Lessons from 2012: Droughts, not Hurricanes, are the Greater Danger

By: Dr. Jeff Masters , 3:34 PM GMT on November 16, 2012

Share this Blog
51
+

The colossal devastation and loss of life wrought by Hurricane Sandy makes the storm one of the greatest disasters in U.S. history. The storm and its aftermath have rightfully dominated the weather headlines this year, and Sandy will undoubtedly be remembered as the most notable global weather event of 2012. But shockingly, Sandy is probably not even the deadliest or most expensive weather disaster this year in the United States--Sandy's damages of perhaps $50 billion will likely be overshadowed by the huge costs of the great drought of 2012. While it will be several months before the costs of America's worst drought since 1954 are known, the 2012 drought is expected to cut America's GDP by 0.5 - 1 percentage points, said Deutsche Bank Securities this week. “If the U.S. were growing at 4 percent, it wouldn’t be as big an issue, but at 2 percent, it’s noticed,” said Joseph LaVorgna, the chief U.S. economist at Deutsche. Since the U.S. GDP is approximately $15 trillion, the drought of 2012 represents a $75 - $150 billion hit to the U.S. economy. This is in the same range as the estimate of $77 billion in costs for the drought, made by Purdue University economist Chris Hurt in August. While Sandy's death toll of 113 in the U.S. is the second highest death toll from a U.S. hurricane since 1972, it is likely to be exceeded by the death toll from the heat waves that accompanied this year's drought. The heat waves associated with the U.S. droughts of 1980 and 1988 had death tolls of 10,000 and 7,500 respectively, according to NOAA's National Climatic Data Center, and the heat wave associated with the $12 billion 2011 Texas drought killed 95 Americans. With July 2012 the hottest month in U.S. history, I expect the final heat death toll in the U.S. this year will be much higher than Sandy's death toll.


Figure 1. The top-ten list of most expensive U.S. weather-related disasters from NOAA's National Climatic Data Center (NCDC) is dominated by hurricanes and droughts. Three of the top five disasters are droughts. The numbers for Hurricane Sandy and the 2012 drought are preliminary numbers from media sources, and are not from NCDC.

Drought: civilization's greatest natural enemy
People fear storms, and spectacular and devastating storms like Hurricane Sandy and Hurricane Katrina have stirred more debate in the U.S. about taking action against climate change than any other weather event. But I argue that this attention is misplaced. Drought is our greatest enemy. Drought impacts the two things we need to live--food and water. The history of civilization is filled with tales of great storms that have killed thousands and caused untold suffering and destruction. But cities impacted by great storms inevitably recover and rebuild, often stronger than before. I expect that New York City, the coast of New Jersey, and other areas battered by Sandy will do likewise. But drought can crash civilizations. Drought experts Justin Sheffield and Eric Wood of Princeton, in their 2011 book, Drought, list more than ten civilizations and cultures that probably collapsed because of drought. Among them: The Mayans of 800 - 1000 AD. The Anasazi culture in the Southwest U.S. in the 11th - 12th centuries. The ancient Akkadian Empire in Mesopotamia. The Chinese Ming Dynasty of 1500 - 1730. When the rains stop and the soil dries up, cities die and civilizations collapse, as people abandon lands no longer able to supply them with the food and water they need to live.


Figure 2. Ruins of the Cliff Palace at Mesa Verde National Park in Colorado. Beginning in 1150 AD, North America experienced a 300-year drought called the Great Drought. This drought has often been cited as a primary cause of the collapse of the ancient Anasazi civilization in the Southwest U.S., and abandonment of places like the Cliff Palace.

The coming great droughts
We should not assume that the 21st century global civilization is immune from collapse due to drought. If we continue on our current path of ever-increasing emissions of carbon dioxide, the hotter planet that we will create will surely spawn droughts far more intense than any seen in recorded history, severely testing the ability of our highly interconnected global economy to cope. The coming great drought disasters will occur at a time when climate change is simultaneously creating record rainfall and flooding in areas that happen to be in the way of storms. Global warming puts more heat energy into the atmosphere. That means more more water will evaporate from the oceans to create heavier rains and make storms stronger, and there will be more heat energy to increase the intensity of heat waves and droughts. It all depends upon if you happen to lie on the prevailing storm track or not which extreme you'll experience. In the future, if you're not being cooked in a record drought, you're going to be washed away in a record flood. Just ask the residents of the Midwest. In 2011, residents of the Midwest endured the largest floods on record on their three great rivers--the Mississippi, Missouri, and Ohio. In 2012, the same region endured their worst drought since 1954, and a top-ten warmest summer.

The nation's top scientific research group, the National Research Council, released an 18-month study on November 9, 2012, titled, "Climate and Social Stress: Implications for Security Analysis". They stated: “It is prudent to expect that over the course of a decade some climate events--including single events, conjunctions of events occurring simultaneously or in sequence in particular locations, and events affecting globally integrated systems that provide for human well-being--will produce consequences that exceed the capacity of the affected societies or global system to manage and that have global security implications serious enough to compel international response.” In other words, states will fail, millions will suffer famine, mass migrations and war will break out, and national and international agencies will be too overwhelmed to cope. We were very lucky that the 2012 U.S. drought did not occur the year following the great 2010 Russian drought. That drought drove up food prices to the highest levels since 1992, and helped trigger social unrest that led to the "Arab Spring" revolts that overthrew multiple governments. Severe droughts in back-to-back years in major world grain-producing areas could cause unprecedented global famine and unrest, and climate change is steadily increasing the odds of this happening.


