Sandy, predicts a stronger storm that will stay just offshore and bring a 12-hour period of strong winds of 40 - 45 mph to the coasts of Maryland, Delaware, New Jersey, and New York on Wednesday morning and afternoon. The GFS model and 06Z NOGAPS model runs from 06Z (2 am EDT) this morning have a weaker storm that is farther offshore, with the main impact of the Nor'easter occurring Wednesday evening in coastal Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and Maine. The Nor'easter will likely bring a swath of 2 - 4" of rain to the coast, and the potential for more than a foot of snow to mountain areas of the New England. The storm is still five days away, and five-day forecasts of the path and intensity of Nor'easters usually have large errors. Nevertheless, residents and relief workers in the region hit by Sandy should anticipate the possibility of the arrival on Wednesday of a moderate-strength Nor'easter with heavy rain, accompanied by high winds capable of driving a 1 - 2 foot storm surge with battering waves.


Figure 1. Predicted wind speed for Wednesday morning, November 7, 2012, from the 00Z (8 pm EDT) run of the ECMWF model made on November 2, 2012. Winds tropical storm-force (40 - 45 mph) are predicted to extend from coastal Maryland to the east tip of Long Island, NY.


Figure 2. Forecast track error for four of our top models used to predict Hurricane Sandy. The GFS model performed the best for 1 - 3 day forecasts, but the European (ECMWF) model far out-performed all models at longer-range 4 - 5 day forecasts. This may be due to the fact the model was able to successfully predict the timing of the arrival of a trough of low pressure over the Eastern U.S. that acted to steer Sandy to the north and then northwest. Image credit: Morris Bender, NOAA/GFDL.


Figure 3. Forecast track error for four of our top models used to predict Hurricane Sandy, for their runs that began at 00Z October 25, 2012. The GFDL and ECMWF models made great forecasts that correctly showed Sandy making landfall in Southern New Jersey in five days. The GFS and HWRF models made good 1 - 3 day forecasts, but failed to anticipate Sandy's northward turn towards the U.S. coast. Image credit: Morris Bender, NOAA/GFDL.

Links
Impressive loop of 1-minute visible satellite imagery spanning 6 days of Sandy's life.

A one-day time lapse video from a New York City webcam showing Sandy's impact on the city. It's eerie to see the city suddenly plunged into darkness.

First round of damage assessment aerial imagery collected by NOAA's National Geodetic Survey on Oct. 31 along the New Jersey coast.


Figure 4. Flooding in Haiti from Hurricane Sandy. Image credit: The Lambi Fund of Haiti.

Charities mobilize for Sandy
Sandy's death toll of 98 in the U.S. makes the storm one of the 30 most deadly hurricanes to affect the U.S.. The outpouring of charitable donations in the wake of the terrible storm has been great to see. NBC is hosting a benefit concert at 8 pm tonight (Friday), and the main owners of The Weather Channel have agreed to match donations of up to $1 million to the American Red Cross, with all donations to benefit people in the hard-hit areas of the U.S. To have your donation matched, please visit www.redcross.org/sandy, or text SANDY to 90999. I also recommend my favorite disaster relief charity, Portlight.org. They are focusing their response efforts exclusively on the post-Sandy needs of people with disabilities.Check out the Portlight blog to see what they're up to.

Sandy's greatest devastation occurred in Haiti, where rains of up to 20 inches in 24 hours unleashed rampaging flood waters that killed at least 54, left 200,000 homeless, wiped out thousand of acres of crops, and killed massive numbers of livestock. For impoverished families in Haiti still struggling to recover from the earthquake in 2010 and Hurricane Isaac in August, Sandy was devastating. These crops are the very essence of rural Haitian’s livelihoods, and there are fears widespread starvation will result. A disaster relief charity in Haiti that I've contributed to for many years, The Lambi Fund of Haiti, is seeking donations to help farmers purchase local seeds so that they can replant their crops in the wake of this latest terrible Haitian catastrophe.

I'll have an update this weekend on the coming Nor'easter.

Jeff Masters

Floods due to Sandy (WunderLecha)
The waters of Sagua la Grande river crossing the National highway in Ranchuelo, Cuba
Floods due to Sandy
Tree damage in Tucker County, W.V. (beaudodson)
Thousands of trees were damaged in West Virginia by the heavy/wet snow. Many were without power for days.
Tree damage in Tucker County, W.V.
Remnants of Sandy (stoneygirl)
These are a few of the incredible clouds associated with Hurricane Sandy. I am blessed because I didn't have any damage. Thank you God. Sending all my thoughts and prayers to NY and NJ where the devastation will take years to recover from.
Remnants of Sandy

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: 405 - 355

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

Quoting yoboi:


oh so he is 93 what age range do ya need data from???

20-30 yrs old 30-40 yrs old?? 40-50 yrs old please inform me the age range....


His age has nothing to do with. The years past since he last worked in the field do.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting plutorising:
i'm pretty sure yoboi is a troll.


