Landmark 2013 IPCC Report: 95% Chance Most of Global Warming is Human-Caused

By: Dr. Jeff Masters , 10:50 AM GMT on September 27, 2013

Share this Blog
124
+

"Warming of the climate system is unequivocal, and since the 1950s, many of the observed changes are unprecedented over decades to millennia. The atmosphere and ocean have warmed, the amounts of snow and ice have diminished, sea level has risen, and the concentrations of greenhouse gases have increased." Thus opens the landmark 2013 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report issued today. Working without pay, hundreds of our most dedicated and talented climate experts have collaborated over a six-year period to create the most comprehensive and authoritative scientific document on climate change ever crafted. The first 31 pages of what will be a 4,000-page tome was released this morning after an all-night approval session that stretched until 6:30 this morning in Stockholm, Sweden. This "Summary For Policymakers" lays out a powerful scientific case that significant climate change with severe impacts is already occurring, humans are mostly responsible, the pace of climate change is expected to accelerate, and we can make choices to cut emission of carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping gases that will limit the damage.

Q: How much has the planet warmed, and what has caused the warming?
The report documents that Earth's surface temperature warmed by 0.85°C (1.5°F) between 1880 - 2012. Two-thirds of this warming (0.6°C, 1.1°F) came after 1950. Human-emitted heat-trapping gases likely were responsible for 0.5 - 1.3°C of this post-1950 warming, while human-emitted aerosol particles reflected away sunlight and likely caused cooling (-0.6° - 0.1°C change in temperature.) Climate change due to variations in solar energy, volcanic dust, and natural sources of heat-trapping greenhouse gases were likely responsible for a small -0.1° - 0.1°C change in temperature since 1950. The sun was in a cool phase between 1978 - 2011, and the report estimates that lower solar output cooled Earth's climate slightly during this period. The influence of cosmic rays on climate over the past century was to weak to be detected, they said. In short, the report shows little support for a significant natural component to global warming since 1950. In fact, natural effects may well have made Earth cooler than it otherwise would have been. The report says that "The best estimate of the human-induced contribution to warming is similar to the observed warming over this period." In other words, close to 100% of the observed warming is due to humans.


Figure 1. The changing view of the IPCC's assessment reports on the human contribution to climate change.

Q: How have the IPCC reports changed through time?
1990: The report did not quantify the human contribution to global warming.

1995: "The balance of evidence suggests a discernible human influence on climate."

2001: Human-emitted greenhouse gases are likely (67-90% chance) responsible for more than half of Earth's temperature increase since 1951.

2007: Human-emitted greenhouse gases are very likely (at least 90% chance) responsible for more than half of Earth's temperature increase since 1951.

2013: Human-emitted greenhouse gases are extremely likely (at least 95% chance) responsible for more than half of Earth's temperature increase since 1951. This is the same confidence that scientists have in the age of the universe, or that cigarettes are deadly, according to an excellent AP article published this week by Seth Borenstein.

Q: Did the new report change the plausible range of global warming?
A. Yes. The "climate sensitivity" is defined as how much the planet would warm if the amount of atmospheric CO2 doubled. A variety of studies have arrived at very different estimates of the exact CO2 sensitivity of the climate, and the 2007 IPCC report gave a range of the most plausible values: 2 to 4.5ºC, with 3ºC deemed the most likely value. Recent research indicates that a sensitivity as low as 1.5ºC may be possible, so the IPCC widened the range of the most plausible values: 1.5 to 4.5ºC. The new lower limit of 1.5ºC is a best-case scenario that appears no more likely than the high end of 4.5ºC. Furthermore, even the lowest sensitivity scenario would not negate the need for emissions reductions. Current trends show that emissions are on track to increase far beyond doubling, which would create dangerous temperature rise even in a low-sensitivity climate. (Note that they give a small but worrisome possibility--0 to 10% chance--that the climate could warm by more than 6ºC for a doubling of CO2.)


Figure 2. Average of NASA's GISS, NOAA"s NCDC, and the UK Met Office's HadCRUT4 monthly global surface temperature departures from average, from January 1970 through November 2012 (blue), with linear trends applied to the time frames Jan '70 - Oct '77, Apr '77 - Dec '86, Sep '87 - Nov '96, Jun '97 - Dec '02, Nov '02 - Nov '12. Climate change skeptics like to emphasize the shorter term fluctuations in global temperatures (blue lines) and ignore the long-term climate trend (red line.) The global surface temperature trend from January 1970 through November 2012 (red line) is +0.16°C (+0.29°F) per decade. Image credit: skepticalscience.com.

