TD 2 Crossing the Yucatan, Bringing Heavy Rains

By: Dr. Jeff Masters , 1:44 PM GMT on June 18, 2013

Share this Blog
52
+

Tropical Depression Two is slowly spinning west-northwest across Belize after making landfall late Monday afternoon in southern Belize. The storm is bringing heavy rain to Belize, Northern Guatemala, and Mexico's Yucatan Peninsula, as seen on Belize radar and satellite loops. The center of TD 2 will remain over land all day Tuesday, but TD 2's west-northwest track may be able to bring the storm over the Gulf of Mexico's southern Bay of Campeche on Wednesday--if the storm hasn't dissipated by then. The Bay of Campeche is a region where the topography aids the spin-up of tropical cyclones, and TD 2 may have barely enough time to become Tropical Storm Barry with 40 mph winds before making landfall on Thursday between Veracruz and Tampico. However, the track of the storm may also keep it just inland during the remainder of the week, keeping it from ever getting to tropical storm strength. Heavy rains are the storm's main threat, but a ridge of high pressure over the Gulf of Mexico should keep any of TD 2's rains from reaching the U.S. Observations from an AMSU instrument on a polar orbiting satellite on Monday afternoon found that TD 2 had developed a modest warm core characteristic of a weak tropical storm, and it is possible that NHC will upgrade TD 2 to a tropical storm in post-analysis after the hurricane season is over. Elsewhere in the tropical Atlantic, none of the reliable computer models is showing tropical cyclone development in the next seven days.


Figure 1. MODIS satellite image of TD 2 taken on Monday afternoon, June 17, 2013. image credit: NASA.

Participate in Tuesday's live radio call-in show to talk climate change in Tea Party country
I spent last week in Granby, Colorado at the American Geophysical Union's conference on climate change communication. Approximately 100 of the world's top climate scientists and specialists in communication gathered to discuss how to effectively communicate climate change. Four of the speakers at that conference will be part of a radio call-in radio show on KCNR 1460AM from downtown Redding, the politically conservative heart of deep red Northern California. The show is today, Tuesday, June 17, from 10 am - noon EDT. The show will be live-streamed at http://www.kcnr1460.com/, and will be preserved in the archives as a podcast. KCNR is a Fox News radio station with all-conservative talk radio programming, featuring such guests as Laura Ingraham, Dennis Miller, and Mike Huckabee. Call in with questions today at 530-605-4565. The four guests will be:

1) Gavin Schmidt (NASA GISS and RealClimate)
2) Simon Donner  (http://www.geog.ubc.ca/~sdonner/)
3) Bob Henson (Rough Guide to Climate Change)
4) Melanie Fitzpatrick (Union of Concerned Scientists)

Jeff Masters

Reader Comments

Comments will take a few seconds to appear.

Post Your Comments

Please sign in to post comments.

or Join

Not only will you be able to leave comments on this blog, but you'll also have the ability to upload and share your photos in our Wunder Photos section.

Display: 0, 50, 100, 200 Sort: Newest First - Order Posted

Viewing: 847 - 797

Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21Blog Index

Quoting daddyjames:


A hypothesis is an educated guess designed to test one observed phenomenon.

A theory is an attempt to coherently explain a number of observed phenomena.

Darwin's theory of evolution was drawn upon a compendium of observation data - no hypotheses were tested to produce experimental data.

English is a contextual and confusing language.

Hypothesis: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/hypothe sis

Theory: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/theory

Regarding Newton and thermodynamics:
"As students of physics will tell you, however, Isaac Newton’s laws relate to motion and gravity. The laws of thermodynamics, relating to the transfer of heat, were initially developed by Lord Kelvin more than 100 years after Newton had snuffed it."

Regarding Darwin; The "Theory of Natural Selection" is best left for another day.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting PalmBeachWeather:
Are you John Denver?


No, but he plays him on tv.
Member Since: June 25, 2011 Posts: 2 Comments: 3733
Quoting Tropicsweatherpr:
About to hit the water.

