The Rough Guide to Climate Change: A book review

By: Dr. Jeff Masters , 1:47 PM GMT on January 29, 2008

Share this Blog
1
+

If you're bewildered by the complexity of the climate change/global warming issue, and want a comprehensive, easy-to-understand guide that presents an unbiased view of the important issues, look no further than Robert Henson's Rough Guide to Climate Change. In fact, we've found the Rough Guide to Climate Change so helpful and well written, that wunderground has licensed a copy of the introductory chapter and featured it on our Climate Change web page. This chapter is a "sneak preview" of the Second Edition, which is scheduled to be released February 4. If I were teaching a course on climate change at the high school or introductory college level, this would be the text.

However, the Rough Guide does not read like a textbook. It presents the key issues in a straightforward, clear, and conversational manner. The author, Robert Henson, is a meteorologist and journalist who works as a writer/editor at the University Corporation for Atmospheric Research in Boulder, Colorado. He organizes his book into four sections: "The basics"--global warming in a nutshell; "The symptoms"--what's happening now, and what might happen in the future; "The science"--how we know what we know about climate change; and "Debates & solutions"--from spats and spin to saving the planet. The book has information current up to September 2007, and discusses the major climate change event so far this century--the record melting of the Arctic's sea ice that peaked in September 2007, opening the Northwest Passage for the first time in recorded history.

Helpful graphics and interesting sidebars are interspersed throughout the text. Some of the more interesting sidebars include an interview with James Lovelock, originator of the Gaia Hypothesis that treats Earth as a living being; "The Nights Chicago Fried", an account of the deadly 1999 heat wave in Chicago; and "The Fast-Disappearing Snows of Kilimanjaro", discussing the controversy over why Mt. Kilimanjaro's ice is disappearing. My favorite sidebar is "Climate Change and the Cinema", where we learn that the first movie to discuss artificial climate change was probably Zombies of the Stratosphere (1952), which featured a young Leonard Nimoy as part of a gang of Martians bent on exploding Earth from its orbit so Mars can move sunward and benefit from a warmer climate. The sidebar also discusses the impact of movies like The Day After Tomorrow and Al Gore's An Inconvenient Truth.

The 2006 first edition of the Rough Guide is my favorite climate change reference book, and I highly recommend purchasing the second edition when it comes out February 4. You can preorder a copy of the second edition from amazon.com ($16.99, softcover). Overall rating: four stars out of four.

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: 103 - 53

Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4Blog Index

103. sebastianjer
10:56 PM EST on January 30, 2008
Hey Sully,
What is the explanation for 2007, only GISS going up while the rest go down, is there an explanation?

JER
Member Since: August 26, 2005 Posts: 1030 Comments: 11197
102. sebastianjer
10:53 PM EST on January 30, 2008
I posted a pic from California, I'm sure you have seen it, the station is five feet from a burn barrel, lol and 25' from a tennis court built in 1980. The temperature graph since 1980 is interesting to say the least.
Member Since: August 26, 2005 Posts: 1030 Comments: 11197
101. sullivanweather
3:54 AM GMT on January 31, 2008
A quick note on the GISS...

It should be noted that they don't always show the highest anomalies. A quick search of HADCRU, NCDC, UAH, RSS, etc. datasets will show this.
Member Since: March 8, 2007 Posts: 273 Comments: 12612
100. atmoaggie
3:51 AM GMT on January 31, 2008
Love the Tuscon pics, especially the Est 1867 zoom in on the sign. Do you think that station has had any warming temperature trends since 1867? Like asphalt or car radiators? Maybe?
Member Since: August 16, 2007 Posts: 6 Comments: 12463
99. sebastianjer
3:40 AM GMT on January 31, 2008
the ice has decreased its coverage of nw passage in the greastest extend since records the most open water ever seen its so simple

Yes it is simple

I just posted the lowest golf score in my recorded history, I just started keeping golf scores Yesterday. :)

Interesting Observation

Satellite temperature measurement makes immensely more sense - it has full coverage (except for the poles) and is not subject to local biases. Can anyone name one single reason why the scientific community does not use the satellite temps as the standard EXCEPT that the Can answer (ie lower temperature increases) is not the one they want? Consider the parallel example of measurement of arctic ice area. My sense is that before satellites, we got some measurements of arctic ice extent from fixed observation stations and ship reports, but these were spotty and unreliable. Now satellites make this measurement consistent and complete. Would anyone argue to ignore the satellite data for spotty surface observations? No, but this is exactly what the entire climate community seems to do for temperature, just because it gives them an answer that is not catastrophic enough.