Q: What does the IPCC say about the "speed bump" in surface global warming over the past 10 - 15 years?
Much attention has been given in the press to the fact that the rate of surface warming over the past fifteen years has been slower than during previous decades. The report notes that due to natural variability, trends based on short records are very sensitive to the beginning and end dates and do not in general reflect long-term climate trends. As one example, the rate of warming over the past 15 years (1998–2012) of 0.05 °C per decade, which begins with a strong El Niño, is smaller than the rate calculated since 1951 of 0.12 °C per decade. However, the recent slow-down in surface warming is likely to be a mere "speed bump" on the highway of global warming, caused by natural variability. We have seen such "speed bumps" before, as well as short, sharp downhill stretches where surface warming speeds up. For example, climate scientist Stefan Rahmstorf writes at realclimate.org that "the warming trend of the 15-year period up to 2006 was almost twice as fast as expected (0.3°C per decade), and (rightly) nobody cared. We published a paper in Science in 2007 where we noted this large trend, and as the first explanation for it we named “intrinsic variability within the climate system”. Which it turned out to be." Physics demands that the massive amounts of heat-trapping carbon dioxide humans have dumped into the atmosphere must cause significant warming, but the chaotic complexity of the system is expected to obscure the magnitude of the long-term trend on time scales of a few years to a decade. The attention being to this latest "speed bump" on the highway of global warming is a direct result of a well-funded PR effort by the fossil fuel industry. One has to look at the total warming of the atmosphere, oceans, land, and ice to judge the true progress of global warming, not just the surface temperature. There has been no slowdown in total global warming when we regard this entire system, as I argued in a post earlier this year. More than 90% of the energy of global warming goes into the oceans, and the reason for the relative lack of surface warming this decade is that more heat than usual is being stored in the oceans. That heat will be released to the atmosphere at some point, removing the "speed bump".

The new IPCC report says that there is medium confidence that the "speed bump" in surface warming is due in roughly equal measure to natural multi-year unpredictable variability in the weather, and to changes in the amount of sunlight reaching the surface due to volcanic eruptions and the downward phase of the current solar cycle. Most of the climate models do not reproduce this lower surface warming rate during the past 10 - 15 years. There is medium confidence that this difference between models and observations is due to natural climate variability that is impossible to predict (for example, the El Niño/La Niña cycle), with possible contributions from the models' inadequate handling of volcanic eruptions, changes in solar output, and changes in light-reflecting aerosol particles, and, in some models, a too-strong response to heat-trapping gases. For an explanation of why arguments about the global warming “slowdown” are misleading and should not offer any consolation, see this explainer from Skeptical Science and this one from the Union for Concerned Scientists.

Q: What does the IPCC say about drought?
A: Drought and reduction in water availability due to decreased mountain snow and ice is the greatest threat civilization faces from climate change, since it attacks the two things we need to live--water and food. Unfortunately, the report makes no mention of drought in the text, and we will have to wait for the March 2014 release of the "impacts" portion of the report to hear more about the threat drought poses to society. Today's report does mention drought in one of their two tables, giving “low confidence”--a 20% chance--that we have already observed a human-caused increase in the intensity and/or duration of drought in some parts of the world. This is a reduction in confidence from the 2007 report, which said that it was more likely than not (greater than 50% chance.) However, the forecast for the future is the same as in the 2007 report: we are likely to see dry areas get dryer due to human-caused climate change by 2100. In particular, there is high confidence (80%) in likely surface drying in the Mediterranean, Southwest U.S., and Southern Africa by 2100 in the high-end emissions scenario (RCP8.5), in association with expected increases in surface temperatures and a shift in the atmospheric circulation that will expand the region of sinking air that creates the world's greatest deserts.

Q: What does the IPCC say about sea level rise?
A: Global average sea level has risen 7.5" (19 cm) since 1901. Sea level has accelerated to 1.5" (3.2 cm) per decade over the past 20 years--nearly double the rate of rise during the 20th century. The report projects that sea level will rise by an extra 0.9 - 3.2' (26 to 98 cm) by 2100. While the maximum sea level rise expected has gone up since the 2007 report, when the IPCC did not even consider melt from Greenland and Antarctica because of the primitive state of glacier science then, the new upper bound (3.2') is still is a very conservative number. IPCC decided not to include estimates from at least five published studies that had higher numbers, including two studies with rises of 2 meters (6.6 feet.) This is in contradiction to NOAA's December 2012 U.S. National Climate Assessment Report, which has 6.6 feet (2.0 meters) as its worst-case sea level rise scenario for 2100. Even this number may be too low; at a presentation Thursday in New York City for Climate Week, glaciologist Dr. Jason Box, who knows as much about Greenland's ice sheets as any person alive, explained that Greenland's contribution to global sea level rise doubled over the past ten years. If Greenland's melt rate continues to double every ten years until 2100, Greenland alone will contribute 4.6' (1.4 meters) of global sea level rise, he said. If the doubling time becomes every nine years, then Greenland will cause 16.4' (5 meters) of sea level rise by 2100. His best-guess number for global sea level rise by 2100 is 4.7' (1.5 meters), but warns that our models used to predict melting of ice of Greenland have large unknowns.