Hope the NHC crew can fly tomorrow to investigate the system.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting hydrus:
I forgot all about that...far out..
Are you John Denver?
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Civicane49:
The low-level circulation of the tropical depression will soon emerge over the Bay of Campeche in the next couple of hours and this would allow the system to strengthen. However, it has very limited time over water to intensify greatly. If it manages to stay offshore longer than anticipated, then we could see Tropical Storm Barry. Regardless, heavy rain continues to be the biggest threat of this system.




The HH can investigate it once it gets over water right?
Member Since: May 1, 2013 Posts: 0 Comments: 775
Quoting PalmBeachWeather:
I got pretty good with the ring on the hook game...
I forgot all about that...far out..
Member Since: September 27, 2007 Posts: 1 Comments: 21424
Quoting daddyjames:


A hypothesis is an educated guess designed to test one observed phenomenon.

A theory is an attempt to coherently explain a number of observed phenomena.

Darwin's theory of evolution was drawn upon a compendium of observation data - no hypotheses were tested to produce experimental data.


Definitely not true.

Excerpted from Wikipedia:
Darwin began an eight-year study of barnacles, becoming the leading expert on their classification. Using his theory, he discovered homologies showing that slightly changed body parts served different functions to meet new conditions, and he found an intermediate stage in the evolution of distinct sexes.[37]

Darwin's barnacle studies convinced him that variation arose constantly and not just in response to changed circumstances. In 1854, he completed the last part of his Beagle-related writing and began working full-time on evolution. His thinking changed from the view that species formed in isolated populations only, as on islands, to an emphasis on speciation without isolation; that is, he saw increasing specialisation within large stable populations as continuously exploiting new ecological niches.

-----------------------------------------

It was not just a "I see it this way, therefore here's my post hoc determination that can never be tested or refuted" idea.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting hydrus:
Tweenies has rocked for decades ( the only place to go back then other than South Seas ). Lazy Flamingo was da waterin hole after work .:)
I got pretty good with the ring on the hook game...
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
About to hit the water.

Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting PalmBeachWeather:
hydrus....I do "Tween Waters" once a year...Best oysters at Lazy Flamingo..
Tweenies has rocked for decades ( the only place to go back then other than South Seas ). Lazy Flamingo was da waterin hole after work .:)
Member Since: September 27, 2007 Posts: 1 Comments: 21424
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting hydrus:
Speaking.
hydrus....I do "Tween Waters" once a year...Best oysters at Lazy Flamingo..
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Birthmark:

Only a larger scales and under relatively (HA!) slow speeds and low gravity.

For small scales we have quantum theory. Newton's Laws fail at these scales.

For higher speeds and gravity, relativity is needed. Newtons Laws fail under these conditions.

But for ordinary purposes on Earth, Newton's Laws work well.


Yes, I know - but it is a Law on the macroscale.
Member Since: June 25, 2011 Posts: 2 Comments: 3733
Quoting PalmBeachWeather:
And D. B. Cooper?
Speaking.
Member Since: September 27, 2007 Posts: 1 Comments: 21424
Quoting ScottLincoln:

For someone with your background, you seem to have an odd misunderstanding for the differences between hypothesis, theory, and law, and what is required for each.
You just really do not hear one with a scientific background such as yours say the phrase "only a theory." The fact that you typed it is very very unusual.


I did not say "ONLY A THEORY", and how do you know my background?
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting MechEngMet:



Newton presented the LAWS of physics and motion centuries ago. The LAWs of motion are well known. I see no reason to risk children on the highway to test an established LAW of physics. Why would we propose risking civilization on a theory?


Because you could use the LAWS of motion and the LAWS of physics to formulate a hypothesis of what would happen should you place an specific object in the path of a specific truck. Then you could test it by actually placing said objects in front a said truck, pushing the gas pedal and recording the results. Make sure you don't use real children, after a while you may run out and it takes a few months to make more :)

After you published your research and had many of your peers repeat the experiment and also publish their results, you could formulate a Theory of Squashed Children Proxy and take credit for your work.

That's how we use Laws to formulate theories.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting daddyjames:


Actually, it pretty much is a law.