There are four leading worldwide data sets. You could at least use the average of these but no, you choose to use the one (GISS) which is the biggest outlier. And then you accuse skeptics of bias.

Yeah, I know, there are still some technical issues in the satellite measurements. But these are tiny biases compared to those in the patchy surface temperature record. I took the Tucson station photographs at surfacestation.org. I have seen with my own eyes how bad a surface temperature record (used by the GISS from a site run by the University of Arizona) can be temperature measurement in the middle of a growing city located right in an asphalt parking lot.


Member Since: August 26, 2005 Posts: 1030 Comments: 11197
98. atmoaggie
3:40 AM GMT on January 31, 2008
Doesn't one simply need one of their expensive subscriptions?

Right, I meant to say FREE public access in that.
Member Since: August 16, 2007 Posts: 6 Comments: 12463
97. sullivanweather
3:39 AM GMT on January 31, 2008
I know the AGU will not be happy (they do not allow public access to anything)

Doesn't one simply need one of their expensive subscriptions?

Member Since: March 8, 2007 Posts: 273 Comments: 12612
96. atmoaggie
3:35 AM GMT on January 31, 2008
Ah ha. I know the AGU will not be happy (they do not allow public access to anything), but Chris Landsea is sharing the work on the HDR ftp server
Member Since: August 16, 2007 Posts: 6 Comments: 12463
95. KEEPEROFTHEGATE (Mod)
3:33 AM GMT on January 31, 2008
the ice has decreased its coverage of nw passage in the greastest extend since records the most open water ever seen its so simple
Member Since: July 15, 2006 Posts: 175 Comments: 54827
94. atmoaggie
3:30 AM GMT on January 31, 2008
Here is a tropical/climate change thought to chew on.

Published in Eos, the American Geophysical Union monthly newsletter by Chris Landsea of NHC/HRD.

Before the launch of our first optical satellites, an average of %75 of all known hurricanes were landfalling hurricanes. After such time (1966, I think) only %59 of all known hurricanes hit land. This makes the obvious point that we do not know about a large number of hurricanes that did not hit a populated area of land before we had satellites.

Postulating that we have had some greater number of storms, record seasons, or more numerous storms of some level of intensity and attributable to anything other than improved observation systems is pure nonsense. While all of that is possible, clear, verifiable, and successfully measured it is not. Assuming that we know all there is to know about the Atlantic TC history is simply faulty.
Member Since: August 16, 2007 Posts: 6 Comments: 12463
93. sebastianjer
3:29 AM GMT on January 31, 2008
Thanks Sully

You are probably correct, however Nils Adolf Erik Nordenskjold made the passage from Norway to the Bering Sea in 1878. I would point out that he did not have modern navigation instruments (GPS) and was on a steamship. Until 1979 nobody has the faintest idea whether or not the passage has been completely ice free or not. Although I did read somewhere recently that they have developed a way to determine Arctic Ice melting history from sea sediment and are analyzing it. I'll have to look it up

If as the Greenland Ice Sheets melt they find Viking farms, bold statements ought to be at least qualified with a degree of humility. Like maybe "we think"

But thanks
JER
Member Since: August 26, 2005 Posts: 1030 Comments: 11197
92. sullivanweather
3:12 AM GMT on January 31, 2008
Jer,

I think the misconception lies in whether the passage was navigable or whether or not it has been 'ice-free'.

I'm sure the northwest passage was navigable due to low ice concentrations in prior times, however, recently the passage was completely ice-free.

Many of the prior expeditions to navigate the northwest passage were multi-year endeavours. The difference this time was due to the ice-free conditons, the passage could have been made in a few days as opposed to many months or a couple of years.