Actually I don't think he's a troll. I think he truly believes what he's saying. Unfortunately, the whole "belief" part is the problem. it runs counter to peer-reviewed science. He can paste article after article of spew backing up his beliefs. It'll never end. Why bother to try to change his mind?

For that matter, why bother to read the spew anymore? I stopped hours ago. I just minus and skip to the next post.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
403. yoboi
Quoting plutorising:
i'm pretty sure yoboi is a troll.



if ya can't add anything to the debate you are the troll be respectful i am, just because we have different views show some class.....
Member Since: August 25, 2010 Posts: 7 Comments: 2337
402. auburn (Mod)
Quoting CybrTeddy:


Awesome. Those tickets weren't cheap, but they were beyond worth it. I got some hi-resolution shots with my good camera (that other one is from the iPhone), with a telescopic lens, got pictures so close to the tiles you can read the serial numbers on them.


She has some picks on her blog also..take a look..
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
401. yoboi
James Lovelock essays, lectures and other writings

Home Page


About James Lovelock


Scientific papers


Articles


In the media


Speeches


Audio


Latest additions


Latest articles




Links
Degrees, awards and prizes
Degrees
Fellowships
Prizes, honours and awards
Honorary degrees (Doctorates in Science)
Degrees
1941 - B.Sc. in Chemistry from Manchester University
1948 - Ph.D. in Medicine from London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine
1959 - D.Sc. in Biophysics from London University

Fellowships
1954 - awarded the Rockefeller Travelling Fellowship in Medicine at Harvard University
1958 - 59 Visiting Scientist, Yale University Medical School
1994 - present Honorary Visiting Fellow, Green College, University of Oxford

Prizes, honours and awards
1955 - CIBA Foundation Award for Research in Ageing
1972 - Three NASA Certificates of Recognition for: Gas Chromatograph Interface System and Method; Vapor Phase Detectors; Combined Carrier Gas Separator and Generator for Gas Chromatographic Systems.
1974 - made a Fellow of the Royal Society
1975 - Tswett Medal for Chromatography
1980 - American Chemical Society's Award for Chromatography
1985 - Stephen Dal Nogare Award
1986 - the Silver Medal and Prize of the Plymouth Marine Laboratory
1988 - Norbert Gerbier Prize of the World Meteorological Association
1990 - Amsterdam Prize for the Environment by the Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences
1990 - Rosenstiel Award in Oceanographic Science
1990 - made a C.B.E. by Her Majesty the Queen
1996 - the Nonino Prize
1996 - the Volvo Environment Prize
1997 - the Blue Planet Prize
2000 - the Goi Peace Prize
2001 - Royal Geographic Society - Discovery Lifetime Award
2003 - made a Companion of Honour by Her Majesty the Queen

Honorary degrees (Doctorates in Science)
1982 - University of East Anglia
1988 - Plymouth Polytechnic (now Plymouth University)
1988 - Exeter University
1991 - Stockholm University
1993 - University of Edinburgh
1996 - University of Kent
1996 - University of East London
1997 - University of Colorado, Boulder (USA)


TOP TOP

------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------
Contents Copyright © James Lovelock and other copyright holders, 1965 - 2011.

This website is automatically published and maintained using 2tix.net.

Member Since: August 25, 2010 Posts: 7 Comments: 2337
Quoting auburn:


Skypony was there also I think..


Awesome. Those tickets weren't cheap, but they were beyond worth it. I got some hi-resolution shots with my good camera (that other one is from the iPhone), with a telescopic lens, got pictures so close to the tiles you can read the serial numbers on them.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Oz GFS coming out now. REALLY hoping we dont get another bad nor easter but i thnk its gonna be a nasty one again
Member Since: August 4, 2008 Posts: 0 Comments: 50
Quoting lat25five:
Anyone besides me think its worth opening a serious discusion on the benifits in delaying or suspending the move back to EST while most of the population in the Northern latitudes of the Eastern time zones may really benifit from staying on Daylightsavings time?


No, dagnabbit! I need the sun to come up at 4AM so I can milk my cows without lighting my kerosene lantern!

Seriously, why must we keep "falling back" every year? What possible good is it doing us to have to turn on our lights at 4:30PM in the winter?
I rail at this stupidity every fall. :P
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting yoboi:



so ya only listen to people with your agenda??? why not have an open mind with respected research???? i am posting respected people findings...


