WunderBlog Archive » Category 6™

Category 6 has moved! See the latest from Dr. Jeff Masters and Bob Henson here.

Another Quirky Medicane Hits the Eastern Mediterranean

By: Bob Henson and Jeff Masters 7:27 PM GMT on November 02, 2016

When the Atlantic hurricane season begins to quiet down in late October and November, it’s time to cast an eye toward the Mediterranean Sea for “medicanes”--a nickname for storms that develop tropical characteristics just off the coast of southern Europe. Medicanes aren’t considered full-fledged tropical systems, since the waters of the Mediterranean aren’t extensive or warm enough to sustain a true hurricane. However, it’s quite possible for an existing center of low pressure in the Mediterranean to briefly take on tropical characteristics, including a symmetric structure and a small core of warm air. Such was the case with a low that intensified last weekend while traveling from near Malta (south of Italy) toward the Greek island of Crete. As it pushed east, this medicane sent high surf west toward Malta and east toward Israel.

The storm swept across Crete on Monday with high winds and heavy rain. On Crete’s northwest coast, the city of Chania (Souda Air Base) recorded 3.07 inches of rain and peak wind gusts of 60 mph on Monday, October 31. Sustained winds topped out at just 35 mph. Crete’s largest city, Heraklion, on the island’s northeast coast, got 0.71 inches of rain, with top wind gusts of 46 mph. On Friday, a ship reported a wind gust to 57 mph, noted Capital Weather Gang. The system probably hit its peak intensity while over the open Mediterranean west of Crete during the weekend. As reported by weather.com, sea surface temperatures in the region were only about 22 - 24°C (72 - 75°F). That’s as much as 2°C above average for this time of year, but well below the usual 26°C benchmark for tropical development. Still, it appears the system briefly took on the symmetric warm-core features typical of a tropical storm.


Figure 1. MODIS satellite image of the medicane approaching Crete taken on Sunday afternoon, October 30, 2016. John Knaff (CIRA/RAMMB/Colorado State University) produced this large-scale black-and-white satellite loop. Image credit: NASA.


Figure 2. Image from a color-enhanced infrared satellite loop of the medicane centered just south of Greece’s Peloponnese peninsula at 0345Z (05:45 a.m. local time) Monday, October 31, 2016. Image credit: Scott Bachmeier, CIMMS/SSEC/University of Wisconsin-Madison.

Where to watch for medicanes
This week’s storm occurred in one of two “hot spots” where medicanes are most likely to develop, according to a long-term climatology published in 2014 in Climate Dynamics. Interpolating from long-term atmospheric data for the period 1948-2011, the authors estimated that medicanes occur once or twice per year, on average, but with much year-to-year variability. None of the world’s meteorological agencies are tasked with monitoring medicanes, so countless such storms have no doubt gone unrecognized, especially before routine satellite monitoring began. The most favored area for development is in the western Mediterranean, especially between Spain and the islands of Sardinia and Corsica. The other hot spot is the Ionian Sea, especially just southeast of Malta and the Italian peninsula, where this week’s storm cranked up. In both areas, medicanes become more likely in autumn, peak in winter, and decrease in spring, according to the study, although the western area has a broader “season.”

Since the waters of the Mediterranean aren’t warm enough to support conventional hurricane development, medicanes rely on colder air aloft, typically brought in as part of an upper-level low that decays over the Mediterranean. Wind shear relaxes as the upper low decays, and the contrast between the cold air aloft and the relatively warm sea surface temperatures can stimulate the formation of showers and thunderstorms. These, in turn, may congeal around a weak surface low and help give it a symmetric, warm-core structure--and sometimes even a cloud-free, eye-like feature. Often a medicane’s warm core will be enveloped within broader cold-core features, which makes it more akin to a hybrid or subtropical storm than a tropical storm.