Only a larger scales and under relatively (HA!) slow speeds and low gravity.

For small scales we have quantum theory. Newton's Laws fail at these scales.

For higher speeds and gravity, relativity is needed. Newtons Laws fail under these conditions.

But for ordinary purposes on Earth, Newton's Laws work well.
Member Since: October 30, 2005 Posts: 7 Comments: 5469
Quoting hydrus:
This next wave has pinosh..Maybe an invest in a few days.?

Hey hydrus!
The tropical wave is actually over northern Venezuela..the flare up in the eastern Caribbean is due to interaction of a trough and the Tropical wave. I'm not sure about an invest as the shear is still pretty high over most of the Caribbean.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Some1Has2BtheRookie:


They will keep looking for Jimmy for as long as new "evidence" is given as to his location. Leave no stone unturned. .... I quit looking a long time ago.
And D. B. Cooper?
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting RTSplayer:


"Natural forces only" curve is based on a fallacy, since modern instruments didn't exist to make those measurements before the man-made portion of CO2 was added.

A laboratory experiment in a jar or sealed box is not sufficient model, because that is a partially closed system, and glass or plastic are insulators, AND trap infrared. The Earth is an open system.


Therefore, what?
CO2 doesn't behave the same way in Earth's atmosphere according to physical and chemical constraints as it does in an enclosed laboratory?

Volcanoes and the sun didn't emit the same types of chemicals and weren't acting under the same physical constraints before we were around to investigate them, but magically started behaving within certain parameters, or the indirect evidence that they left behind in the past just magically look like the ones we can directly observe and understand today?

The "were you there?" argument is a poor rebuttal.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting PalmBeachWeather:
Just a thought...How much are we going to spend searching for the body of Jimmy Hoffa.... Show me the money!


They will keep looking for Jimmy for as long as new "evidence" is given as to his location. Leave no stone unturned. .... I quit looking a long time ago.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting BaltimoreBrian:
Newton's insight into gravity is a theory.




Actually, it pretty much is a law.
Member Since: June 25, 2011 Posts: 2 Comments: 3733
Nevada here from Jamaica, we had a gorgeous day weather wise right here in Spanish Town, today. We had lots of sun, along with some hazy conditions, but it has been very windy since Monday with high pressure interacting with low pressure in the western Caribbean.

TD#2 continues to be spinning but it does not have much shower activity with it all, but that will change when it enters the Bay of Campeche on Wednesday.
O.K later.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting schistkicker:


By that logic, it's okay to let your kids huff a jar filled with Yersinia pestis, since it's only the germ THEORY of disease...

Go jump out of a building. That whole gravity thing... only a theory!
Member Since: September 28, 2002 Posts: 5 Comments: 3210
Quoting MechEngMet:



Newton presented the LAWS of physics and motion centuries ago. The LAWs of motion are well known. I see no reason to risk children on the highway to test an established LAW of physics. Why would we propose risking civilization on a theory?


Taking action/inaction is not going to risk civilization. But the world will change significantly on its current path. We have the capability of altering how much change occurs, and to mitigate its affects. Otherwise, its going to be a tumultuous event.
Member Since: June 25, 2011 Posts: 2 Comments: 3733
Quoting galvestonhurricane:

Quoting galvestonhurricane:


Ever notice how difficult it is to determine any real information/trends from graphs on that time scale? Also, theinconvenientskeptic.com is not an accurate source of information on the science of climate. It's just another weather conspiracy web site.
Member Since: June 1, 2010 Posts: 4 Comments: 3491
Quoting MechEngMet:



Newton presented the LAWS of physics and motion centuries ago. The LAWs of motion are well known. I see no reason to risk children on the highway to test an established LAW of physics. Why would we propose risking civilization on a theory?


By that logic, it's okay to let your kids huff a jar filled with Yersinia pestis, since it's only the germ THEORY of disease...
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting MechEngMet:



Newton presented the LAWS of physics and motion centuries ago. The LAWs of motion are well known. I see no reason to risk children on the highway to test an established LAW of physics. Why would we propose risking civilization on a theory?