I have an open mind to all. BUT, it surely makes sense to not pollute the world as much as we can, or as much as we do. FYI, In think any climate change is a combination of us and various natural forces in whatever degree. BUt whatever that degree, how could it ever be good to pollute our home and oceans?! I've said before, I wanted 'green energy' LONG before it was 'green energy', just to not be paying some leeching company for my electric, when I can get it naturally via wind and/or Sun, was nothing even to do with climate change when I first was thinking of it. but sans that, renewable energy is healthier for the planet, so surely better for the planet, and I don't see how anyone could think less pollution is worse! Energy companies would still need to charge for upkeep...which they would 100 fold, so still make their precious profits to them and leeching stockholders, so would be win win for the planet, people and those who only care about their portfolio or bank balances
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting NJcat3cane:
How come when you upload a picture i lose my comment count? lol not like i had that many but still haha


it happens only once, when you "create" your new blog...
(or your first activity on that page)
an unfortunate WUbug
Member Since: July 12, 2007 Posts: 0 Comments: 6036
Quoting yoboi:
excerpts are reprinted below.]

Roger Pielke Jr.: Hurricanes and Human Choice - Wall Street Journal - October 31, 2012

'Sandy was terrible, but we're currently in a relative hurricane 'drought.' Connecting energy policy and disasters makes little scientific sense.'

By ROGER PIELKE JR.

Selected Excerpts: (For full article go to WSJ - Subscription required - Also see Prof. Roger Pielke Jr.'s website here & full free version here.)

But to call Sandy a harbinger of a "new normal," in which unprecedented weather events cause unprecedented destruction, would be wrong. This historic storm should remind us that planet Earth is a dangerous place, where extreme events are commonplace and disasters are to be expected. In the proper context, Sandy is less an example of how bad things can get than a reminder that they could be much worse.
[...]

While it's hardly mentioned in the media, the U.S. is currently in an extended and intense hurricane "drought." The last Category 3 or stronger storm to make landfall was Wilma in 2005. The more than seven years since then is the longest such span in over a century.

Flood damage has decreased as a proportion of the economy since reliable records were first kept by the National Weather Service in the 1930s, and there is no evidence of increasing extreme river floods. Historic tornado damage (adjusted for changing levels of development) has decreased since 1950, paralleling a dramatic reduction in casualties. Although the tragic impacts of tornadoes in 2011 (including 553 confirmed deaths) were comparable only to those of 1953 and 1964, such tornado impacts were far more common in the first half of the 20th century.

The United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change reports that drought in America's central plains has decreased in recent decades. And even when extensive drought occurs, we fare better. For example, the widespread 2012 drought was about 10% as costly to the U.S. economy as the multiyear 1988-89 drought, indicating greater resiliency of American agriculture.

There is therefore reason to believe we are living in an extended period of relatively good fortune with respect to disasters. A recurrence of the 1908 San Francisco earthquake today, for example, could cause more than $300 billion in damage and thousands of lives, according to a study I co-published in 2009.

[...]

Another danger: Public discussion of disasters risks being taken over by the climate lobby and its allies, who exploit every extreme event to argue for action on energy policy. In New York this week, Gov. Andrew Cuomo declared: "I think at this point it is undeniable but that we have a higher frequency of these extreme weather situations and we're going to have to deal with it." New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg spoke similarly.

Humans do affect the climate system, and it is indeed important to take action on energy policy—but to connect energy policy and disasters makes little scientific or policy sense. There are no signs that human-caused climate change has increased the toll of recent disasters, as even the most recent extreme-event report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change finds. And even under the assumptions of the IPCC, changes to energy policies wouldn't have a discernible impact on future disasters for the better part of a century or more.

The only strategies that will help us effectively prepare for future disasters are those that have succeeded in the past: strategic land use, structural protection, and effective forecasts, warnings and evacuations. That is the real lesson of Sandy.



That is an interesting article and I would agree, 100%, that no single weather related event would be a proving point that AGW is the root cause of said event. ... This is, however, only an opinion piece and no scientific evidence is introduced to back the opinion. What needs to be looked at the long term trends to see if there is an indication that the climate is changing. Have the world's severe weather related events become more frequent, more durable and happening in regions that are not normally associated with such extreme events? Should this be true, then you must come to the conclusion that something has changed in the global climate. This does not show certainty that it is a man induced change, but only that there has been a change. We must look at what could be behind the change. What has changed? We know that the planet's climate has changed in the past and we have a fairly good grasp on what could initiate a climate change.

1. A change in Earth's orbit. This is cyclical and we know the cycle. Earth's orbit is not a circular orbit but, rather, an elliptical orbit. We know where the planet is in that cycle and it is not a rapid warming/cooling cycle.

2. An increase in solar energy. There have been no observations that would support that this would be the driver for the current climate trends. Also, sun spot activity is on 11 years cycles and have no long term trends on our climate. Some cycles are are stronger or more extended but, again these are short term trends and not long term trends.

3. A change in the tilt of the planet on its axis. Too easily measured and we know that this is not what is happening now.

4. Tectonic activity. There has been no increase in tectonic activity that would account for the current warming trend that climate is now undergoing.

5. Volcanic activity. This would actually have a short term cooling affect due to the amount of particulates that are thrown into the atmosphere. A super volcanic event, on the other hand, would have a dramatic affect on our climate. There have been no such events during our lifetime. I cannot think of any evidence of one during man's existence on this planet. They can be life ending events for nearly every species on Earth.