I think Dr.Masters could have been a bit more specific as to what he meant by "opening the Northwest Passage for the first time in recorded history."

What he most likely meant was the passage had 'open water' which is a term used to describe a particular sea-ice condition (<10% coverage)
Member Since: March 8, 2007 Posts: 273 Comments: 12612
91. sebastianjer
3:01 AM GMT on January 31, 2008
In post 13 of this blog, I pointed out an error. In post 19 Lat expounded on that error and others have commented on it. I'm sure that Dr.M reads this blog on occasion, if he is putting out faulty information he ought to correct it. If he feels there is another explanation he ought to present it. I have been called out for misstatements and have had to eat crow and apologize and I'm a nobody.

Dr. M is the founder of this blog, many, myself included look up to him as an expert in meteorology. As such he has an obligation to respond to an obvious misrepresentation of facts or explain his understanding of the stated facts.

Whether or not he was just quoting the book or if that is his opinion is irrelevant, he chose that statement to post and he strongly endorses the book.

It is obvious that the Weather Underground has taken a position on AGW and is acting as advocates for their beliefs. That is fine, it is their Website they have every right to. I am grateful that they allow those of us who are skeptical of this belief to comment and point out other information without any censorship.

It is totally up to them whether they feel it necessary to respond to questions about statements they make regarding this or any other issue. In fact I feel uncomfortable bringing the subject up, having been with WU since its inception, but Dr. M brought up the topic. The feature on Climate Change does not permit comment, Ricky's blog which can be quite energetic, lol, does but Dr. M brought it up here and I for one would like to know what he means by-
"and discusses the major climate change event so far this century--the record melting of the Arctic's sea ice that peaked in September 2007, opening the Northwest Passage for the first time in recorded history".

JER
Member Since: August 26, 2005 Posts: 1030 Comments: 11197
90. extreme236
1:52 AM GMT on January 31, 2008
Well in the US, the term limit is 2 terms. Even if he could, it probably wouldn't happen.
Member Since: August 2, 2007 Posts: 19 Comments: 19234
88. Drakoen
1:30 AM GMT on January 31, 2008
86. sullivanweather 1:25 AM GMT on January 31, 2008
It's actually because of the republicans that were mad after FDR won 4 terms to office.

They amended (22nd amendment) the constitution putting term limits (2) on the presidency.


I thought it was because George Washington was only in office for 8 years before he retired. Maybe i need to brush up on my history lol.
Member Since: October 28, 2006 Posts: 57 Comments: 30602
87. GBlet
1:27 AM GMT on January 31, 2008
In the case of George "Dubba" Bush, this is a good thing!
Member Since: September 13, 2007 Posts: 0 Comments: 435
86. sullivanweather
1:25 AM GMT on January 31, 2008
It's actually because of the republicans that were mad after FDR won 4 terms to office.

They amended (22nd amendment) the constitution putting term limits (2) on the presidency.
Member Since: March 8, 2007 Posts: 273 Comments: 12612
85. GBlet
1:24 AM GMT on January 31, 2008
456, our president are limited to 2-four year terms.
Member Since: September 13, 2007 Posts: 0 Comments: 435
84. Drakoen
1:22 AM GMT on January 31, 2008
W456, he can't do that lol. Blame George Washington.
Member Since: October 28, 2006 Posts: 57 Comments: 30602
83. Cavin Rawlins
1:12 AM GMT on January 31, 2008
Can some send me an email or leave a post here?

Why is that President Bush not running for a 3rd year? Thanks
Member Since: July 24, 2005 Posts: 407 Comments: 19076
81. sullivanweather
12:34 AM GMT on January 31, 2008
Thunder,

Again, a very good summary.

I would have to point out, tough, that our period of reliable record kieeping is too short to be able to make such assertions about tropical cyclone activity and it's connection to global warming.