Newton's Laws were wrong when he formulated them --and he knew it. (See: "Precession of Mercury's perihelion)

Civilization is at risk from AGW, particularly if we do nothing. That risk is far, far greater than anything proposed to address the issue.
Member Since: October 30, 2005 Posts: 7 Comments: 5469
Newton's insight into gravity is a theory.


Quoting MechEngMet:



Newton presented the LAWS of physics and motion centuries ago. The LAWs of motion are well known. I see no reason to risk children on the highway to test an established LAW of physics. Why would we propose risking civilization on a theory?
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting MechEngMet:



Newton presented the LAWS of physics and motion centuries ago. The LAWs of motion are well known. I see no reason to risk children on the highway to test an established LAW of physics. Why would we propose risking civilization on a theory?

For someone with your background, you seem to have an odd misunderstanding for the differences between hypothesis, theory, and law, and what is required for each.
You just really do not hear one with a scientific background such as yours say the phrase "only a theory." The fact that you typed it is very very unusual.
Member Since: September 28, 2002 Posts: 5 Comments: 3210
Quoting zampaz:

A hypotheis is an eductated guess regarding observed phenomena.
Scientists design experiments to test their hypothesis and publish their results.
Other scientists repeat the tests, verify validity of data collection methods and design new experiments to test the hypothesis. If a hypothesis can be improved, it is. If a hypothesis is found to be in error, alternate hypothesis are proposed. Through time and through repeated peer reviewed validation of hypothesis a hypothesis becomes theory by general consensus.
Validation is a methodical, and often slow process.



A hypothesis is an educated guess designed to test one observed phenomenon.

A theory is an attempt to coherently explain a number of observed phenomena.

Darwin's theory of evolution was drawn upon a compendium of observation data - no hypotheses were tested to produce experimental data.
Member Since: June 25, 2011 Posts: 2 Comments: 3733
Quoting MechEngMet:


That is a possibility, but needs further study for certain.

I had no desire to acknowledge or reply to such an obvious personal attack by__________. Thank you for calling the proper attention to the matter. You are trying to keep this civil. Thank you.
Sigh. Just for the record, I didn't read it as a personal attack on you, but construing it that way does give you an easy way out of the discussion, doesn't it?
Member Since: January 6, 2013 Posts: 3 Comments: 2384
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Some1Has2BtheRookie:


Do I still have a choice?!?!?!? LOL
Just a thought...How much are we going to spend searching for the body of Jimmy Hoffa.... Show me the money!
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting CosmicEvents:
I think you mean panache....pinosh I think would be yiddush for a little bit to eat, a small piece of pi, perhaps.
I thought "pi" was a greek letter representing 22 over 7 or 3.14...:)
Member Since: September 27, 2007 Posts: 1 Comments: 21424
Quoting BaltimoreBrian:



Cardinal Fang! Fetch....the comfy chair!


BECAUSE...NOBODY EXPECTS THE SPANISH INQUISISTION!
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting islander44:


Just how much discussion should we engage in about gravity, Ohm's law, humors as disease vectors, or pyramids as energy sources?

If you want to test the theories of inertia and kinetic energy by placing your children on a busy highway in front of a speeding truck, that would make for an interesting discussion. I'm sure there would be lots of useful information derived from that experiment.

My question is this: Do you want to engage in a course of action while the truck is 1/4 mile away, 100 yards away, or 10 yards away? Or do you need to see the results of that experiment? Heck, it's possible all the science around those theories is wrong.

Now, the truck owners might deny that there are any problems, especially if it might cost them a lot of revenue this quarter if anything changed. Heck, they won't suffer any problems they can't cope with, with all their money.

But you and your kids might find the results less than satisfactory. I guess you have to decide what matters to you, rather than quibble over terms like belief, faith, theory, law, etc.

But instead, how about we discuss the weather that we're seeing, rather than cockamamie theories that have negligible support?