Long-term sea level rise is expected to be much greater. The IPCC report states with "very high confidence" that 119,000 - 126,000 years ago, during the period before the most recent ice age, sea levels were 16 - 33 feet (5 - 10 meters) higher than at present. Melting of Greenland "very likely" contributed 1.4 - 4.3 meters of this rise, with additional contributions coming from Antarctica. Temperatures at that time weren't more than 2°C warmer than "pre-industrial" levels during that period. Two of the four scenarios used for the report project we will exceed 2°C of warming by 2100, with "high confidence", raising the possibility that we could see sea level rises of many meters over time scales of 1,000 years or so. The report expects sea level rise reach 3.3 - 9.8' (1 - 3 meters) by 2300, assuming CO2 levels rise above 700 ppm (close to what the higher-end RCP6.0 scenario prescribes.)

Q: What does the IPCC say about ocean acidity?
A: The world's oceans have seen a 26% increase in acidity since the Industrial Revolution, as the average pH has dropped from 8.2 to 8.1. Under all report scenarios, the acidification of the world's oceans will increase, with the pH falling by another 0.06 - 0.32 units. According to a 2012 study in Science, the current acidification rate is likely the fastest in 300 million years, and "may have severe consequences for marine ecosystems."

Q: How about hurricanes?
A: The new report gives “low confidence”--a 20% chance--that we have observed a human-caused increase in intense hurricanes in some parts of the world. This is a reduction from the 2007 report, which said that it was more likely than not (greater than 50% chance.) The IPCC likely took note of a landmark 2010 review paper, "Tropical Cyclones and Climate Change", authored by ten top hurricane scientists, which concluded that the U.S. has not seen any long-term increase in landfalling tropical storms and hurricanes, and that "it remains uncertain whether past changes in tropical cyclone activity have exceeded the variability expected from natural causes." The 2013 IPCC report predicts that there is a greater than 50% chance (more likely than not) that we will see a human-caused increase in intense hurricanes by 2100 in some regions; this is a reduction from the 2007 report, which said this would be likely (66% chance or higher.)

Q: How about extreme weather events?
"Changes in many extreme weather and climate events have been observed since about 1950. It is very likely that the number of cold days and nights have decreased and the number of warm days and nights has increased on the global scale. It is likely that the frequency of heat waves has increased in large parts of Europe, Asia, and Australia. There are likely more land regions where the number of heavy precipitation events has increased than where it has decreased. The frequency or intensity of heavy precipitation events has likely increased in North America and Europe." The report made no mention of tornadoes and severe thunderstorms, since the uncertainties of how they have behaved in the past and how climate change might affect them in the future are too great.

Q: What does the IPCC say about a "Day After Tomorrow" scenario?
A: In the disaster movie "The Day After Tomorrow", the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation (AMOC)--the ocean current system of which the Gulf Stream Current is a part of--collapses, causing a rapid and extreme change in climate. A collapse of the AMOC is very unlikely (0 - 10% chance) before 2100 according to the report, but cannot be ruled out beyond the 21st century. A weakening of the AMOC by about 11 - 34% by 2100 is expected in the moderate RCP4.5 scenario, where CO2 levels reach 538 ppm in 2100. However, these odds assume that Greenland will dump a relatively modest amount of fresh water into the North Atlantic by 2100. If the higher-end sea level rise estimates that the IPCC did not consider as plausible come true, the AMOC will likely slow down much more, with a higher chance of collapse this century. No slow-down in the AMOC has been observed yet, according to the report.

Commentary
As I read though the report, digesting the exhaustive list of changes to Earth's atmosphere, oceans, and ice that have occurred over the past few decades, I was struck by how the IPCC report reads like lab results from a sick hospital patient. The natural systems that civilization depends upon to thrive have been profoundly disturbed, and the forecast for the future reads like a medical diagnosis for an overweight smoker with a heart condition: unless the patient makes major lifestyle changes, the illness will grow far worse, with severe debilitation or death distinct possibilities. We can and we must make the huge effort to turn things around. Oil and natural gas are the energy technologies of the 20th century. Coal is the energy technology of the 19th century. We have countless innovative and dedicated people ready to move us to the energy technology of the 21st century; I heard three of them speak last night at the Climate Week event I am at, and they really gave me some needed hope that we can turn things around. We must elect new leaders and pressure our existing leaders to take the strong actions needed to advance us into a new, 21st century energy economy. You can all help make it so!