The last Mediterranean storm to get this much notice occurred in the first week of November 2014. It was dubbed Qendresa by the Free University of Berlin, whose vortex-naming practices have become the default choice for medicanes. Qendresa produced wind gusts as high as 96 mph on the north coast of Malta. Winds at the Luqa, Malta, airport looked suspiciously like what one would observe with a tropical storm passing overhead--a double peak with a near-calm in between, with the pressure falling to 984 mb during the calm. Wunderground member Zivipotty, a meteorology student in Hungary who has analyzed Qendresa, believes it was primarily subtropical in nature, as it weakened rapidly once it became detached from its parent frontal system. In early November 2011, another noteworthy storm named Rolf took shape in the western Mediterranean. Rolf was the only medicane to be officially monitored by NOAA, whose Satellite Analysis Branch named it 01M and tracked it for two days. Zivipotty found Rolf to be more tropical in nature than Qendresa at its peak.


Figure 3. Winds at the 250-mb level (about 34,000 feet above sea level) were very weak (less than 20 knots on the legend at right, or 23 mph) above the medicane, which is shown here as a 1013-millibar low southwest of Greece at 12Z (2:00 pm local time) Sunday, October 30, 2016. Image credit: tropicaltidbits.com.


Figure 4. Near-surface winds derived from the space-borne European Advanced Scatterometer (ASCAT) show speeds topping 50 knots (58 mph) around the center of the medicane as it approached Crete on Monday, October 31. Image credit: ASCAT and NOAA/NESDIS.

Could bona fide hurricanes develop in the Mediterranean later this century?
According to research published in 2007, an increase in ocean temperatures of 3°C (5.4°F) in the Mediterranean by the end of the century could lead to hurricanes forming there. Miguel Angel Gaertner of the University of Castilla-La Mancha in Toledo, Spain, ran 9 different climate models with resolutions of about 50 km and found that some (but not all) of the models simulated hurricanes in the Mediterranean in September by the end of the century, when sea surface temperatures there could reach 30°C (86°F). Though the Mediterranean could start seeing hurricanes by the end of the century, these storms should be rare and relatively short-lived for three reasons:

1) The Mediterranean is quite far north and is subject to strong wind shear from jet stream activity.

2) The waters are shallow, and have relatively low heat content. There is no deep warm water current like the Gulf Stream.

3) The Mediterranean has a lot of large islands and peninsulas poking into it, increasing the chances that a tropical storm would weaken when it encountered land.

Wikipedia has an excellent page on Mediterranean tropical-like cyclones (medicanes).


Figure 5. Infrared image from Japan’s Himawari-8 satellite of Invest 90W and invest 99W in the Northwest Pacific at 1630Z (12:30 pm EDT) Wednesday, November 2, 2016. Image credit: CIMMS/SSEC/University of Wisconsin-Madison.

A potential tropical threat to the Philippines next week
Two large but loosely organized tropical waves in the Northwest Pacific are expected to gather strength, and one of them may pose a significant threat to the Philippines in a week or so. The westernmost of the two waves, Invest 90W, will have supportive conditions for growth as it moves west over the next few days: very warm sea surface temperatures of 29 - 30°C, a very moist atmosphere (mid-level relative humidities around 80%), and fairly light wind shear of around 10 - 15 knots. By early next week, the GFS, European, and UKMET models all project Invest 90W to reach typhoon strength. On its westward track, 90W could be approaching the Philippines by the middle of next week, perhaps still strengthening. The other wave, Invest 99W, should track further northwest, possibly gaining typhoon strength while over the open Northwest Pacific.

Meanwhile, the National Hurricane Center is keeping an eye on two systems with limited potential for development. A nontropical low well northeast of the Lesser Antilles may take on subtropical characteristics late this week as it heads toward the central North Atlantic, while a disturbance west of Costa Rica could become a tropical cyclone as it heads toward the northeast Pacific. NHC gives both systems a 20% chance of development over the next five days.

We’ll be back with a new post on Friday.

Bob Henson and Jeff Masters



Hurricane

The views of the author are his/her own and do not necessarily represent the position of The Weather Company or its parent, IBM.