6. Extra-planetary strikes. Again, if large enough, these can be species ending events. We have not had any events occur that would be large enough to change our climate.

7. Large methane escape events from a shallow oceanic thermal inversion that would bring methane from the ocean floor to the surface. Again, no evidence that this is yet occurring.

So, if natural forces are not behind the current climate warming trends, then what is left? We know that CO2 is a greenhouse gas and that mankind's activities are releasing tons/day of CO2 into the atmosphere. CO2 produced from the burning of fossil fuels have a distinct chemical marker. This chemical marker is showing up in the atmosphere. - How do we know that recent CO2 increases are due to human activities?

Eventually, the facts become too apparent to ignore.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting auburn:


Sent in a service ticket for you..
whats that mean? lol
Member Since: August 4, 2008 Posts: 0 Comments: 50
392. auburn (Mod)
Quoting NJcat3cane:
How come when you upload a picture i lose my comment count? lol not like i had that many but still haha


Sent in a service ticket for you..
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
How come when you upload a picture i lose my comment count? lol not like i had that many but still haha
Member Since: August 4, 2008 Posts: 0 Comments: 50
Oops. Mayda an erra at 380. Somehow left this article by Doc M off the list. This is the one that cites Pielke, (add) who is quoted extensively at comment 357.

Global warming and the frequency of intense Atlantic hurricanes: model results (April 5, 2010)
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
The Atlantic is quiet.

Member Since: Posts: Comments:
388. auburn (Mod)
Quoting CybrTeddy:
So, guess what I did today? ;)


Skypony was there also I think..
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Neapolitan:
I don't have to even bother; many others have done it before me. Try here. Or here. Or here. Or here.

A friendly suggestion: you might want to try a different tactic. Clogging the forum with one denialist non-sequitir after another in hopes that something will stick only serves to make you look both wrong and desperate. If you'd spend one-tenth as much time researching the issue as you do hunting down and pasting the gibberish you find on denialist sites, you'd be doing both yourself and the forum a huge favor.


Alot of copy and paste on here tonight Nea..
I wish more would take the time to fully understand what they are really reading and posting..
Thanks for your links to back up your statements..
(I don't always agree but I do like to think and digest info on my own)
They way it should be.. :)
Off to bed now..G'night all.. :)
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
27March2006 Dr. Jeff Masters: In September 2005, a paper published in Science magazine reported that worldwide, the number of Category 4 and 5 hurricanes had increased 80% in the past 30 years...
There are good reasons to believe that the actual increase in Category 4 and 5 hurricanes is far lower...
Member Since: August 21, 2007 Posts: 0 Comments: 4860
So, guess what I did today? ;)
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting KoritheMan:


I'm a little astonished she was able to kill so many people in the US. I don't mean to sound insensitive (after what happened the other night, I hope nobody takes it the wrong way), but if it were say, Haiti, it would pretty much be the norm for that country...
Take a look at the pictures i just uploaded. Add about 4-5 feet everywhere and thats what happened on my street. Add more then 6 feet thats what happen a few blocks away closer to the bay and ocean and thats how you get 100 people dead.. farther to my north got it a little worse and thats why they had deaths and my town didnt

EDIT: you have to add 4-5 feet to these pictures because they were taken during the AM high tide and the PM high tide was the really bad one that did most the damage
Member Since: August 4, 2008 Posts: 0 Comments: 50
Anyone besides me think its worth opening a serious discusion on the benifits in delaying or suspending the move back to EST while most of the population in the Northern latitudes of the Eastern time zones may really benifit from staying on Daylightsavings time?
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
382. yoboi
Quoting Some1Has2BtheRookie:


Nice try and not a bad effort. Also, James Lovelock is not a climatologist. Even the interview you posted have the word "environmentalist" for him.

Dr. James Lovelock - Degrees, Awards and Prizes.
Your article also does not make any claims that there will be more land falling hurricanes. Nor do any climatologist, that I am aware of, agree with Dr. James Lovelock's assessment he made there. Dr. Lovelock has not practiced in years. He is over 93 now.


oh so he is 93 what age range do ya need data from???

20-30 yrs old 30-40 yrs old?? 40-50 yrs old please inform me the age range....
Member Since: August 25, 2010 Posts: 7 Comments: 2337
Quoting PPUGrad04:
That Alaska storm is striking. If I didn't know better, I'd think it was a hurricane.

Me thinks we're in for some wacky stuff from here-on-out.

Not due to Global Warming, of course. No - this is totally normal run-of-the-mill weather we're seeing and are going to continue to see.

Move along.
Storms like this are nothing new up there. Neither are the Pacific NW version of a noreaster. Hybrid storms like Sandy that started as tropical have hit the West Coast in past years. Maybe bloggers here will pay more attention to them now but they are not anything new.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
And here's a few of Doc M's blogs on the subject of climate change aka global warming and Atlantic hurricanes...