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: 1179 - 1129

Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41 | 42 | 43 | 44 | 45 | 46 | 47 | 48 | 49 | 50 | 51 | 52 | 53Blog Index

And this is what it might look like.

Member Since: June 30, 2013 Posts: 9 Comments: 6676
Here we go 2013 season folks may have something brewing.

Member Since: June 30, 2013 Posts: 9 Comments: 6676
Quoting 1164. JLPR2:


Nah! That's a 45mph TS. XD

I'm seriously considering trying to work for the JTWC or JMA when I grow up. I'd get to forecast more intense cyclones and give reasonable intensities to tropical cyclones for once. -_-
Member Since: July 6, 2010 Posts: 108 Comments: 30245
Goodnight guys see ya'll at 7:15.
Member Since: March 25, 2013 Posts: 29 Comments: 941
Down to 999 mb.

Member Since: June 30, 2013 Posts: 9 Comments: 6676
120 hrs.

Member Since: June 30, 2013 Posts: 9 Comments: 6676
Quoting 764. Jedkins01:

I will add to the comment. The people who care can't do anything about it. The people who can do something about it don't care. Quite the conundrum!
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
GFS 105 hrs.

Member Since: June 30, 2013 Posts: 9 Comments: 6676
Quoting 1161. TXEER:
We must elect new leaders and pressure our existing leaders to take the strong actions needed to advance us into a new, 21st century energy economy. You can all help make it so!

Jeff Masters


Spare me please!!!


lol
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
1169. EstherD
Quoting 1073. sts100launch:
... Why is it no one from the IPCC can say they were wrong about some prediction or why can't the non-belivers say hey I was wrong and there is some evidence of golbal temp change.


Did you actually read Dr. Master's post? He gave two examples of the IPCC doing exactly what you want:

Q: What does the IPCC say about drought? ...
Today's report does mention drought in one of their two tables, giving “low confidence”--a 20% chance--that we have already observed a human-caused increase in the intensity and/or duration of drought in some parts of the world. This is a reduction in confidence from the 2007 report, which said that it was more likely than not (greater than 50% chance.)


Q: How about hurricanes?
A: The new report gives “low confidence”--a 20% chance--that we have observed a human-caused increase in intense hurricanes in some parts of the world. This is a reduction from the 2007 report, which said that it was more likely than not (greater than 50% chance.)


No surprise there... this exactly what good scientific practice demands of them.

Still hoping for the other side to fess up to their errors, but I really don't expect anything anytime soon.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
1168. HadesGodWyvern (Mod)
Wutip has likely become a typhoon.


close.. 60 knots on the 2 minute average wind speed measurement.

** WTPQ20 BABJ 280300 ***
SUBJECTIVE FORECAST
STS WUTIP 1321 (1321) INITIAL TIME 280300 UTC
00HR 16.3N 114.2E 980HPA 30M/S (60 knots)
30KTS 280KM
50KTS 50KM
P12HR WSW 5KM/H
P+24HR 16.2N 113.0E 965HPA 38M/S
P+48HR 17.3N 109.9E 955HPA 42M/S
P+72HR 18.3N 104.6E 996HPA 18M/S=
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
1167. KEEPEROFTHEGATE (Mod)
Quoting 1161. TXEER:
We must elect new leaders and pressure our existing leaders to take the strong actions needed to advance us into a new, 21st century energy economy. You can all help make it so!

Jeff Masters


Spare me please!!!






Member Since: July 15, 2006 Posts: 163 Comments: 52226
AMSU says WUTIP is a Typhoon if you convert knots to mph. it will give you roughly 78 mph.

Visible 1 km.


Member Since: June 30, 2013 Posts: 9 Comments: 6676
1165. HadesGodWyvern (Mod)
Japan Meteorological Agency
Tropical Cyclone Advisory #22
Storm Warning
SEVERE TROPICAL STORM WUTIP (T1321)
12:00 AM JST September 28 2013
======================================

South China Sea

At 3:00 AM UTC, Severe Tropical Storm Wutip (990 hPa) located at 16.5N 114.0E has 10 minute sustained winds of 50 knots with gusts of 70 knots. The cyclone is reported as moving west southwest slowly.