Figure 3. Black Sunday: On April 14, 1935 a "Black Blizzard" hit Oklahoma and Texas with 60 mph winds, sweeping up topsoil loosened by the great Dust Bowl drought that began in the early 1930s.

Learning from the past: the great Dust Bowl of the 1930s

"The clouds appeared and went away, and in a while they did not try anymore."
- Nobel Prize-winning author John Steinbeck in his 1939 classic, The Grapes of Wrath, describing the weather in Oklahoma during the great Dust Bowl drought of the 1930s.

No disaster in American history caused more suffering than the legendary Dust Bowl drought of the 1930s, as year after year of desperately dry conditions across the Great Plains dried out farmlands, forcing 2.5 million people to leave their homes and seek a better life elsewhere. At its peak in July 1934, drought conditions covered an astonishing 80% of the contiguous U.S., making it our largest drought ever recorded. The true cost of the drought is impossible to calculate, but the amount of government assistance paid out was $13 billion in today's dollars. The heat waves that accompanied the drought killed at least 5,000 people, making it one of the deadliest disasters in U.S. history. Fortunately, a repeat of the dust storms and hardships of the 1930s Dust Bowl are much less likely now, because we learned from our mistakes. In a 2009 paper titled, Amplification of the North American "Dust Bowl" drought through human-induced land degradation, a team of scientists led by Benjamin Cook of the Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory explained the situation that led up to the Dust Bowl:

During the 1920s, agriculture in the United States expanded into the central Great Plains. Much of the original, drought-resistant prairie grass was replaced with drought-sensitive wheat. With no drought plan and few erosion-control measures in place, this led to large-scale crop failures at the initiation of the drought, leaving fields devegetated and barren, exposing easily eroded soil to the winds. This was the source of the major dust storms and atmospheric dust loading of the period on a level unprecedented in the historical record.

Improved farming practices adopted after the great Dust Bowl allowed the Midwest to endure the great multi-year drought of 1951 - 1954 without the kind of damage the Dust Bowl caused. Those improved farming practices, in combination with the development of improved drought-resistant grains, have helped keep the damages from the 2012 drought down. But climate change has the potential to bring far more severe droughts to the U.S. than anything seen in American history. The great drought of 2012 is a harbinger of the future, and we have a significant challenge to meet if we are to continue feeding the world in the face of intensifying droughts during the coming decades. We need to stop the unsustainable pumping of our aquifers, move even more aggressively to develop improved drought-resistant grains, and practice better water conservation if we are to avoid future Dust Bowl-scale tragedies.



Renowned documentary film maker Ken Burns debuts his new film, "The Dust Bowl", on PBS this Sunday and Monday, November 18 and 19, 2012, from 8 - 10 pm EST. Catch the trailer at pbs.org. It promises to be a fascinating and highly relevant story, told by one of America's great story-tellers. PBS is also airing a show on Hurricane Sandy, Inside the Megastorm, on NOVA on Sunday night November 18, at 7 pm. I helped them out this week with fact checking and graphics for the show.

Jeff Masters

Burned Corn (treeman)
From the wind and static electricity. This was no till corn
Burned Corn
Drought (GaryVA)
Most of Texas has been under serious drought conditions for about a year and a half. Much of the state is under Extreme Drought conditions. The agricultural/ranching/rural areas of the county are most affected, as the drought has a direct and significant impact on the livelihood of those making their living in a way dependent on nature. The importance of rain to daily life is reflected in this sign at a church in rural George West, Texas, in Live Oak, County.
Drought

Reader Comments

Comments will take a few seconds to appear.

Post Your Comments

Please sign in to post comments.

Sign In or Register Sign In or Register

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: 876 - 826

Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18Blog Index

876. VR46L
7:09 PM GMT on November 19, 2012
Quoting Neapolitan:
Wow, guy. You're so obsessed with defending your superstitious beliefs that you go off on an ad hominem tangent. ;-)

The thing is, I believe in that which empirical science explains. That's my right. Others choose to jettison part or all of that science, and instead go with that which is based on nothing more than ancient superstition, legend, and myth. That's their right. But answer me this: which of those sides deserves to be "taken seriously"?


Actually everyone has a right to their opinions and beliefs in my opinion ...
Member Since: March 1, 2012 Posts: 0 Comments: 7057
875. eyeofbetsy
4:57 PM GMT on November 19, 2012
Quoting ILwthrfan:
Wow so we go from politics to religion in a matter of a week....lol

The most pondering single question one can make with respect to religion. Use Occam's razor with respect to the big bang.

How can you have nothing before you have something? Some outside force would have to create that moment for it to exist. Even if everything is cyclical how does that something exist without never being created?

If its one thing we can deduce from what we know now it's that to create something you need an outside force or variable. You can not create with nothing. Therefor to me something or some outside or unknown force would have had to create the process to begin with, even if its cyclic. It has to have a starting point.