For example, a recent study was published in Nature (I wish I had a subscription) that says the period of 1995-2005 had 40% more hurricanes due to higher SST's (or something along those lines). I've already read several articles about this and I say to myself, "There's no way that one can compare the noise of a decade of hurricane seasons to a multi-decadal signal"

BTW - You mentioned Katrina, I was simply quoting you LOL
Member Since: March 8, 2007 Posts: 273 Comments: 12612
80. Inyo
12:02 AM GMT on January 31, 2008
If southern california changes from a mediterranean climate to a sub-tropical climate, that's climate change.

yes but if that happened, that would mean so-cal would get hurricanes.Six hurricanes hitting Los Angeles in 10 years would indeed be a sign of a climate change.
Member Since: September 3, 2002 Posts: 42 Comments: 873
79. thunder01
11:51 PM GMT on January 30, 2008
Climate change is a change in climate.
If the southeast turns from a sub-tropical climate to a tropical climate, for example, that's climate change.


This is true...

If southern california changes from a mediterranean climate to a sub-tropical climate, that's climate change.


Well, yes...

If New Orleans enters an active phase of hurricane frequency, that's NOT climate change, just extreme weather. Hurricanes are already part of the climate is the point I'm trying to make.


Here is a finer point, though. The frequency of hurricane strikes on New Orleans (or any other point on the globe)is not a reliable measure of any aspect of climate. The rate of change of the total energy of all tropical cyclone activity globally (and perhaps in specific basins) smoothed over a period of years or decades, however, would be significant. I use this example only because you mentioned Katrina; actually, tropical cyclonic energy is not a good way to examine changes in climate because of dramatic potential for subseasonal and inter-decadal fluctuations in both frequency and intensity of storms. It actually appears that a warmer planet may decrease the FREQUENCY of hurricanes in the Atlantic basin but increase significantly the potential strength of the storms that do develop (higher heat content of warmer water). Here, again, is another reason why it is also fallacious to use the converse of this argument (that a decrease in hurricane activity is indicative of a cooler regime).

More importantly, though, "climate" is nothing more than the weather through time. If the number of "extreme" events increases over different temporal and spatial scales, this is indeed evidence that the climate has changed. Obviously, a particular event (or even a short series of events over several years) can never be tied to long-term climate changes (though it seems that the popular media does not understand this). This allows those looking to discredit the scientific consensus to critisize, with some merit, these dramatic postulations put forth by those who really have no business in making such assertions. Those directly in the field, however, do not make these types of connections--that last week's heatwave was a result of global warming, etc.. These ridiculous and detrimental statements are reserved for local network affiliate television "meteorologists" to boldly spew during the 6 o'clock news hour.
78. Cavin Rawlins
11:37 PM GMT on January 30, 2008
Member Since: July 24, 2005 Posts: 407 Comments: 19076
77. Inyo
11:03 PM GMT on January 30, 2008
Most research on southern California fires indicate that the reason fire frequency is increasing is not climate change but in fact a proliferation of non-native annual plants such as mustard and ripgut brome. Although chaparral is quite flammable, it generally would not naturally burn more than once every 30 to 60 years. We have had fires burning over the same place last year that burned 3 to 5 years ago... which would not happen in intact chaparral. However, these areas are now infested with mustard, brome, and other weeds not native to the area. Many of them were actually seeded in the 50s to 'reduce erosion after fires' which they are not successful in doing because they have shallow roots. Also, unlike chaparral, these weeds can burn EVERY YEAR and the more they spread, the more fires we will see, because in addition to encouraging fires to spread, they themselves thrive after fires.

Likewise, because of cheatgrass and buffelgrass, large areas of desert that basically never burned are now starting to burn. It is a big problem and will be blamed on global warming, but it is another environmental problem - introduced weeds - that is the main culprit.

In the pine forest, on the other hand, climate change (rising snow levels) is probably a major factor in all the fires, along with inappropriate logging practices and fire supression in the 20th century.

if you are interested in this subject please see this blog entry I wrote about it in october
Member Since: September 3, 2002 Posts: 42 Comments: 873
76. nrtiwlnvragn
10:39 PM GMT on January 30, 2008
British researchers say they have shown that a half-degree Celsius temperature rise in the Atlantic ocean can fuel a 40 percent increase in hurricanes.