Gale Force Winds
==================
210 NM from the center in north quadrant
90 NM from the center in south quadrant

Dvorak intensity: T3.0

Forecast and Intensity
=======================
24 HRS: 16.4N 112.3E - 55 knots (CAT 2/Severe Tropical Storm) South China Sea
45 HRS: 17.7N 109.2E - 55 knots (CAT 2/Severe Tropical Storm) South China Sea
69 HRS: 18.2N 106.6E - 50 knots (CAT 2/Severe Tropical Storm) Gulf Of Tonkin
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
1164. JLPR2
Quoting 1158. TropicalAnalystwx13:
Wutip has likely become a typhoon.




Nah! That's a 45mph TS. XD
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
1163. GatorWX
Quoting 1159. GTstormChaserCaleb:
It bugs me till this day, some of the meteorologist in Tampa were certain at the time that this was our storm and there was no way around it. I've asked a couple of times if anyone has an archive or knows a website that stores the computer model runs for hurricane charley. I think it was the VIPER and another model it might have been the AVN or NOGAPS, 2 models if I'm not mistaken that was predicting a landfall in SW FL. but the meteorologist kept ON discounting them as outliers. That storm taught me not to focus on the line, but the cone, unfortunately for the residents of SW FL. some didn't have enough time to get out of the way, so they had to hunker down and ride it out. Also, Charley was only expected to make landfall as a Category 2 hurricane and ended up making landfall as a 145 mph. Category 4 hurricane, anymore time over water and Charley may have made landfall as a Category 5.


There used to be a model forecast verification on here, but I can't find it for Charley at least. Charley was actually 150mph upon first landfall in Captiva. I think it is likely it was very close to 156mph as gusts recorded, although unofficial, were in the 175-180mph range before some of these anemometers failed. It was a very tight little thing! I lived about 13 miles from the center of the eye and "only" received 70-80mph gusts. It was one of those days that I'll never forget.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
How strong will future Jerry be?
A 45
B 55
C 65
D 75+

I think C.
Member Since: March 25, 2013 Posts: 29 Comments: 941
1161. TXEER
We must elect new leaders and pressure our existing leaders to take the strong actions needed to advance us into a new, 21st century energy economy. You can all help make it so!

Jeff Masters


Spare me please!!!
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting 1158. TropicalAnalystwx13:
Wutip has likely become a typhoon.




Looks like a decent eye to me.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting 1145. Jelloboy:


Ah OK, no problem then.

I lived a couple of miles away from the water in north Pasco during the '93 storm. We lost power that night and I didn't have a radio in my car when I had to wake up early to go to work and as I drove down US 19 there were school buses and cars all along the side of the road, and this was at 8a on a Saturday morning. I had no idea what was going on until I came around a corner to a road where I could normally see out to the gulf, which was a mile or so away and instead the water, from the gulf, was along the side of the road. That's when I realized what was happening. The winds were blowing steady at around 60mph with higher gusts. Several people drowned in their homes that night out in Hudson Beach and there is some incredible footage of the flooding in Hernando Beach. Remember this hit in the middle of the night in March with no warning other than a cold front was coming through, there was nothing about there being a 6-9 foot storm surge. Here's a link to a YouTube video with some stills, someone had actual video posted before but I can't find it now.

Hurricane Charley really bugged me in the way the NHC handled things. Everything suggested that the storm was going to turn before it got as far north as Tampa yet the NHC center stuck with its forecast putting it directly over my house at that time. Obviously you have to pay attention to the entire cone, but their cone was too far to the west and didn't give enough of a heads up to the people to south. At least in my opinion. So many people from Pinellas County evacuated to Orlando where, surprise, they got hit by a hurricane. The real failing on the NHC side is how long they waited once it was evident that the storm was turning, they waited an unnecessarily long period of time before finally changing the track away from Tampa. If it was a large Katrina sized storm they wouldn't have looked so bad - but I lived out by the airport and it barely sprinkled and we got pretty much nothing in terms of wind.

I was pretty young for Elena in 1985 but I lived up in Hernando during the storm and remember it fairly well. It was over a labor day weekend and it sat off in the Gulf for three days. So it wasn't like a normal storm where you have a build up and then it's gone, it just keep off the coast causing major damage to beach front property. Also where I lived it rained so much it flooded all the major roads for nearly a week, and back in that time it was a big deal since there were not that many north/south roads around.

Anyways those are the 3 major storms that came in from the gulf.

In 2004 we got on the backend of the two hurricanes and it was finally Jeanne that knocked out our power for a few days, that really sucked.