Reader Comments

Thanks for putting the election day banner on the right day in the wunderforecast!
To carry over from the last blog entry:

I believe the Earth has a balance to it, the yin and the yang so to speak. While it is a dry and warm fall here (the yin), check out what Russia (the yang) is enduring at the same time and be thankful that its not us..........at least not yet.

Russia – Record snow covers houses up to the roofs –

Link

https://www.sott.net/article/332807-Animals-slaug hted-due-to-record-snowfall-with-five-times-the-mo nthly-normal-precipitation-in-Yakutia-Russia
A nod to our European friends ;-)
Always 2 weeks out...



Quoting 2. RichardBLong:

To carry over from the last blog entry:

I believe the Earth has a balance to it, the yin and the yang so to speak. While it is a dry and warm fall here (the yin), check out what Russia (the yang) is enduring at the same time and be thankful that its not us..........at least not yet.

Russia %u2013 Record snow covers houses up to the roofs %u2013

Link

https://www.sott.net/article/332807-Animals-slaug hted-due-to-record-snowfall-with-five-times-the-mo nthly-normal-precipitation-in-Yakutia-Russia



sure... yet for some reason (cough cough co2ugh) when you avg out the "yin" and "yang" it gets more and more "yiny" every year. Slice and dice however you want.... The planet is getting warmer, dude.

sigh.. the mental gymnastics kochheads put themselves into.....
Quoting 5. fmbill:

Always 2 weeks out...






you mean our rain chances here in central Alabama? lol... There is always rain in the forecast, until it's about 10 days out then it magically disappears.
Quoting 2. RichardBLong:

To carry over from the last blog entry:

I believe the Earth has a balance to it, the yin and the yang so to speak. While it is a dry and warm fall here (the yin), check out what Russia (the yang) is enduring at the same time and be thankful that its not us..........at least not yet.

Russia %u2013 Record snow covers houses up to the roofs %u2013

Link

https://www.sott.net/article/332807-Animals-slaug hted-due-to-record-snowfall-with-five-times-the-mo nthly-normal-precipitation-in-Yakutia-Russia





# siberia represents 2.5% of the earths surface


Quoting 6. OKsky:




sure... yet for some reason (cough cough co2ugh) when you avg out the "yin" and "yang" it gets more and more "yiny" every year. Slice and dice however you want.... The planet is getting warmer, dude.

sigh.. the mental gymnastics kochheads put themselves into.....


The funniest part is that there is 50 yiny's for every 1 yang! What happened to balance?!
As we currently have a 'sceptic' amongst us, I would like to repost a simple question I posed a couple of days ago and got no reply to.

Just as a general question to the AGW sceptics / deniers. What exactly is it about AGW that you do not believe to be occurring? I see it at its most basic as 3 simple steps of logic

1) Infrared radiation from the planet is absorbed be certain molecules in the atmosphere - Methane, CO2 etc thus reducing heat loss to space - this is easily verified in the lab

2 )We are burning vast quantities of fossil fuels and thus increasing the levels of CO2 in the atmosphere - this is measurable directly (through atmospheric sampling) and indirectly (through sales of fossil fuels)

3) As the amount of heat absorbed due to (1) should be proportional to the amount of gas doing the absorbing, and that amount is known to be increasing (2), then the amount of heat retained in the atmosphere must increase, all other factors being equal.

What am I missing?
* clogged the blog * see .18, where the original comment is quoted.
Many thanks for the links of my reports on this blog! And also thanks for this blog about the medicanes. :)

As I said earlier, I also wrote a summary from Trixie: Link
If I can get reanalysis data later, I will write a full reoprt like Rolf and Qendresa.
Quoting 8. ILwthrfan:






# siberia represents 2.5% of the earths surface




The funniest part is that there is 50 yiny's for every 1 yang! What happened balanced?!