Link
Member Since: September 23, 2005 Posts: 14 Comments: 11251
75. sullivanweather
10:24 PM GMT on January 30, 2008
This only serves to undermine the legitimate connections that have been made between anthropogenic forcing on the climate system

Couldn't have said that better myself.

This rush to blame every weather event on global warming is what's clouding the picture.

On the other hand...

No individual event can be linked to climate change (like Katrina, or the SoCal fires), but the sum total of all such events can, indeed, be connected

That is wrong...


Climate change is a change in climate.
If the southeast turns from a sub-tropical climate to a tropical climate, for example, that's climate change.

If southern california changes from a mediterranean climate to a sub-tropical climate, that's climate change.

If New Orleans enters an active phase of hurricane frequency, that's NOT climate change, just extreme weather. Hurricanes are already part of the climate is the point I'm trying to make.

Member Since: March 8, 2007 Posts: 273 Comments: 12612
74. TEXASYANKEE43
10:11 PM GMT on January 30, 2008
66. StormW 8:35 PM GMT on January 30, 2008 He's speaking of the Commumity Collaborative Rain, Hail & Snow network.

67. Bonedog 8:58 PM GMT on January 30, 2008Yankee I have been good and Storm explained what you asked for.

Basically its a bunch of folks around the country reporting their conditions to the NWS so they have more coverage then just a few stations. Finally NJ became part of the network.

Thanks Storm & Bone, I wouldn't think there would much use for snow reporting here in SE Texas.
Also, to anyone who was offended by my fire & brimstone post, I am truly sorry! Was just trying to put a lil' twist on the convo. Sorry
73. thunder01
9:48 PM GMT on January 30, 2008
The cause of wildfires cannot be global warming (unless I have missed something and ambient surface temperatures have lately reached the spontaneous combustion point of dry brush). The fact that the wildfires in the West have been increasingly intense and large (in terms of acerage) in the past few decades, however, can (and has been) correlated to changes in rainfall distribution and temperature changes in both spatial and temporal domains. Actually...climate change very well could increase the frequency of fires in the West--as vegetation becomes drier and dry lightning events may potentially become more frequent, natural fire starts will increase in number. The SoCal fires in late 2007 were all human-caused, accidental or arson, but that is largely beside the point. I do agree that the news media, as a general rule, tends to exaggerate connections (or in some cases, make patently false connections) between individual extreme weather events and climate change. This only serves to undermine the legitimate connections that have been made between anthropogenic forcing on the climate system and an increase in the frequency and range of extreme weather events on the whole. No individual event can be linked to climate change (like Katrina, or the SoCal fires), but the sum total of all such events can, indeed, be connected.
72. sullivanweather
9:32 PM GMT on January 30, 2008
sp,

That so-called 'connection' between the Socal fires and global warming was shoved down the throats of the American people for almost a week before investigators came foward with their findings as to the cause of the fires, which were mostly arson.

The point I'm trying to make is that most people read the news and take it at face value i.e. global warming must be to blame for every fire, heat wave, cold snap, winter storm, drought, flood, tornado, hurricane, etc.

Name any extreme weather event making news headlines and global warming is usually mentioned.

the cause of a fire has absolutely nothing to do with how many acres are burned

That is a ridiculous statement.

Arsonist aren't stupid. They KNOW that if a fire is set in a particular spot (base of a canyon), during Santa Ana winds (blowing 70-100mph), with a lot of dry brush ahead of them they'll get a big fire.

If the fire was started due to natrual causes then it's purely chance how much it burns, since the fire starts in a random spot whereas an arsonist will choose the most vulnerable spot.


Oh, BTW, those 'headlines' I mentioned may or may not have been the actual headlines...I cannot remember them word for word, but if you want me to go dig up some news articles from those fires....
Member Since: March 8, 2007 Posts: 273 Comments: 12612
70. thunder01
9:21 PM GMT on January 30, 2008
I just object to untruths by politicians that CO2 is the cause just to further their agenga and force it down our throats. They are not scientists and are getting rich by promoting the agenda

Exactly who is "getting rich" by pursuing or encouraging public understanding and mitigation of the effects of anthropogenic climate change? I mean, we all know that the fastest way to become a multi-millionaire in the United States is to get a Ph.D. in atmoshperic physics and become a research scientist in the Alaskan Arctic, but other than that? And I'd like to personally congratulate all of these politicians acknowledging the scientific consensus on the contribution of CO2 and other industrial emissions on the climate system, but I can't seem to find them.