We're due for something at some point, but certainly Tampa is not in a position to get hit by as many storms as the panhandle or south Florida.
It bugs me till this day, some of the meteorologist in Tampa were certain at the time that this was our storm and there was no way around it. I've asked a couple of times if anyone has an archive or knows a website that stores the computer model runs for hurricane charley. I think it was the VIPER and another model it might have been the AVN or NOGAPS, 2 models if I'm not mistaken that was predicting a landfall in SW FL. but the meteorologist kept ON discounting them as outliers. That storm taught me not to focus on the line, but the cone, unfortunately for the residents of SW FL. some didn't have enough time to get out of the way, so they had to hunker down and ride it out. Also, Charley was only expected to make landfall as a Category 2 hurricane and ended up making landfall as a 145 mph. Category 4 hurricane, anymore time over water and Charley may have made landfall as a Category 5.
Member Since: June 30, 2013 Posts: 9 Comments: 6676
Wutip has likely become a typhoon.


Member Since: July 6, 2010 Posts: 108 Comments: 30245
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
1156. KEEPEROFTHEGATE (Mod)
Member Since: July 15, 2006 Posts: 163 Comments: 52226
Member Since: March 25, 2013 Posts: 29 Comments: 941
Member Since: March 25, 2013 Posts: 29 Comments: 941
Maybe a renumber tomorrow.
Member Since: March 25, 2013 Posts: 29 Comments: 941
1151. Pallis
Quoting 1124. Jedkins01:


That's really disturbing, that puts the southern yellow jacket and the africanized bee to shame. Being killed by a an insect is really a disturbing concept.
I contradict that statement. More people die from yellowjackets than any other creature in the U.S.A. That includes sharks and snakebites. It is not the size of the insect but the obnoxiousness of the lawnmower that they attack. 50 to 100 a year dead is the average. This giant hornet sounds like a Chinese version of the really big one in Japan. 30 to 40 dead each year. There is a much bigger one that the shadow corporation is trying to unleash in America, the asiatic. No honeybees = no fruit. There are reports that they are already here. Pray for a cold winter.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting 1139. allancalderini:
If this becomes Jerry the trend for weak jerries will continue.


That could be true. Just reading this and I had forgotten about Jerry 1989. Had it in my head Bonnie 86 finally destroyed HWY 87 before they gave up on rebuilding it for the 100th time. :)

Since 1842, ONLY 5 storms have hit the Texas Coast with the last one on October 16, 1989 - Hurricane Jerry which destroyed Highway 87 west of Sabine Pass.

Regardless, hurricane season lasts through November and by no means should we let our guard down.


Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Wow guys special tropical weather outlook
Looks like 96L will become Jerry and SW Caribbean system will become Karen

PECIAL TROPICAL WEATHER OUTLOOK
NWS NATIONAL HURRICANE CENTER MIAMI FL
1050 PM EDT FRI SEP 27 2013

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

SPECIAL OUTLOOK ISSUED TO UPDATE DISCUSSION OF AREA OF DISTURBED
WEATHER EAST-NORTHEAST OF THE LESSER ANTILLES.

UPDATED...SATELLITE IMAGES AND SATELLITE-DERIVED WIND DATA INDICATE
THAT A SMALL LOW PRESSURE SYSTEM HAS DEVELOPED ABOUT 700 MILES
EAST-NORTHEAST OF THE NORTHERN LEEWARD ISLANDS AND IS PRODUCING
WINDS NEAR GALE FORCE. HOWEVER...THE ASSOCIATED SHOWERS AND
THUNDERSTORMS ARE BEING DISPLACED NORTH OF THE CENTER OF THE LOW
DUE TO STRONG UPPER-LEVEL WINDS. ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS
ARE EXPECTED TO BE MARGINALLY CONDUCIVE FOR ADDITIONAL DEVELOPMENT
DURING THE NEXT COUPLE OF DAYS WHILE THE LOW MOVES GENERALLY
NORTHWARD AT ABOUT 15 MPH. THIS SYSTEM HAS A MEDIUM CHANCE...40
PERCENT...OF BECOMING A TROPICAL CYCLONE DURING THE NEXT 48 HOURS
AND A MEDIUM CHANCE...50 PERCENT...OF BECOMING A TROPICAL CYCLONE
DURING THE NEXT 5 DAYS. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ON THIS SYSTEM CAN
BE FOUND IN HIGH SEAS FORECASTS ISSUED BY THE NATIONAL WEATHER
SERVICE.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
1148. KEEPEROFTHEGATE (Mod)
Quoting 1144. sunlinepr:


Would be like a Terror movie coming alive...
I have Been mountain hiking and have been panicked when hearing the sound of africanized bees in their honeycomb.... leaving inmeately the place.... Imagine an attack by those hornets...
maybe all of it will turn on us in the end
Member Since: July 15, 2006 Posts: 163 Comments: 52226

Pentagon sees decisions on U.S. weather satellite in next months


Friday Sep 27, 2013 | Andrea Shalal-Esa for Reuters

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Pentagon is expected to reach decisions in coming months on how to meet its weather forecasting needs after the 2012 termination of a nearly $15 billion program being built by Northrop Grumman Corp, a senior official told Reuters on Thursday.