Global warming and hurricanes part 1: The natural cycle (December 19, 2005)

Global warming and hurricanes part 2: An increase in late season activity (January 9, 2006)

Hurricane scientists divided on global warming issue (April 27, 2006) This article cites Pielke, the same person at comment 347, the WSJ article. (See comment 390)

This blog is a must read:

Cyclopsychic research breakthrough proves hurricanes/global warming connection
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting charlottefl:


That puts Sandy at the 25th deadliest Hurricane behind Agnes, which also ironically hit the NE US killing 122.


Unfortunately, I will not be surprised if the death toll climbs to the vicinity of 21-20 on the WU list. ie around 150+
Member Since: July 12, 2007 Posts: 0 Comments: 6036

Quoting PPUGrad04:

I guess you can't discern sarcasm, either.

I'll add you to the ever-growing list of online people who cannot do so.
Add me to whatever list you feel like adding, lol. Not gonna lose sleep over it.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
377. yoboi
Quoting Neapolitan:
I don't have to even bother; many others have done it before me. Try here. Or here. Or here. Or here.

A friendly suggestion: you might want to try a different tactic. Clogging the forum with one denialist non-sequitir after another in hopes that something will stick only serves to make you look both wrong and desperate. If you'd spend one-tenth as much time researching the issue as you do hunting down and pasting the gibberish you find on denialist sites, you'd be doing both yourself and the forum a huge favor.



so ya only listen to people with your agenda??? why not have an open mind with respected research???? i am posting respected people findings...
Member Since: August 25, 2010 Posts: 7 Comments: 2337

Quoting KoritheMan:

Why do people parrot the claim that you can't directly attribute anything to global warming, but then turn around and say things like this? A better way of phrasing it would be that these events are consistent with what we'd expect to see in a warming world, but judging by the wording, I'm not sure that was the intent.

Practice what you preach, guys.
I guess you can't discern sarcasm, either.

I'll add you to the ever-growing list of online people who cannot do so.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
375. etxwx
An overview of possible effects of Sandy on voting in various states:

Disruption From Hurricane Sandy May Be Felt at the Polls

By MICHAEL COOPER
Published: November 2, 2012

Excerpt: Some New Jersey voters may find their hurricane-damaged polling sites replaced by military trucks, with — in the words of the state’s lieutenant governor, Kim Guadagno — “a well-situated national guardsman and a big sign saying, ‘Vote Here.’ ” Half of the polling sites in Nassau County on Long Island still lacked power on Friday. And New York City was planning to build temporary polling sites in tents in some of its worst-hit neighborhoods.

The aftermath of Hurricane Sandy is threatening to create Election Day chaos in some storm-racked sections of New York, New Jersey and Connecticut — and some effects may also be felt in other states, including Pennsylvania, where some polling sites still lacked power on Friday morning.


And this is an interesting tidbit from the above article: "A little-noticed New York State law allows counties to seek permission for a second day of voting if they determine that voter turnout was less than 25 percent “as the direct consequence” of a disaster, but several election lawyers said that they did not believe it had ever been invoked and that it was unlikely to be used next week. "

Complete article here.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:

Quoting PPUGrad04:
That Alaska storm is striking. If I didn't know better, I'd think it was a hurricane.

Me thinks we're in for some wacky stuff from here-on-out.

Not due to Global Warming, of course. No - this is totally normal run-of-the-mill weather we're seeing and are going to continue to see.

Move along.
Why do people parrot the claim that you can't directly attribute anything to global warming, but then turn around and say things like this? A better way of phrasing it would be that these events are consistent with what we'd expect to see in a warming world, but judging by the wording, I'm not sure that was the intent.

Practice what you preach, guys.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
373. yoboi

Today the frozen Antarctic ice sheet borders the Southern Ocean. But tropical palm trees once flourished there.

An intense warming phase occurred 52 million years ago, leading tropical vegetation, including palms and relatives of today's tropical Baobab trees, to grow on the continent’s now frozen coasts.

The surprising discovery came from a study of drill cores obtained from the seafloor near Antarctica. The results, published in the journal Nature, show that warm ocean currents and high carbon dioxide (CO2) levels in the air boosted temperatures, allowing tropical vegetation to grow where visitors today meet only icebergs and freezing cold.

"The CO2 content of the atmosphere as assumed for that time interval is not enough on its own to explain the almost tropical conditions in the Antarctic," said Jörg Pross, a paleoclimatologist at the Goethe University and member of the Biodiversity and Climate Research Center in Frankfurt, Germany.


'The CO2 content of the atmosphere ... is not enough on its own to explain the almost tropical conditions in the Antarctic.'
- Jörg Pross


"Another important factor was the transfer of heat via warm ocean currents that reached Antarctica."

When the warm ocean current collapsed and the Antarctic coast came under the influence of cooler ocean currents, the tropical rainforests, palm trees and Baobab relatives also disappeared.