Hmmm. That's odd.

Seriously, though--I'd like to know. I'm in the field myself, and I'd sure like to know where all this money is. Seems like everyone else already knows...
69. Cavin Rawlins
9:12 PM GMT on January 30, 2008
Someone asked: What is the significance of the warm core?

The stronger the warm core, the stronger the wall clouds in eye-wall or center of the storm. These thermals enhanced lift and vertical velocity (speed) of air flowing into the storm. The more lift and speed, the higher the moist air will go and then heat is then release through condensation to warm the upper levels, or the warm core. Moreover, that happens within a loop called a positive feedback loop until wind shear (which causes the thermal wall cloud to slant and be disrupted and become inefficient*) or any other of the inhibiting factors breaks it and causes the storm to weaken.

* The storm looses heat by strong upper level winds....much like ur warm body walking within a cold breeze.
Member Since: July 24, 2005 Posts: 407 Comments: 19076
68. Cavin Rawlins
9:02 PM GMT on January 30, 2008
Tropical Cyclone Gene Update 1

Issued 2000 UTC Jan 30 2008 by W456

Tropical Cyclone Gene is located near 19S-171.8E, moving towards the southwest. Estimated surface winds are near 65 knots and minimum central pressure is near 976 mb. Wind shear is 15 knots and sea surface temperatures are 28C.

Microwave imagery from 1705 UTC revealed an embedded eye within the cold cloud cover (CCC) which was used to determine the center of storm along with infrared enhanced loops. If one were to look at the image I posted, one would see that the center is embedded within the white and colder cloud tops, which gave a Dvorak rating of CI 5.0. Model expected T number is more at CI 4.0 or 65 knots, 976 mb. Infrared satellite imagery showed an impressive tropical cyclone with an embedded eye as stated before. A trough within the upper westerlies of the South Pacific is enhancing the cyclone outflow channel. This is allowing the system to ventilate and for the warm-core (thermal walls) to grow substantially. Global models show the cyclone maintaining intensity while moving towards the southwest then southeast.

by W456

JTWC Stats:
1800 UTC 15P GENE.65kts-974mb-189S-1724E






Member Since: July 24, 2005 Posts: 407 Comments: 19076
67. Bonedog
8:58 PM GMT on January 30, 2008
thanks Storm. NJ doesnt go live until Feb 2nd so I have a little bit of time till my info posts.

Yankee I have been good and Storm explained what you asked for.

Basically its a bunch of folks around the country reporting their conditions to the NWS so they have more coverage then just a few stations. Finally NJ became part of the network.
Member Since: July 14, 2005 Posts: 14 Comments: 7418
65. SCwxwatch
8:31 PM GMT on January 30, 2008

42. lawntonlookers 12:03 PM EST on January 30, 2008
The storm that went through the North East has created a storm surge on Lake Erie. Here is an article from the Buffalo, NY newspaper about the storm that went through this morning. They say it is the worst storm in years as far as extrems. They also refer to a seiche that is interesting to read about.




•Public works crews in the city are dealing with toppled trees, flooding, malfunctioning traffic lights, wind-blown garbage totes and other wind-related woes.


Garbage Totes??

Is that like a designer Trash Can?