Douglas Loverro, deputy assistant defense secretary for space policy, said Pentagon officials were weighing the possibility of replacing the large satellite system that Northrop was slated to build with a series of smaller, less expensive satellites in the $200 million to $300 million range.

Those decisions, expected in several months, would help the Pentagon move toward what it describes as a "disaggregated" approach to national security satellites, said Loverro.

Link
Member Since: Posts: Comments:

Quoting 1124. Jedkins01:


Being killed by a an insect is really a disturbing concept.
Agreed. Worse than a serial killer, even.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting 1110. GTstormChaserCaleb:
Sorry didn't mean for it to sound offensive, just wanted to catch your attention. You seem as interested as I am too, mainly because my family lives in the Tampa area. That '93 storm almost destroyed our porch. It was crazy because I was a young boy then playing outside and it started out as a nice day with hardly a cloud in the skies and next thing you know everything turned black outside and things were flying around. My mom had to pull me inside. If I was older I might have been like this is awesome or terrified. The 2004 season was the first time I witnessed near hurricane conditions with Frances and Jeanne and I was outside in both of those storms, feeling those winds whip up was a pretty cool experience for me.


Ah OK, no problem then.

I lived a couple of miles away from the water in north Pasco during the '93 storm. We lost power that night and I didn't have a radio in my car when I had to wake up early to go to work and as I drove down US 19 there were school buses and cars all along the side of the road, and this was at 8a on a Saturday morning. I had no idea what was going on until I came around a corner to a road where I could normally see out to the gulf, which was a mile or so away and instead the water, from the gulf, was along the side of the road. That's when I realized what was happening. The winds were blowing steady at around 60mph with higher gusts. Several people drowned in their homes that night out in Hudson Beach and there is some incredible footage of the flooding in Hernando Beach. Remember this hit in the middle of the night in March with no warning other than a cold front was coming through, there was nothing about there being a 6-9 foot storm surge. Here's a link to a YouTube video with some stills, someone had actual video posted before but I can't find it now.

Hurricane Charley really bugged me in the way the NHC handled things. Everything suggested that the storm was going to turn before it got as far north as Tampa yet the NHC center stuck with its forecast putting it directly over my house at that time. Obviously you have to pay attention to the entire cone, but their cone was too far to the west and didn't give enough of a heads up to the people to south. At least in my opinion. So many people from Pinellas County evacuated to Orlando where, surprise, they got hit by a hurricane. The real failing on the NHC side is how long they waited once it was evident that the storm was turning, they waited an unnecessarily long period of time before finally changing the track away from Tampa. If it was a large Katrina sized storm they wouldn't have looked so bad - but I lived out by the airport and it barely sprinkled and we got pretty much nothing in terms of wind.

I was pretty young for Elena in 1985 but I lived up in Hernando during the storm and remember it fairly well. It was over a labor day weekend and it sat off in the Gulf for three days. So it wasn't like a normal storm where you have a build up and then it's gone, it just keep off the coast causing major damage to beach front property. Also where I lived it rained so much it flooded all the major roads for nearly a week, and back in that time it was a big deal since there were not that many north/south roads around.

Anyways those are the 3 major storms that came in from the gulf.

In 2004 we got on the backend of the two hurricanes and it was finally Jeanne that knocked out our power for a few days, that really sucked.

We're due for something at some point, but certainly Tampa is not in a position to get hit by as many storms as the panhandle or south Florida.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting 1124. Jedkins01:


That's really disturbing, that puts the southern yellow jacket and the africanized bee to shame. Being killed by a an insect is really a disturbing concept.


Would be like a Terror movie coming alive...
I have Been mountain hiking and have been panicked when hearing the sound of africanized bees in their honeycomb.... leaving inmeately the place.... Imagine an attack by those hornets...
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting 1140. Autistic2:


When are we supposed to SEE the ocean levels rise?

Some people (like me) have a hard time with abstract concepts yet things we can see, hear, feel, taste, or measure are very believable.


They already are. About 2 1/2" since 1990.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
1142. GatorWX
Quoting 1136. BaltimoreBrian:


It was 40%. Those articles compared the average of August 2013 to the yearly minimum day in September 2012.


lol.