The scientists used rock samples from drill cores on the seabed obtained off the coast of Wilkes Land, Antarctica, as part of the Integrated Ocean Drilling Program (IODP). The samples are between 53 and 46 million years old and contain fossil pollen and spores that are known to originate from the Antarctic coastal region.

The researchers were thus able to reconstruct the local vegetation on Antarctica and, accordingly, interpret the presence of tropical and subtropical rainforests covering the coastal region 52 million years ago.

The scientists' evaluations show that the winter temperatures on the Wilkes Land coast were warmer than 50 degrees Fahrenheit at that time, despite three months of polar night. The continental interior, however, was noticeably cooler, with the climate supporting the growth of temperate rainforests characterized by southern beech and Araucaria trees of the type common in New Zealand today.

Additional evidence of extremely mild temperatures was provided by analysis of organic compounds that were produced by soil bacteria populating the soils along the Antarctic coast.

"By studying naturally occurring climate warming periods in the geological past, our knowledge of the mechanisms and processes in the climate system increases," Pross said.



Member Since: August 25, 2010 Posts: 7 Comments: 2337
Quoting yoboi:



prove watts wrong.....ya can't do it...
I don't have to even bother; many others have done it before me. Try here. Or here. Or here. Or here.

A friendly suggestion: you might want to try a different tactic. Clogging the forum with one denialist non-sequitir after another in hopes that something will stick only serves to make you look both wrong and desperate. If you'd spend one-tenth as much time researching the issue as you do hunting down and pasting the gibberish you find on denialist sites, you'd be doing both yourself and the forum a huge favor.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting PPUGrad04:
That Alaska storm is striking. If I didn't know better, I'd think it was a hurricane.

Me thinks we're in for some wacky stuff from here-on-out.

Not due to Global Warming, of course. No - this is totally normal run-of-the-mill weather we're seeing and are going to continue to see.

Move along.


950 mb...it was 948 before. Hurricane winds right there !
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
That Alaska storm is striking. If I didn't know better, I'd think it was a hurricane.

Me thinks we're in for some wacky stuff from here-on-out.

Not due to Global Warming, of course. No - this is totally normal run-of-the-mill weather we're seeing and are going to continue to see.

Move along.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting KoritheMan:

Cool.


I'll give you a year guarantee
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Bluestorm5:
Plus, we haven't got a landfalling major OFFICIALLY since Wilma in 2005. Ike, Irene, Isaac, and Sandy were all either Category 1 or 2 at landfall.
Far as I know, Sandy was not officially a hurricane at "landfall."
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting KoritheMan:


I'm a little astonished she was able to kill so many people in the US. I don't mean to sound insensitive (after what happened the other night, I hope nobody takes it the wrong way), but if it were say, Haiti, it would pretty much be the norm for that country...


That puts Sandy at the 25th deadliest Hurricane behind Agnes, which also ironically hit the NE US killing 122.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:

Quoting trHUrrIXC5MMX:


sure
Cool.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting KoritheMan:

For 30 days or my money back?


sure
Member Since: Posts: Comments:

Quoting trHUrrIXC5MMX:


risk free
For 30 days or my money back?
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
363. yoboi
Quoting Neapolitan:
Why would it keep me busy? Watts' site contains as much intelligence as an episode of Jersey Shore, and about as much truthful and honest scientific content; if I want my fill of nonsensical, spittle-flecked blather, I'll watch Snooki get drunk and pass out in some liquor store parking lot.



prove watts wrong.....ya can't do it...
Member Since: August 25, 2010 Posts: 7 Comments: 2337
Gulf of Alaska MAJOR STORM



click on the pic for a 4x bigger size...risk free
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Some1Has2BtheRookie:


We are being nice, Taz. No name calling. No mud slinging. Everything is actually quite cordial between yoboi and I. I respect his/her opinion. We are just trying to back up our opinions.



good
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Chucktown:
Here, this should keep Nea busy tonight - He loves Watts Up With That?

Link
Why would it keep me busy? Watts' site contains as much intelligence as an episode of Jersey Shore, and about as much truthful and honest scientific content; if I want my fill of nonsensical, spittle-flecked blather, I'll watch Snooki get drunk and pass out in some liquor store parking lot.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting charlottefl:
So sad, death toll up to 106 in the U.S.

Link


I'm a little astonished she was able to kill so many people in the US. I don't mean to sound insensitive (after what happened the other night, I hope nobody takes it the wrong way), but if it were say, Haiti, it would pretty much be the norm for that country...
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting yoboi:

James Lovelock is a world-renowned scientist and environmentalist.

559
Change text size for the story Print this story Report an error

Related Stories
Climate data feeling the heat
Recap: Lorrie Goldstein discusses climate change
Two months ago, James Lovelock, the godfather of global warming, gave a startling interview to msnbc.com in which he acknowledged he had been unduly “alarmist” about climate change.