Some scientist suggest that "nothing" needs to be redefined, in that nothing might be something. My definition would be that nothing is the absence of everything except the nothing.
Member Since: July 20, 2005 Posts: 0 Comments: 49
874. Neapolitan
4:53 PM GMT on November 19, 2012
Quoting RTSplayer:
Try to be a little less ridiculous if you want to be taken seriously.
Wow, guy. You're so obsessed with defending your superstitious beliefs that you go off on an ad hominem tangent. ;-)

The thing is, I believe in that which empirical science explains. That's my right. Others choose to jettison part or all of that science, and instead go with that which is based on nothing more than ancient superstition, legend, and myth. That's their right. But answer me this: which of those sides deserves to be "taken seriously"?
Member Since: November 8, 2009 Posts: 4 Comments: 14167
873. bohonkweatherman
4:51 PM GMT on November 19, 2012
Quoting RitaEvac:
TX Outlook: We're going down ship

The global factors that produced the incredible 2011 drought remain in place and in many areas of the state, while the drought of 2011 was eased it was not ended with the past spring and summer wet weather and water supply lakes especially in west and central TX remain at dangerously low levels. The failure of ENSO warm conditions (El Nino) to fully develop and support weather pattern teleconnection changes into the southern plains thus far this fall are concerning. With the overall background pattern supportive of a dry southern plains climate and this not likely to change for the next several years, a continuation of the long term drought and increased severity of drought appears at least possible this winter into next spring. Expected above normal rainfall this winter and next spring looks less likely with the failure of El Nino development and in fact the current pattern of such little rainfall over the past 6 weeks is very similar to the fall of 2010 (or the start of the 2011 drought). Given already low lake storage levels and significantly low soil moisture values over much of the state, lack of winter rainfall in 2012-2013 will have significant impacts and there is potential for severe or even exceptional drought development by spring.



Additionally, with winter freezes upon the region and the curing of fine fuels, the threat for increased wildfire activity is likely without widespread wetting rainfall. KBDI values are already above 600 in several counties with values above 700 considered critical. Vegetation health already stressed from the 2011 drought will suffer if rainfall remains on the low side prior to the onset of warmer temperatures next spring. Critical fire weather days behind cold frontal passages will be increasing if widespread rains do not occur.



Lake Storage Conditions:

Lake Buchanan: -25.07 (43%)

Lake Conroe: -3.23 (85%)

Lake Houston: -.24 (97%)

Lake Livingston: -.62 (97%)
Lake Travis: -48.26 (40%)

Sam Rayburn: -4.41 (83%)

Lake Somerville: -2.21 (84%)

Lake Texana: -1.73 (90%)

Toledo Bend: -4.28 (84%)



Total state of Texas water storage supply is at 65.97% which is down from 68.10% a month ago and 77.68% 6 months ago
.
Maybe Texas will get some rain next tropical season? That is plan b without El Nino, Happy Thanksgiving early to all from bone dry southcentral Texas where we should be in 80s and humid most of this week.
Member Since: July 5, 2009 Posts: 0 Comments: 1348
872. WunderAlertBot (Admin)
4:44 PM GMT on November 19, 2012
JeffMasters has created a new entry.
871. SouthShoreLI
4:42 PM GMT on November 19, 2012
Quoting FLWeatherFreak91:
Did anyone watch the documentaries on discovery and history about Sandy? Which is better? I have both recorded... Choices choices choices!


I watched them both, as well another documentary on Ch. 13 by NOVA. IMO, they were all excellent. Discovery had more home video footage. History had more personal accounts. I'd watch both.
Member Since: October 28, 2012 Posts: 0 Comments: 7
870. slinkyredfoot
4:41 PM GMT on November 19, 2012
its simple really. the potential for what we know as the universe has always been there. and time itself is multi-dimensional. its either that or the belief that there was nothing and then something created it. the "potential" has always been there. and it always will.
Member Since: November 3, 2012 Posts: 0 Comments: 4
869. Grothar
4:38 PM GMT on November 19, 2012
Quoting hydrus:
We certainly have had some wonderful and enlightened beings exist on the Earth. The funny thing is many times it is the ones who feel they will never be enlightened actually are, and the people who claim to be are not...Makes things interesting to say the least.


They are so few, we can actually name them.
Member Since: July 17, 2009 Posts: 71 Comments: 27519
867. RitaEvac
4:37 PM GMT on November 19, 2012
Member Since: July 14, 2008 Posts: 2 Comments: 9689
866. Draefendscur
4:34 PM GMT on November 19, 2012
Quoting RTSplayer:
Xyrus2000:

I find it silly that you still cling to this thing when even some of the people who developed it no longer agree with it or believe in it. [etc]


Hmm.

I am a professional astronomer 'in training' and I can tell you that the overwhelming majority of astrophysicists 'believe' (I prefer to say we 'accept', because belief implies a lack of supporting evidence) the Big Bang theory, particularly the Lambda-CDM model of cosmology with a Hot Big Bang as its origin. The leading alternative was the Steady State theory, which was effectively discarded many decades ago. There is no other model for the universe's creation and evolution that even remotely agrees with observations.

The idea that the Big Bang started from nothing is an extremely common misconception. The Big Bang theory makes no such claim and in fact makes no claims about the nature of the exact moment of the event itself, let alone 'before' it. What it discusses is how the universe evolved since its formation, from the present day all the way back to less than a microsecond after the first instant (which is pretty dang impressive if you ask me). The reason we can't go back any further is because it would require an understanding of quantum gravity which we do not yet have. (Quantum Mechanics and General Relativity are by themselves extremely powerful theories, but they don't work well together). String Theory is one of the current lines of thought that may resolve the incompatibility of QM and GR, though I do not study String Theory specifically.