Trends, isn't that what we follow? I'm thinking one month doesn't amount to much. ;)
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting 1092. TropicalAnalystwx13:
In other news, it has now been 2,896 days (between but not including October 24, 2005 and September 28, 2013) since the last 100kt tropical cyclone made landfall in the United States. The record was 2,321 days between September 8, 1900 and October 19, 1906.


Nope. The record remains 3,315 days between August 11, 1860 and September 8, 1869.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting 1131. BaltimoreBrian:


And many other American cities and others around the world.


When are we supposed to SEE the ocean levels rise?

Some people (like me) have a hard time with abstract concepts yet things we can see, hear, feel, taste, or measure are very believable.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting 1138. Civicane49:
Code orange

If this becomes Jerry the trend for weak jerries will continue.
Member Since: October 15, 2011 Posts: 0 Comments: 3703
Code orange

Member Since: Posts: Comments:
1137. whitewabit (Mod)
Quoting 1131. BaltimoreBrian:


And many other American cities and others around the world.


364 million people are estimated to be in danger of rising oceans ..
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting 1099. GatorWX:


In September, ice extent was 60% greater than the previous September, doesn't that debunk the whole theory?


It was 40%. Those articles compared the average of August 2013 to the yearly minimum day in September 2012.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting 1098. ncstorm:
look at the difference of the amount of ensembles bringing a system north to florida..

18z



12z
Not only the GFS Ensembles take a look at the latest FIM-9:

Member Since: June 30, 2013 Posts: 9 Comments: 6676

SPECIAL TROPICAL WEATHER OUTLOOK
NWS NATIONAL HURRICANE CENTER MIAMI FL
1050 PM EDT FRI SEP 27 2013

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

SPECIAL OUTLOOK ISSUED TO UPDATE DISCUSSION OF AREA OF DISTURBED
WEATHER EAST-NORTHEAST OF THE LESSER ANTILLES.

UPDATED...SATELLITE IMAGES AND SATELLITE-DERIVED WIND DATA INDICATE
THAT A SMALL LOW PRESSURE SYSTEM HAS DEVELOPED ABOUT 700 MILES
EAST-NORTHEAST OF THE NORTHERN LEEWARD ISLANDS AND IS PRODUCING
WINDS NEAR GALE FORCE. HOWEVER...THE ASSOCIATED SHOWERS AND
THUNDERSTORMS ARE BEING DISPLACED NORTH OF THE CENTER OF THE LOW
DUE TO STRONG UPPER-LEVEL WINDS. ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS
ARE EXPECTED TO BE MARGINALLY CONDUCIVE FOR ADDITIONAL DEVELOPMENT
DURING THE NEXT COUPLE OF DAYS WHILE THE LOW MOVES GENERALLY
NORTHWARD AT ABOUT 15 MPH. THIS SYSTEM HAS A MEDIUM CHANCE...40
PERCENT...OF BECOMING A TROPICAL CYCLONE DURING THE NEXT 48 HOURS
AND A MEDIUM CHANCE...50 PERCENT...OF BECOMING A TROPICAL CYCLONE
DURING THE NEXT 5 DAYS. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ON THIS SYSTEM CAN
BE FOUND IN HIGH SEAS FORECASTS ISSUED BY THE NATIONAL WEATHER
SERVICE.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting 1130. BaltimoreBrian:


IAWTC


sigh...I had to google yet another acronym
Member Since: June 26, 2013 Posts: 0 Comments: 1306
1132. Pallis
Quoting 1112. JohnLonergan:


Shorter version:

What a blowhard. After an invigorating day of discussion, and answers to the very questions you pose, you offer nothing in return. You have no proof of anything. Nada. No Bueno Senor.Se obtiene una f.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting 1117. Autistic2:
If all this GW and sea level talk is real then New Orleans is doomed.


And many other American cities and others around the world.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting 1128. LAbonbon:


I agree with this post. John, that's usually not okay on this blog. Might want to delete it.


IAWTC
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting 1124. Jedkins01:


That's really disturbing, that puts the southern yellow jacket and the africanized bee to shame. Being killed by a an insect is really a disturbing concept.


I agree. I omitted that one from my list!
Member Since: Posts: Comments:

Viewing: 1179 - 1129

Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41 | 42 | 43 | 44 | 45 | 46 | 47 | 48 | 49 | 50 | 51 | 52 | 53Blog Index

Top of Page

About JeffMasters

Jeff co-founded the Weather Underground in 1995 while working on his Ph.D. He flew with the NOAA Hurricane Hunters from 1986-1990.

Local Weather

Mostly Cloudy
45 °F
Mostly Cloudy