The implications were extraordinary.

Lovelock is a world-renowned scientist and environmentalist whose Gaia theory — that the Earth operates as a single, living organism — has had a profound impact on the development of global warming theory.

Unlike many “environmentalists,” who have degrees in political science, Lovelock, until his recent retirement at age 92, was a much-honoured working scientist and academic.

His inventions have been used by NASA, among many other scientific organizations.

Lovelock’s invention of the electron capture detector in 1957 first enabled scientists to measure CFCs (chlorofluorocarbons) and other pollutants in the atmosphere, leading, in many ways, to the birth of the modern environmental movement.

Having observed that global temperatures since the turn of the millennium have not gone up in the way computer-based climate models predicted, Lovelock acknowledged, “the problem is we don’t know what the climate is doing. We thought we knew 20 years ago.” Now, Lovelock has given a follow-up interview to the UK’s Guardian newspaper in which he delivers more bombshells sure to anger the global green movement, which for years worshipped his Gaia theory and apocalyptic predictions that billions would die from man-made climate change by the end of this century.

Lovelock still believes anthropogenic global warming is occurring and that mankind must lower its greenhouse gas emissions, but says it’s now clear the doomsday predictions, including his own (and Al Gore’s) were incorrect.

He responds to attacks on his revised views by noting that, unlike many climate scientists who fear a loss of government funding if they admit error, as a freelance scientist, he’s never been afraid to revise his theories in the face of new evidence. Indeed, that’s how science advances.

Among his observations to the Guardian:

(1) A long-time supporter of nuclear power as a way to lower greenhouse gas emissions, which has made him unpopular with environmentalists, Lovelock has now come out in favour of natural gas fracking (which environmentalists also oppose), as a low-polluting alternative to coal.

As Lovelock observes, “Gas is almost a give-away in the U.S. at the moment. They’ve gone for fracking in a big way. This is what makes me very cross with the greens for trying to knock it … Let’s be pragmatic and sensible and get Britain to switch everything to methane. We should be going mad on it.” (Kandeh Yumkella, co-head of a major United Nations program on sustainable energy, made similar arguments last week at a UN environmental conference in Rio de Janeiro, advocating the development of conventional and unconventional natural gas resources as a way to reduce deforestation and save millions of lives in the Third World.)

(2) Lovelock blasted greens for treating global warming like a religion.

“It just so happens that the green religion is now taking over from the Christian religion,” Lovelock observed. “I don’t think people have noticed that, but it’s got all the sort of terms that religions use … The greens use guilt. That just shows how religious greens are. You can’t win people round by saying they are guilty for putting (carbon dioxide) in the air.”

(3) Lovelock mocks the idea modern economies can be powered by wind turbines.

As he puts it, “so-called ‘sustainable development’ … is meaningless drivel … We rushed into renewable energy without any thought. The schemes are largely hopelessly inefficient and unpleasant. I personally can’t stand windmills at any price.”

(4) Finally, about claims “the science is settled” on global warming: “One thing that being a scientist has taught me is that you can never be certain about anything. You never know the truth. You can only approach it and hope to get a bit nearer to it each time. You iterate towards the truth. You don’t know it.”



Name one scientific organization that disputes AGW, and has the peer-reviewed publications to support their claim.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
357. yoboi
excerpts are reprinted below.]

Roger Pielke Jr.: Hurricanes and Human Choice - Wall Street Journal - October 31, 2012

'Sandy was terrible, but we're currently in a relative hurricane 'drought.' Connecting energy policy and disasters makes little scientific sense.'

By ROGER PIELKE JR.

Selected Excerpts: (For full article go to WSJ - Subscription required - Also see Prof. Roger Pielke Jr.'s website here & full free version here.)

But to call Sandy a harbinger of a "new normal," in which unprecedented weather events cause unprecedented destruction, would be wrong. This historic storm should remind us that planet Earth is a dangerous place, where extreme events are commonplace and disasters are to be expected. In the proper context, Sandy is less an example of how bad things can get than a reminder that they could be much worse.
[...]

While it's hardly mentioned in the media, the U.S. is currently in an extended and intense hurricane "drought." The last Category 3 or stronger storm to make landfall was Wilma in 2005. The more than seven years since then is the longest such span in over a century.

Flood damage has decreased as a proportion of the economy since reliable records were first kept by the National Weather Service in the 1930s, and there is no evidence of increasing extreme river floods. Historic tornado damage (adjusted for changing levels of development) has decreased since 1950, paralleling a dramatic reduction in casualties. Although the tragic impacts of tornadoes in 2011 (including 553 confirmed deaths) were comparable only to those of 1953 and 1964, such tornado impacts were far more common in the first half of the 20th century.

The United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change reports that drought in America's central plains has decreased in recent decades. And even when extensive drought occurs, we fare better. For example, the widespread 2012 drought was about 10% as costly to the U.S. economy as the multiyear 1988-89 drought, indicating greater resiliency of American agriculture.