I think I figured out whats wrong with the kochheads. They have some mutant form of Dichromasy!!
So when they see graphics like what is posted in #11 (now 18 and 20, lol), they have no idea what they are looking at!
Am I being too charitable? =P

Up here in Montana October was definitely the new September. The forecast for the next week suggests that November may well be the OTHER new September. This sort of thing may have happened in the past, but if and when it did, you could be sure that the east coast would be having a nasty cold snap. I live in Helena, Montana up in the city. We have had only one real freeze, down to 27 F the neighbor said. (Official readings are taken at the airport, down in the valley, where it can be colder).

There is one silver lining, I guess, to ACC: The first sector of humans to go extinct will be the CC deniers.
Quoting 2. RichardBLong:

To carry over from the last blog entry:

I believe the Earth has a balance to it, the yin and the yang so to speak. While it is a dry and warm fall here (the yin), check out what Russia (the yang) is enduring at the same time and be thankful that its not us..........at least not yet.

Russia – Record snow covers houses up to the roofs –

Link

https://www.sott.net/article/332807-Animals-slaug hted-due-to-record-snowfall-with-five-times-the-mo nthly-normal-precipitation-in-Yakutia-Russia
What I caught from the article is "record-snowfall-with-five-times-the-mo nthly-normal-precipitation"and "Horses are unable to feed themselves because of deep snow. The locals had to slaughter young horses because of negative weather conditions."!!! Wow! That is some precipitation - kinda like what has been predicted over the last couple decades...
Polar heatwaves have ice in retreat at both ends of the planet
The Sydney Morning Herald - October 31.

"Climate change has a habit of throwing up some surprising outcomes and this has to be one of them: sea ice is now at record low levels at both ends of the planet."

Warm Temps Slow Arctic Sea Ice Growth to a Crawl
Climate Central - November 2.

Sluggish ice growth in the Arctic - NSIDC / Nov 2.
I highly recommend taking a look at the "Antarctic sea ice dropping" section at the end of this article - interesting times ahead...
think the medicane sprung up fast watch the western carib. this nov. its not over to its over and then its possible for a december storm
Quoting 11. 999Ai2016:

Daily average :

5-day forecast average :



How much longer can this be kept quite. The whole science community should be up in arms or maybe there all afraid or worried about there pensions.
Quoting 15. cynyc2:

What I caught from the article is "record-snowfall-with-five-times-the-mo nthly-normal-precipitation"and "Horses are unable to feed themselves because of deep snow. The locals had to slaughter young horses because of negative weather conditions."!!! Wow! That is some precipitation - kinda like what has been predicted over the last couple decades...
its the flip effect from one end of the extreme back to other last 3 days been like a summer feel day some rain tonight a little cool down then small rebound but when the flip comes and it will in about another 10 days or so then it will be mid winter with 6 feet of snow the pendulum is swinging farther and farther with each stroke back and forth and will continue as is
reached a high of 64.4 today normal should be around 48 to 50

15/16 degrees above normal
Quoting 18. frank727:



How much longer can this be kept quite. The whole science community should be up in arms or maybe there all afraid or worried about there pensions.


Open dialog has been and is materially discouraged both by government and private employers. You talk? You walk. And get hit with all sorts of intimidations and punishments.
Quoting 21. KEEPEROFTHEGATE:

reached a high of 64.4 today normal should be around 48 to 50

15/16 degrees above normal


Things may turn out to be more abrupty than anyone might have guessed.

Caution: STEEP learning curve ahead~
Remember to exhale!
Quoting 19. KEEPEROFTHEGATE:

its the flip effect from one end of the extreme back to other last 3 days been like a summer feel day some rain tonight a little cool down then small rebound but when the flip comes and it will in about another 10 days or so then it will be mid winter with 6 feet of snow the pendulum is swinging farther and farther with each stroke back and forth and will continue as is
Not everywhere, Keep. Here in Tucson it goes from 10 degrees F above average for a month to 5 days of "average" temps, then back to a month of 10 above.

I think I am just sick of the heat - high 80's later this week....
Quoting 12. Zivipotty:

Many thanks for the links of my reports on this blog! And also thanks for this blog about the medicanes. :)

As I said earlier, I also wrote a summary from Trixie: Link
If I can get reanalysis data later, I will write a full reoprt like Rolf and Qendresa.