As for 'lack of evidence', I suggest you actually pick up an astronomy textbook or start reading some scholarly articles. Evidence for the Big Bang includes Hubble's Law, the Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation, the observed evolution of structure in the universe, and the observed abundance of elements in the universe. These are all explained beautifully by the Big Bang theory, and thus far no other theory can.

We do not like to say 'proof' in science, but if you must insist on 'proof' then the CMBR alone would probably be satisfactory. It is the remnant radiation field from the era of Recombination, when the primordial plasma had finally cooled and expanded enough to form the first atoms and the universe turned transparent. This happened about 300,000 years after the Big Bang, or when the universe was about 0.002% of its present age. Look up some studies of the WMAP mission data if you are interested in learning more.
Member Since: November 13, 2012 Posts: 0 Comments: 1
865. RitaEvac
4:31 PM GMT on November 19, 2012
TX Outlook: We're going down ship

The global factors that produced the incredible 2011 drought remain in place and in many areas of the state, while the drought of 2011 was eased it was not ended with the past spring and summer wet weather and water supply lakes especially in west and central TX remain at dangerously low levels. The failure of ENSO warm conditions (El Nino) to fully develop and support weather pattern teleconnection changes into the southern plains thus far this fall are concerning. With the overall background pattern supportive of a dry southern plains climate and this not likely to change for the next several years, a continuation of the long term drought and increased severity of drought appears at least possible this winter into next spring. Expected above normal rainfall this winter and next spring looks less likely with the failure of El Nino development and in fact the current pattern of such little rainfall over the past 6 weeks is very similar to the fall of 2010 (or the start of the 2011 drought). Given already low lake storage levels and significantly low soil moisture values over much of the state, lack of winter rainfall in 2012-2013 will have significant impacts and there is potential for severe or even exceptional drought development by spring.



Additionally, with winter freezes upon the region and the curing of fine fuels, the threat for increased wildfire activity is likely without widespread wetting rainfall. KBDI values are already above 600 in several counties with values above 700 considered critical. Vegetation health already stressed from the 2011 drought will suffer if rainfall remains on the low side prior to the onset of warmer temperatures next spring. Critical fire weather days behind cold frontal passages will be increasing if widespread rains do not occur.



Lake Storage Conditions:

Lake Buchanan: -25.07 (43%)

Lake Conroe: -3.23 (85%)

Lake Houston: -.24 (97%)

Lake Livingston: -.62 (97%)
Lake Travis: -48.26 (40%)

Sam Rayburn: -4.41 (83%)

Lake Somerville: -2.21 (84%)

Lake Texana: -1.73 (90%)

Toledo Bend: -4.28 (84%)



Total state of Texas water storage supply is at 65.97% which is down from 68.10% a month ago and 77.68% 6 months ago
.
Member Since: July 14, 2008 Posts: 2 Comments: 9689
864. ILwthrfan
4:31 PM GMT on November 19, 2012
Wow so we go from politics to religion in a matter of a week....lol

The most pondering single question one can make with respect to religion. Use Occam's razor with respect to the big bang.

How can you have nothing before you have something? Some outside force would have to create that moment for it to exist. Even if everything is cyclical how does that something exist without never being created?

If its one thing we can deduce from what we know now it's that to create something you need an outside force or variable. You can not create with nothing. Therefor to me something or some outside or unknown force would have had to create the process to begin with, even if its cyclic. It has to have a starting point.
Member Since: February 2, 2010 Posts: 0 Comments: 1635
863. SteveDa1
4:30 PM GMT on November 19, 2012
Quoting RTSplayer:


It's obscenely profane, actually quite insane, to believe that the universe, and more particularly the life on Earth, exists by chance!


I am insane then. :) Thanks for confirming my doubts.

In all seriousness, I strongly believe that life was created by chance on this earth, just like it probably has millions of times in other places in the universe. I also believe that the Big Bang wasn't a unique event or the beginning of creation, for that matter. I also don't believe in time, to me it's just an illusion.
As you have probably guessed by now, I don't believe in anything.
Anyway, I don't think religious individuals are insane, neither should you perceive people like me as insane. ;)
Member Since: October 17, 2006 Posts: 60 Comments: 1310
862. Skyepony (Mod)
4:28 PM GMT on November 19, 2012
East Coast Stuck With Gas Rationing Indefinitely
Member Since: August 10, 2005 Posts: 270 Comments: 40517
861. hydrus
4:21 PM GMT on November 19, 2012
Quoting Grothar:
I always liked this;

"There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy"

WS

P.S. Horatio is not on the blog.
We certainly have had some wonderful and enlightened beings exist on the Earth. The funny thing is many times it is the ones who feel they will never be enlightened actually are, and the people who claim to be are not...Makes things interesting to say the least.
Member Since: September 27, 2007 Posts: 1 Comments: 23829
860. Skyepony (Mod)
4:18 PM GMT on November 19, 2012
Lastnight's OSCAT

Member Since: August 10, 2005 Posts: 270 Comments: 40517
859. Tropicsweatherpr
4:18 PM GMT on November 19, 2012
Here is the 12z surface analysis that shows the developing low. The question is if it will turn subtropical or tropical.