There is therefore reason to believe we are living in an extended period of relatively good fortune with respect to disasters. A recurrence of the 1908 San Francisco earthquake today, for example, could cause more than $300 billion in damage and thousands of lives, according to a study I co-published in 2009.

[...]

Another danger: Public discussion of disasters risks being taken over by the climate lobby and its allies, who exploit every extreme event to argue for action on energy policy. In New York this week, Gov. Andrew Cuomo declared: "I think at this point it is undeniable but that we have a higher frequency of these extreme weather situations and we're going to have to deal with it." New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg spoke similarly.

Humans do affect the climate system, and it is indeed important to take action on energy policy—but to connect energy policy and disasters makes little scientific or policy sense. There are no signs that human-caused climate change has increased the toll of recent disasters, as even the most recent extreme-event report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change finds. And even under the assumptions of the IPCC, changes to energy policies wouldn't have a discernible impact on future disasters for the better part of a century or more.

The only strategies that will help us effectively prepare for future disasters are those that have succeeded in the past: strategic land use, structural protection, and effective forecasts, warnings and evacuations. That is the real lesson of Sandy.

Member Since: August 25, 2010 Posts: 7 Comments: 2337
Quoting charlottefl:
So sad, death toll up to 106 in the U.S.

Link


Very sad, indeed. Let us hope and pray that this number does not become any larger. There is already enough pain and suffering.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
000
WTPZ42 KNHC 030239
TCDEP2

TROPICAL STORM ROSA DISCUSSION NUMBER 16
NWS NATIONAL HURRICANE CENTER MIAMI FL EP172012
800 PM PDT FRI NOV 02 2012

THE LOW-LEVEL CENTER OF ROSA BECAME COMPLETELY EXPOSED TO THE WEST
OF THE DEEP CLOUDINESS EARLIER TODAY...AND CONVECTION HAD BEEN
DECREASING THROUGHOUT THE AFTERNOON. A NEW AREA OF DEEP
CONVECTION...HOWEVER...DEVELOPED OVER THE NORTHEAST QUADRANT OF THE
CIRCULATION AROUND 0000 UTC...AND IT HAS BEEN EXPANDING RECENTLY.
THE INITIAL WIND SPEED IS HELD AT 40 KT...WHICH IS IN AGREEMENT
WITH A BLEND OF THE LATEST DVORAK CI-NUMBERS FROM TAFB...SAB...AND
UW-CIMSS ADT. WESTERLY TO SOUTHWESTERLY WIND SHEAR IS EXPECTED TO
INCREASE DURING THE NEXT COUPLE OF DAYS. THESE UNFAVORABLE
ENVIRONMENTAL WINDS COMBINED WITH DRIER AND MORE STABLE AIR THAT IS
NEARING THE CYCLONE SHOULD CAUSE ROSA TO GRADUALLY WEAKEN. THE
OFFICIAL INTENSITY FORECAST FOLLOWS THE TREND OF THE GUIDANCE AND
CALLS FOR ROSA TO BECOME A REMNANT LOW IN ABOUT 36 HOURS...WHEN THE
SHEAR IS EXPECTED TO BE STRONGER THAN 30 KT.

THE TROPICAL STORM APPEARS TO BE TURNING TOWARD THE WEST...LIKELY
DUE TO THE INFLUENCE OF A LOW- TO MID-LEVEL TROUGH TO THE NORTH OF
ROSA. THE SPREAD IN THE TRACK MODELS IS QUITE LARGE WITH THE GFS
AND GFDL MODELS SHOWING THE STORM TURNING NORTHWARD SOON...WHILE
THE ECMWF AND UKMET MODELS SHOW A GENERAL WEST-NORTHWESTWARD
MOTION. THE NHC TRACK FORECAST IS BETWEEN THOSE SCENARIOS AND IS
NUDGED TO THE NORTH OF THE PREVIOUS ONE...BUT STILL LIES A LITTLE
TO THE SOUTH OR LEFT OF THE CONSENSUS AIDS.

FORECAST POSITIONS AND MAX WINDS

INIT 03/0300Z 12.7N 119.4W 40 KT 45 MPH
12H 03/1200Z 12.7N 119.8W 35 KT 40 MPH
24H 04/0000Z 12.8N 120.1W 30 KT 35 MPH
36H 04/1200Z 13.1N 120.5W 25 KT 30 MPH...POST-TROP/REMNT LOW
48H 05/0000Z 13.5N 120.9W 25 KT 30 MPH...POST-TROP/REMNT LOW
72H 06/0000Z 14.5N 121.8W 20 KT 25 MPH...POST-TROP/REMNT LOW
96H 07/0000Z 15.5N 123.0W 20 KT 25 MPH...POST-TROP/REMNT LOW
120H 08/0000Z...DISSIPATED

$$
FORECASTER CANGIALOSI
Member Since: Posts: Comments:

Viewing: 405 - 355

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