Question for you ... what do you think of the medicane that was dubbed "maximo." It occured in 1985 although im not sure of the date off the top of my head. Closest thing ive seen to a full fledged hurricane in the Mediterranean ... including the jan. 1995 system.
Back to the issue I promised earlier today to come back to, with links. As a preamble, here are the links given by 999Ai2016 yesterday: [1] [2] [3]. I can concede to daddyjames, that Greenpeace-affiliated link can be counted as reputable secondary source. As counterbalance, I feel free to resort to Wikipedia.

I'll simply go to discuss not only iron fertilization, but a case, where all nutrients are depleted, to estimate a maximum for costs, and compare it will likely values of carbon sequestration and increase in fishery. In this image we see, that nutrient-rich areas of coastal upwelling are capable of reaching primary productivity of at least 800 g/m² annually, whereas at least 100 million km² of oceans in tropics and subtropics have some 100 g/m². So, if that area would be fertilized so that nutrients would never be a limiting factor, primary productivity would increase by 7*10^13 kg. Carbon release by humans is currently approximately 10^13 kg per year, so some 14% of the created biomass should get into sediment to keep carbon dioxide levels constant. Normally some 20% - 30% of algal blooms get eventually so deep that any carbon remains away from atmosphere for at least centuries, even though link [1] suggests, that over millions of years, only 0.5% gets sedimented. What is needed at most, is 10^13 kg of nitrogen, 2*10^12 kg of phosphorus and 3*10^9 kg of iron. Depending on season, if nitrogen is supplied in urea, the cost seems to be some 0.40 USD/kg. Phosphorus supplied in triple superphosphate, some 1.05 USD/kg. Iron in ferric sulfate, some 0.55 USD/kg. In total, six trillion dollars would be needed annually. Some 90 dollars for every metric ton of carbon in new biomass. If only iron would be needed (as is case in much of world's oceans, however only until other nutrients would become depleted), two cents for a metric ton. Every excess metric ton of carbon in the atmosphere as carbon dioxide will cause damages of some 10 dollars during this century. Likewise, replacing the energy source, which emits that metric ton, with a non-emitting energy source, will cause economic losses related to poorer cost-efficiency by some 10 dollars for each metric ton of carbon left unemitted.

Then there is fishery. Currently the total fish catch of oceans is some 90 million tonnes per year. Total primary productivity of oceans is 5*10^13 kg of carbon. Using a constant ratio between these two, fishery could be expected to increase by 126 million tonnes. A few hundred billion dollars worth.

In essence: fertilization is practical, as long as the limiting nutrient is iron. Increase in fishery and decrease in impacts of climate change may also support the addition of phosphorus. But whenever nitrogen is the limiting factor, fertilization becomes way too costly. Transport costs of iron fertilizer do not have to be taken into account: it can be assumed, that fishing vessels can be equipped with machinery to distribute iron to their fishing grounds.
31. bwi
It's a lovely 70 degrees F in Washington DC this evening; expecting 80F tomorrow with a chance of showers before closer-to-normal temps return on Friday and the weekend.

T-shirt shorts and no gloves today on the bike rides!
Quoting 10. OviedoWatcher:

As we currently have a 'sceptic' amongst us, I would like to repost a simple question I posed a couple of days ago and got no reply to.

Just as a general question to the AGW sceptics / deniers. What exactly is it about AGW that you do not believe to be occurring? I see it at its most basic as 3 simple steps of logic

1) Infrared radiation from the planet is absorbed be certain molecules in the atmosphere - Methane, CO2 etc thus reducing heat loss to space - this is easily verified in the lab

2 )We are burning vast quantities of fossil fuels and thus increasing the levels of CO2 in the atmosphere - this is measurable directly (through atmospheric sampling) and indirectly (through sales of fossil fuels)

3) As the amount of heat absorbed due to (1) should be proportional to the amount of gas doing the absorbing, and that amount is known to be increasing (2), then the amount of heat retained in the atmosphere must increase, all other factors being equal.