Newton presented the LAWS of physics and motion centuries ago. The LAWs of motion are well known. I see no reason to risk children on the highway to test an established LAW of physics. Why would we propose risking civilization on a theory?
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Bluestorm5:
Very spooky picture of tornado directly above an airport gate. Wow...


It looks almost unreal...awesome picture btw.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting PalmBeachWeather:
Imagine if you will Rookie...Granny on "Beverly Hillbillies" in a leopard leotard...


Do I still have a choice?!?!?!? LOL
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting RTSplayer:
1, Supposedly, Colorado's fire was caused by a human (directly,) not GW.

Climate doesn't cause fires. Did someone say climate causes fires? If not, then you really didn't rebut anything.
Climate is related to the conditions that make fires more likely, or more likely to spread.
Quoting RTSplayer:
3, Alaska's heatwave was caused by a ridge of high pressure.

Alaska has seen ridges of high pressure before, yet this one is causing warmer temperatures. That's what more heat energy in the climate system does - high temperatures, on average, even with similar weather patterns. The high pressure area (weather) explains the anomaly, in this case warm weather. Climate change explains the trend in frequency and magnitude of the warm weather, and increases in warm extremes. It is very very likely that in the future, when Alaska sees record temperatures again, it will be caused by a high pressure area.
Quoting RTSplayer:
4, The Arctic and much of Greenland is currently 5C to 10C below normal, and has been for several days.


What climatic normal are you using? Greenland melt has been above average according to NSIDC for most of melt season so far, and much above average for a substantial recent portion:
Member Since: September 28, 2002 Posts: 5 Comments: 3210
Quoting RTSplayer:


"Natural forces only" curve is based on a fallacy, since modern instruments didn't exist to make those measurements before the man-made portion of CO2 was added.

A laboratory experiment in a jar or sealed box is not sufficient model, because that is a partially closed system, and glass or plastic are insulators, AND trap infrared. The Earth is an open system.

Again, evidence?
Member Since: October 30, 2005 Posts: 7 Comments: 5469
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
The low-level circulation of the tropical depression will soon emerge over the Bay of Campeche in the next couple of hours and this would allow the system to strengthen. However, it has very limited time over water to intensify greatly. If it manages to stay offshore longer than anticipated, then we could see Tropical Storm Barry. Regardless, heavy rain continues to be the biggest threat of this system.

Member Since: Posts: Comments:

Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting PalmBeachWeather:
Rookie...I see you don't recall my aunt DeeDee... Now there is a real trip.
Imagine if you will Rookie...Granny on "Beverly Hillbillies" in a leopard leotard...
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting CosmicEvents:
I think you mean panache....pinosh I think would be yiddush for a little bit to eat, a small piece of pi, perhaps.
My bad. I thought a pan, ache was when one drops a cast iron skillet on there foot..
Member Since: September 27, 2007 Posts: 1 Comments: 21424
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Patrap:


Pink and Black


"Natural forces only" curve is based on a fallacy, since modern instruments didn't exist to make those measurements before the man-made portion of CO2 was added.

A laboratory experiment in a jar or sealed box is not sufficient model, because that is a partially closed system, and glass or plastic are insulators, AND trap infrared. The Earth is an open system.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting ncstorm:
12z CMC starting at 78 hours..weak low but potential is there..








LOL a 1025 mb. low?
Member Since: August 31, 2009 Posts: 0 Comments: 5628
Quoting MechEngMet:


That is a possibility, but needs further study for certain.

I had no desire to acknowledge or reply to such an obvious personal attack by__________. Thank you for calling the proper attention to the matter. You are trying to keep this civil. Thank you.


I am always up for a good discussion, and never take it personal - well at least I try not to.

I may disagree, and everyone is entitled to their own opinion.

What I dislike is when a frank, open discussion devolves into name-calling and attempts at discrediting the other individual.

I enjoyed this discussion, very much.
Member Since: June 25, 2011 Posts: 2 Comments: 3733
Quoting Some1Has2BtheRookie:


You have not met the rest of my family?
Rookie...I see you don't recall my aunt DeeDee... Now there is a real trip.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:

Viewing: 847 - 797

Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21Blog 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.