Was a good read though.
63. cchsweatherman
8:23 PM GMT on January 30, 2008
Good afternoon all! I have been wondering if anyone could provide me with a link to a site that has great IR satellite imagery of the Tropical Atlantic that I could place on my website. All the loops that I want to place on my site are JAVA script and cannot be copied into my website. Thanks in advance.
Member Since: April 14, 2007 Posts: 8 Comments: 5169
62. NEwxguy
8:04 PM GMT on January 30, 2008
afternoon to all
Member Since: September 6, 2007 Posts: 886 Comments: 15942
61. Cavin Rawlins
8:02 PM GMT on January 30, 2008
Tropical Cyclone Gene looks powerful..and aewsome....look at the outflow to the west and south

Member Since: July 24, 2005 Posts: 407 Comments: 19076
60. sp34n119w
7:46 PM GMT on January 30, 2008
27. sullivanweather 12:02 AM PST on January 30, 2008
sp,

Pretty much...

I read the national headlines coming from the southern California fires. Most of them initially reported these fires to be result of global warming.

"Warming climate contributes to socal fires"
"Socal wildfires, is global warming to blame"


sullivan, you say "result of", but, the first of the headlines you list says "contributes to" and the second is a question "is...?"
I say again, there's nothing wrong with asking questions and considering possibilities. It's human nature and it's how we learn new things.

Also, the cause of a fire has absolutely nothing to do with how many acres are burned. That is determined by fuel availability and how accessible the areas are to firefighters and the resources available to fight the fire. In other words, those fires that were started by arson would have burned in the same way had they been started by lightning.
BTW, I'd like to see an article that lists which fires were caused by arson. I know most were started by human activity but didn't realize that it was through illegal activity.

As a sidenote, and this is just a friendly suggestion, you may want to work on your mental filters - turn off your tv for a few days and give some thought as to what to listen to and what to ignore as hype and ratings grabs. Media outlets are in the business of making money through advertising dollars and they spend the most time on those subjects that garner the most attention. If you're watching it, you're telling them that that's what you want to see, and they'll give you more of the same. You can rail all you like against that reality but you won't change it by continuing to give them your attention and then blogging endlessly about how useless they are :)
Member Since: January 27, 2007 Posts: 82 Comments: 4307
59. CajunSubbie
7:45 PM GMT on January 30, 2008
BEIJING, China (CNN) -- China's worst winter in more than half a century showed no signs of abating Wednesday as forecasters told citizens to brace for three more days of snow and sleet.

Meanwhile, China's Civil Affairs Ministry said the cost of the storms to the Chinese economy had reached $4.5 billion.


AHHHH! WHERE DID MY GLOBAL WARMING GO!!!!
Member Since: August 18, 2007 Posts: 0 Comments: 12
58. TEXASYANKEE43
7:33 PM GMT on January 30, 2008
53. Bonedog 6:29 PM GMT on January 30, 2008
hey folks :) good news I am now part of the CoCoRaHS network.

NJ-PS-2 is my station number :)

Oh happy days :)



Hey Bone, how you been?
Pray tell what you just said???
57. PeachTree
7:25 PM GMT on January 30, 2008
Here is the secret hope of humanity. One day, the politicians and the generals will sit down and break bread with the common man across the false borders of nations - and stay the hand of revenge before plunging into the abyss of war. That those who hate, would look into the eyes of the innocent children they are about to kill - before pulling the pin on the explosives device - and see the eyes of their own children looking back at them.

Gulf, too bad we cant send you to the Middle East as an ambassador.
55. NorthPix
6:59 PM GMT on January 30, 2008
I agree we shoudn't pollute the earth and should have alternative energy not oil dependance. In 1974 we started reducing emissions from cars. Today cars have very little emissions. Pre 74 cars had high level of NOX, Carbon monoxide,etc. Todays cars are mostly water vapor and small amount of CO2. The added mileage is a plus. (I used to test
auto emissions in the 70-80'S)
I just object to untruths by politicians that CO2 is the cause just to further their agenga and force it down our throats. They are not scientists and are getting rich by promoting the agenda.

Member Since: September 24, 2003 Posts: 1 Comments: 3
53. Bonedog
6:29 PM GMT on January 30, 2008
hey folks :) good news I am now part of the CoCoRaHS network.

NJ-PS-2 is my station number :)

Oh happy days :)
Member Since: July 14, 2005 Posts: 14 Comments: 7418

Viewing: 103 - 53

Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4Blog Index

Top of Page

About

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

Local Weather

Light Rain
51 °F
Light Rain