Member Since: April 29, 2009 Posts: 75 Comments: 15381
858. yoboi
4:17 PM GMT on November 19, 2012
i like in DR M blog we have a pic that says pray for rain......
Member Since: August 25, 2010 Posts: 8 Comments: 3071
857. Grothar
4:16 PM GMT on November 19, 2012
I always liked this;

"There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy"

WS

P.S. Horatio is not on the blog.
Member Since: July 17, 2009 Posts: 71 Comments: 27519
856. slinkyredfoot
4:16 PM GMT on November 19, 2012
To me, the notion to a self aware organic life form(human being) that if he does not believe in a creator and speak highly of that creator may cause that very same organic life form to not benefit after its death and suffer some sort of punishment as well for it is plain and simple madness. we are what we are. we are simple. our techniques have refined themselves over the last ten thousand years or so. But we are still what we have always been. Religion does have one thing right. all humans are descended from a common mother. but this is true of all successful species mutations. we can know what we know. and thats all. slowly, we can continue to adapt hopefully without killing ourselves or even worse this planet. this earth and humans really are not all that special in the grand scheme of things. quite the opposite in fact. the physical "universe" is an infinite space. and our species may one day, very very far into the future, unlock the great mysteries that we so desperatly wish to understand and on that day become something special. but until then, humankind is still rather infantile socially. we murder and we judge and we exploit and we try to convey our superiority over one another and deny the things we still are. step back and look down upon the ancestors of that one mother. 7 billion selfish little bastards running around. humankind has just begun. many many thousand years from now we will be looked upon as barbaric.
love and cooperation is what gave humans an advantage and allowed them to do so well. weve gotten away from that ideal. we will become truly special when we unite once again. and when we do, that is the time we can truly take advantage of all ouknowledge and experience. we are nowhere near that yet. we exploit the erth and all forms of life including our own. to be human and a concious being is to be ashamed in this "modern" era. the future is bright though.
Member Since: November 3, 2012 Posts: 0 Comments: 4
855. RTSplayer
4:13 PM GMT on November 19, 2012
Anyway, science is the province of scientists practicing empirical research; religion on the other hand, is the province of priests practicing faith. IOW, it's not science's job or goal to "disprove" any of the many elaborate religious creation myths that our species has devised. All science is tasked with doing is finding the truth of the what, where, when, and how via the well-established scientific method. Creation mythologies developed and retold over the course of centuries can often be beautiful and even comforting to those in need. But science they most definitely are not--and no one should make the mistake of confusing the two.I'm agnostic about god like I'm agnostic about the Easter Bunny or the Tooth Fairy: no one has yet proven that they don't exist, either. ;-)


Wow guy.

You're so obsessed with defending yourself against "religion" that you go off on a tangent addressing something I never even said for two paragraphs, and then you want to mix up ontology with the tooth fairy.

Try to be a little less ridiculous if you want to be taken seriously.

The BB is self conflicted regardless of whatever else or whoever else is involved in the existence of our reality.

You opened your own post with a claim which is absolutely false.

The leading scientists absolutely do NOT have a consensus.

Even people who worked on aspects of the Standard Model of particle physics believe in God, for the same reason I do. It's obscenely profane, actually quite insane, to believe that the universe, and more particularly the life on Earth, exists by chance!
Member Since: January 25, 2012 Posts: 33 Comments: 1520
854. yoboi
4:13 PM GMT on November 19, 2012
Quoting Jedkins01:
I must also mention though, that I really challenge those who so frequently use science to criticize those with a biblical philosophy. Just as I can't use the Bible to go after climate change or the age of the earth, or the structure of atoms, the same goes for using science against God as the beginning. To do so puts one in a logical fallacy. I understand when people say they are agnostic, that is, they aren't sure if a god exists, but to say you KNOW God does not exist, I really challenge you not to be so hostile, because there isn't anyway for you to prove so.

While I cannot prove through theory that God exists, that goes for any theory regarding something coming before the Universe because that object exists outside the Universe, and is in essence "bigger" than us, I came to a conclusion God exists through rational analysis of existence, everything is "designed" with incredible complexity, upon which I don't see it happening on its own. I therefore found the biblical God, to my choice, because it makes the most rational sense than other religious forms to me in regards to human social behavior and historical tendencies of man. Furthermore, while many may mock me for saying this, I have experienced God powerfully, such that only lines up with a biblical perspective on God.

Some then may ask me why would I believe in the Bible if many of the writers said things which don't make sense when compared to scientific findings today? Well, look at it this why, if the Bible is true, and God is behind it, God isn't concerned with how scientifically accurate those writers were. They were ancient peoples who had only an archaic understanding of physics and biology, and like I said, that isn't the "goal" of God in the Bible.

There are also other reasons for why I stand where I do. However, I realize it is very offensive to some here, and so I want to keep peace with all as much as possible, if anyone has any questions about the conclusions I come to, you can always pop me a personal message, I'd be glad to hold some questions on philosophy and its relationship to science :)


I only mention all this, because I'm explaining what its like from the view of one who places trust in God but is also a very scientifically minded person who is going to school to be a scientist :)

Yes its a science blog of meteorology focus, but sometimes we do stray a bit off topic, I don't see a problem with that.



great post...
Member Since: August 25, 2010 Posts: 8 Comments: 3071
853. Skyepony (Mod)
4:12 PM GMT on November 19, 2012
Models are taking the low to Bermuda.