What am I missing?
A large piece of global warming mankind contributes to, and not just by using fossil fuels. Someday learn humans may learn to keep their legs crossed, and that would help reduce emissions.

I cannot speak for RichardBLong, whom I presume is your "designated skeptic." I can understand where Dick Long is coming from, maybe. Calling any or all extreme weather event(s) a result of Anthropomorphic (human-caused) Global Warming (AGW) is premature.* It is known some types of events are more likely than others to be exacerbated by global warming. Causal relationships have not been firmly established. As we all know, all types of weather have been happening for more than the two hundred or so years since societies leapt forward(?) to industrialization. As we all know, mankind's population has grown and placed itself in larger and larger numbers into harm's way causing any weather event judged by human casualty and property loss ismore likely to do greater damage today than it did 200, 400, 600 years ago.

Record heat. We know it's happened before. We know some of the data presented is questionable in the sense of the burgeoning human population, the data sites themselves changing location, yada yada... But more important than DATA is the YIN-YANG. Nature's attempts at balance at are quite obvious to someone who keys into them. Even if we believe the data, global heating has to continue in order for the rantings about AGW to prove true.

I'd love it if mankind could shut off all fossil fuel emissions right now, today. Then the rantings over rich people who own "big oil" could either be proven or put to bed. As it stands, we must observe a longer period of time to know.

And that's what some of you cannot think your way to - the "warming trend," and that's all it is until it lasts for an eon, or even if it lasts for longer than an eon, involves more than mankind's petty little busy-ness on Earth.

RUN FOR THE HILLS! WE'RE ALL GONNA DIE!!! (TM wu member Palmettobug53)

add: *Parentheticals included for those readers who may not understand the lingo.
no need to wait the signal is strong and will be getting stronger waiting any longer and it will be too late if not already

Wait for what? Eons to see the real truth? Because that is how long it will take.

Already too late? We don't know. Even if so, "too late" does not mean all humans will die. Nor does it mean humans as individuals should wait for their leadership to dictate change. We can each do what we can as individuals now, and we can educate the young ones about Earth-care and their own survival.

What have you or any one else who posts here done lately, this year let's say, to smallen your carbon footprint?

I hear thunder. bbl, bf
Quoting 35. Barefootontherocks:

Wait for what? Eons to see the real truth? Because that is how long it will take.

Already too late? We don't know. Even if so, "too late" does not mean all humans will die. Nor does it mean humans as individuals should wait for their leadership to dictate change. We can each do what we can as individuals now, and we can educate the young ones about Earth-care and their own survival.

What have you or any one else who posts here done lately, this year let's say, to smallen your carbon footprint?

I hear thunder. bbl, bf
it will shake the foundations that thunder can be safe
Since we have Medicane, I'd like to throw my hat in the ring for the following:
Labricane (Labrador Sea)
Noricane (North Sea)
Pericane (Persian Gulf)
Bericane (Bering Sea)
Coricane (Coral Sea)
Yellicane (Yellow Sea)
....and my personal fav
Chilicane (Chilean Sea)
gonna watch a movie looks good



The blog seems to be in a "good news" phase. Here's some: Shipping Industry Postpones Climate Plan Until 2023
A firm plan for potentially easing the shipping industry’s impact on the climate will be delayed for seven years under a roadmap drafted by a United Nations agency on Friday.

The lackluster outcome at the end of a week of environmental talks in London deepened the disparity between ship and plane operators and much of the rest of the world when it comes to tackling global warming. The shipping industry participated in the negotiations on behalf of some nations.
Coastal SSTs as far north as the SF buoy have hit the low 60s, unusual for November, except during an El Nino, which does not exist right now.
Have a climate change doubt? They have the answer Link
Very nice write-up of our medicanes, Sirs. Thank you! As a European I'm very proud of our hurricane-wannabes :-)
And congratulations to Zivipotty for the shout-out!
Historic World Series game 7...
46. Kumo
Temps got up into the upper 80's here around Harris County, TX today. Unreal. I miss cool Fall weather. Doesn't look like it is going to happen this year. :(
What is this? Is this the Atlantic AOI? If so, the location and data seems a little off...