Member Since: August 10, 2005 Posts: 270 Comments: 40517
852. PalmBeachWeather
4:08 PM GMT on November 19, 2012
Quoting Tazmanian:




he wil do it when he dam ready too
LOL...
Member Since: October 3, 2008 Posts: 0 Comments: 6001
851. hydrus
4:07 PM GMT on November 19, 2012
Quoting ncstorm:
All I know is I rather leave this earth believing in GOD than to be an aethist and find out after I die that I was wrong..won't be able rectify that wrong..

Have a great day everyone! I can't do the blog with all the negativity about religion..

I hope everyone has an enjoyable thanksgiving with family and friends!
I believe in God. I just do not believe who some people say " God " is or what happens after we die. People who try to interpret or superimpose there view of morality, or God and the rules on how to ascend to the pastures of heaven, are at the very least are self righteous and self centered. The Ten Commandments are a logical set of rules to live by in my opinion, and can be followed with relative ease. If God created the Universe or Universes and everything in them, then the last thing I want to do is obey some mortal humans interpretation on how to save my soul from eternal damnation.
Member Since: September 27, 2007 Posts: 1 Comments: 23829
849. PalmBeachWeather
4:06 PM GMT on November 19, 2012
Quoting Neapolitan:
The fact is, the BBT is accepted, supported and endorsed by virtually ever cosmologist and theoretical physicist alive today. No, consensus does not make fact, but it does mean it's disingenuous to claim the BB theory isn't widely accepted. And it's widely accepted because a) the extant evidence corroborates it and b) no competing theory yet devised has stood up to the rigorous scrutiny BBT has.Nothing? How about the cosmic microwave background? How about the fact that none of the oldest objects in the known universe appear to be older than about 13.9 billion years--the time cosmology tells us the BB occurred?

Anyway, science is the province of scientists practicing empirical research; religion on the other hand, is the province of priests practicing faith. IOW, it's not science's job or goal to "disprove" any of the many elaborate religious creation myths that our species has devised. All science is tasked with doing is finding the truth of the what, where, when, and how via the well-established scientific method. Creation mythologies developed and retold over the course of centuries can often be beautiful and even comforting to those in need. But science they most definitely are not--and no one should make the mistake of confusing the two.I'm agnostic about god like I'm agnostic about the Easter Bunny or the Tooth Fairy: no one has yet proven that they don't exist, either. ;-)
So please explain where my 50 cents came from when I lost a tooth big shot?
Member Since: October 3, 2008 Posts: 0 Comments: 6001
848. PalmBeachWeather
4:03 PM GMT on November 19, 2012
Quoting slinkyredfoot:
where the hell is masters and his next post?
Are you swearing? Oh no
Member Since: October 3, 2008 Posts: 0 Comments: 6001
847. calkevin77
4:02 PM GMT on November 19, 2012
Quoting Jedkins01:
I must also mention though, that I really challenge those who so frequently use science to criticize those with a biblical philosophy. Just as I can't use the Bible to go after climate change or the age of the earth, or the structure of atoms, the same goes for using science against God as the beginning. To do so puts one in a logical fallacy. I understand when people say they are agnostic, that is, they aren't sure if a god exists, but to say you KNOW God does not exist, I really challenge you not to be so hostile, because there isn't anyway for you to prove so.

While I cannot prove through theory that God exists, that goes for any theory regarding something coming before the Universe because that object exists outside the Universe, and is in essence "bigger" than us, I came to a conclusion God exists through rational analysis of existence, everything is "designed" with incredible complexity, upon which I don't see it happening on its own. I therefore found the biblical God, to my choice, because it makes the most rational sense than other religious forms to me in regards to human social behavior and historical tendencies of man. Furthermore, while many may mock me for saying this, I have experienced God powerfully, such that only lines up with a biblical perspective on God.

Some then may ask me why would I believe in the Bible if many of the writers said things which don't make sense when compared to scientific findings today? Well, look at it this why, if the Bible is true, and God is behind it, God isn't concerned with how scientifically accurate those writers were. They were ancient peoples who had only an archaic understanding of physics and biology, and like I said, that isn't the "goal" of God in the Bible.

There are also other reasons for why I stand where I do. However, I realize it is very offensive to some here, and so I want to keep peace with all as much as possible, if anyone has any questions about the conclusions I come to, you can always pop me a personal message, I'd be glad to hold some questions on philosophy and its relationship to science :)


I only mention all this, because I'm explaining what its like from the view of one who places trust in God but is also a very scientifically minded person who is going to school to be a scientist :)

Yes its a science blog of meteorology focus, but sometimes we do stray a bit off topic, I don't see a problem with that.


Well said. I couldn't agree more. Everyone is entitled to their beliefs and to share them as long as they are civil. Def can see that there are all kinds of beliefs and they do come out on this board. Thats for sure. With that said and in lighter news. My fantasy football team did horrible this week. Have a great Monday y'all.
Member Since: June 9, 2006 Posts: 0 Comments: 869
845. ncstorm
3:49 PM GMT on November 19, 2012
All I know is I rather leave this earth believing in GOD than to be an aethist and find out after I die that I was wrong..won't be able rectify that wrong..

Have a great day everyone! I can't do the blog with all the negativity about religion..

I hope everyone has an enjoyable thanksgiving with family and friends!
Member Since: August 19, 2006 Posts: 13 Comments: 16305
844. imipak
3:45 PM GMT on November 19, 2012
(edit: WRT cosmology):

https://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&q=false%20a ut hority%20syndrome
Member Since: November 7, 2010 Posts: 0 Comments: 11
843. HouGalv08
3:38 PM GMT on November 19, 2012
Quoting FLWeatherFreak91:
Did anyone watch the documentaries on discovery and history about Sandy? Which is better? I have both recorded... Choices choices choices!
Saw both last night, Sandy and the follow on about the Dust Bowl. Sandy---fair, just sort of a timeline and some videos as events unfolded in and around the NY area. If you saw the news and got updates here, you got more than last nights program. The Dust Bowl story is pretty good. Up till now I never had a good insight as to how the situation developed before the huge dust storms occurred. As always, hindsight shows us how we ignore Mother Nature and we humans think we know it all. The Dust Bowl story is a good reminder that we are pawns on this planet, the forces of Nature will win eventually.
Member Since: July 21, 2008 Posts: 0 Comments: 384
842. AussieStorm
3:32 PM GMT on November 19, 2012
Quoting fireflymom:
Yes, and very funny.


Agreed. His character is very funny. It's a very funny show. We are a series behind you guys.
Member Since: September 30, 2007 Posts: 9 Comments: 15998
841. fireflymom
3:27 PM GMT on November 19, 2012
Yes, and very funny.
Quoting AussieStorm:

It it true the actor is gay.

Member Since: June 5, 2007 Posts: 0 Comments: 600
840. Neapolitan
3:26 PM GMT on November 19, 2012
Quoting RTSplayer:
I find it silly that you still cling to this thing when even some of the people who developed it no longer agree with it or believe in it... there's like entire teams of scientists and think tanks that don't accept this thing as given. There's lots of logical reasons NOT to accept it at face value.
The fact is, the BBT is accepted, supported and endorsed by virtually ever cosmologist and theoretical physicist alive today. No, consensus does not make fact, but it does mean it's disingenuous to claim the BB theory isn't widely accepted. And it's widely accepted because a) the extant evidence corroborates it and b) no competing theory yet devised has stood up to the rigorous scrutiny BBT has.
Quoting RTSplayer:
On the other hand, for the BB you have nothing except the faulty assumption that space and time were always the same.
Nothing? How about the cosmic microwave background? How about the fact that none of the oldest objects in the known universe appear to be older than about 13.9 billion years--the time cosmology tells us the BB occurred?

Anyway, science is the province of scientists practicing empirical research; religion on the other hand, is the province of priests practicing faith. IOW, it's not science's job or goal to "disprove" any of the many elaborate religious creation myths that our species has devised. All science is tasked with doing is finding the truth of the what, where, when, and how via the well-established scientific method. Creation mythologies developed and retold over the course of centuries can often be beautiful and even comforting to those in need. But science they most definitely are not--and no one should make the mistake of confusing the two.
Quoting Jedkins01:
I understand when people say they are agnostic, that is, they aren't sure if a god exists, but to say you KNOW God does not exist, I really challenge you not to be so hostile, because there isn't anyway for you to prove so.
I'm agnostic about god like I'm agnostic about the Easter Bunny or the Tooth Fairy: no one has yet proven that they don't exist, either. ;-)
Member Since: November 8, 2009 Posts: 4 Comments: 14167
839. AussieStorm
3:20 PM GMT on November 19, 2012
Quoting PensacolaDoug:




pop in for a moment.

Sheldon Cooper is the best sitcom character on tv IMHO.

It it true the actor is gay.
Member Since: September 30, 2007 Posts: 9 Comments: 15998
838. PensacolaDoug
3:20 PM GMT on November 19, 2012
Quoting FunnelVortex:


Take it to the christian forums Godboy.





Godboy?



Uncool.
Member Since: July 25, 2006 Posts: 2 Comments: 766
837. goosegirl1
3:18 PM GMT on November 19, 2012
Quoting Grothar:
Good Morning, Erin, Good Morning, John-Boy, Good Morning Jim-Bob


Good morning, ancient venerable One.
Member Since: December 17, 2009 Posts: 0 Comments: 1274
836. Grothar
3:17 PM GMT on November 19, 2012
Member Since: July 17, 2009 Posts: 71 Comments: 27519
835. goosegirl1
3:16 PM GMT on November 19, 2012
**We can test gravity and the concept of an atom at least; we've made nuclear bombs, so while we may never have a 100% accurate model of an atom or even gravity itself, what we have is good enough that for technological purposes at this point it never fails.

On the other hand, for the BB you have nothing except the faulty assumption that space and time were always the same...but then use that faulty assumption to "post-dict" that they weren't always the same...and then you just ignore the self-contradiction.**

We can test the Big Bang theory in a super collider. The observations fit the theory rather well, too. We can see evidence supporting the big bang all over the universe. Link

There will always be something new to discover. Look at how our BB theory was developed- Einstein improved on Newton, and a group of Dutch researchers improved on Einstein's new theory and caused him to release his theory of Special Relativity. Quantum mechanics builds on what we already know via Einstein and Newton and takes a whole new twist on the way the universe runs. There will always be a young, new upstart to come along and poke a hole in your favorite theory.

I will agree- I have never been comfortable with the fudge factor of dark matter. Maybe further research will point where all this "matter" and gone. Maybe it will point us in whole new direction. Maybe the next Einstein is already conducting research with CERN, and a breakthrough discovery will be anounced next week. Who can know? That's the beauty of science- we will never know everything about the universe.


Modified to fix the link!
Member Since: December 17, 2009 Posts: 0 Comments: 1274
834. MontanaZephyr
3:16 PM GMT on November 19, 2012
"...

Grist.org's Philip Bump dug through NOAA's latest State of the Climate report and discovered this nugget, emphasis his:

The average temperature across land and ocean surfaces during October was 14.63°C (58.23°F). This is 0.63°C (1.13°F) above the 20th century average and ties with 2008 as the fifth warmest October on record. The record warmest October occurred in 2003 and the record coldest October occurred in 1912. This is the 332nd consecutive month with an above-average temperature. The last below-average month was February 1985. The last October with a below-average temperature was 1976....


Link
Member Since: May 21, 2007 Posts: 0 Comments: 447
833. PalmBeachWeather
3:15 PM GMT on November 19, 2012
Quoting Grothar:
Good Morning, Erin, Good Morning, John-Boy, Good Morning Jim-Bob
Good morning Brad Pitt
Member Since: October 3, 2008 Posts: 0 Comments: 6001
832. PensacolaDoug
3:15 PM GMT on November 19, 2012
Quoting Jedkins01:


Ha! Yes it is a great show, I hate most tv comedies, in fact I've found most comedies in general to be stupid and unoriginal, but I like that one!




pop in for a moment.

Sheldon Cooper is the best sitcom character on tv IMHO.
Member Since: July 25, 2006 Posts: 2 Comments: 766
831. imipak
3:06 PM GMT on November 19, 2012
Quoting GeorgiaStormz:
Every month we seem to have an issue that endangers the world, and now we have our november scare....Its like we take 2 steps forward and 1 step back towards a major conflict.....I remember when North Korea shooting rockets was our big problem..


Eh?
Member Since: November 7, 2010 Posts: 0 Comments: 11
830. AussieStorm
3:05 PM GMT on November 19, 2012
Quoting LargoFl:
Thx for the Info aussie

Your welcome
Member Since: September 30, 2007 Posts: 9 Comments: 15998
829. GeorgiaStormz
3:04 PM GMT on November 19, 2012
Every month we seem to have an issue that endangers the world, and now we have our november scare....Its like we take 2 steps forward and 1 step back towards a major conflict.....I remember when North Korea shooting a rocket was our big problem..
Member Since: February 11, 2012 Posts: 0 Comments: 9769
828. Jedkins01
2:55 PM GMT on November 19, 2012
I must also mention though, that I really challenge those who so frequently use science to criticize those with a biblical philosophy. Just as I can't use the Bible to go after climate change or the age of the earth, or the structure of atoms, the same goes for using science against God as the beginning. To do so puts one in a logical fallacy. I understand when people say they are agnostic, that is, they aren't sure if a god exists, but to say you KNOW God does not exist, I really challenge you not to be so hostile, because there isn't anyway for you to prove so.

While I cannot prove through theory that God exists, that goes for any theory regarding something coming before the Universe because that object exists outside the Universe, and is in essence "bigger" than us, I came to a conclusion God exists through rational analysis of existence, everything is "designed" with incredible complexity, upon which I don't see it happening on its own. I therefore found the biblical God, to my choice, because it makes the most rational sense than other religious forms to me in regards to human social behavior and historical tendencies of man. Furthermore, while many may mock me for saying this, I have experienced God powerfully, such that only lines up with a biblical perspective on God.

Some then may ask me why would I believe in the Bible if many of the writers said things which don't make sense when compared to scientific findings today? Well, look at it this why, if the Bible is true, and God is behind it, God isn't concerned with how scientifically accurate those writers were. They were ancient peoples who had only an archaic understanding of physics and biology, and like I said, that isn't the "goal" of God in the Bible.

There are also other reasons for why I stand where I do. However, I realize it is very offensive to some here, and so I want to keep peace with all as much as possible, if anyone has any questions about the conclusions I come to, you can always pop me a personal message, I'd be glad to hold some questions on philosophy and its relationship to science :)


I only mention all this, because I'm explaining what its like from the view of one who places trust in God but is also a very scientifically minded person who is going to school to be a scientist :)

Yes its a science blog of meteorology focus, but sometimes we do stray a bit off topic, I don't see a problem with that.
Member Since: August 21, 2008 Posts: 0 Comments: 8577
827. LargoFl
2:52 PM GMT on November 19, 2012
Quoting AussieStorm:
NWS Tampa Bay ‏@NWSTampaBay
The automated weather station at Tampa Executive Airport (Vandenburg or KVDF) has had some issues and is being checked on. #flwx
Thx for the Info aussie
Member Since: August 6, 2011 Posts: 4 Comments: 45304
826. LargoFl
2:51 PM GMT on November 19, 2012
Member Since: August 6, 2011 Posts: 4 Comments: 45304

Viewing: 876 - 826

Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18Blog 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.

JeffMasters's Recent Photos

Carrot Nose in Danger
Deep Snow in Brookline, MA
Sunset at Fort DeSoto
New Years Day Sunset in Death Valley