Unknown Storm NEWTEST
As of 00:00 UTC Nov 03, 2016:

Location: 20.0°N 50.0°W
Maximum Winds: 20 kt Gusts: N/A
Minimum Central Pressure: 1009 mb
Environmental Pressure: 1010 mb
Radius of Circulation: 150 NM
Radius of Maximum Wind: 0 NM
Eye Diameter: N/A
That is something you don't hear about every day, a Medicane! :)
Quoting 43. MrTornadochase:

Have a climate change doubt? They have the answer Link

That website is so blatantly one-sided and some of the data is wrong. Just thought I would point that out.
Quoting 49. hotroddan:


That website is so blatantly one-sided and some of the data is wrong. Just thought I would point that out.

I'm not trying to say you're wrong, but how so?
Saturday makes 40 days with no rain in Mobile Al. This will break the record of 39 days. Climate change has been changing for 6000 years. The change is speeding up. Earths labor pains are contracting closer together. Man is arrogant to think he can stop it. The great controversy is going to end soon.
Well to begin with there have been instances where Climate scientists have been manipulating data in favor of the Climate Change argument. One other reason is that Humans have only accurately recorded temperatures for around one hundred years and the earth is supposedly millions of years old so we have no strong idea of the global trend because we simply do not have enough data. There are also many other issues that I could list because I do not have the time.
Quoting 52. hotroddan:

Well to begin with there have been instances where Climate scientists have been manipulating data in favor of the Climate Change argument. One other reason is that Humans have only accurately recorded temperatures for around one hundred years and the earth is supposedly millions of years old so we have no strong idea of the global trend because we simply do not have enough data. There are also many other issues that I could list because I do not have the time.


That's not how the scientific process works. Everything you stated is completely false. Almost sounds like something Rush Limbaugh would say. Could you please site the sources that show this "conspiracy of manipulating data" you speak of ? Remember Peer Reviewed work only. No media garbage. Also you need to refresh up on the dozens of different proxies that are used for the analysis that show adding CO2 to the atmosphere adds to the energy it is able to retain. There is no if, there is no bias. Only ignorance.

Heres a link. Though I know you will not engage with it. Careful though, as most of us here are highly educated on the subject of Climate, so your drive by BS isn't going to have anything but a positive effect on helping others understanding the flaw in your tactic.

http://serc.carleton.edu/microbelife/topics/proxi es/paleoclimate.html
Welcome "69L"
Quoting 36. KEEPEROFTHEGATE:

it will shake the foundations that thunder can be safe
Revered by ancients, thunder never has been safe. Has it? Perhaps I misunderstand...
Obscure?

Really?



Why obfuscate,lamely here, on this obscure comment section then?

Your logic is extremely flawed.

But do try the phish and free tartar sauce in the green room.

😷😵
Quoting 53. ILwthrfan:



That's not how the scientific process works. Everything you stated is completely false. Almost sounds like something Rush Limbaugh would say. Could you please site the sources that show this "conspiracy of manipulating data" you speak of ? Remember Peer Reviewed work only. No media garbage. Also you need to refresh up on the dozens of different proxies that are used for the analysis that show adding CO2 to the atmosphere adds to the energy it is able to retain. There is no if, there is no bias. Only ignorance.

Heres a link. Though I know you will not engage with it. Careful though most of us here are highly educated here on the subject of Climate, so your drive by BS isn't going to have anything but a positive effect on helping others understanding the flaw in your tactic.

http://serc.carleton.edu/microbelife/topics/proxi es/paleoclimate.html


I am not going to even bother responding or reasoning with you.
Quoting 57. Patrap:

But do try the phish and free tartar sauce in the green room.

😷😵


I hope its halibut that's my fav with a twist of lemon nothing better
Quoting 58. hotroddan:


I am not going to even bother responding or reasoning with you.


lol, thats simply because you lack both.
EDIT: oooo, now I hear thunder. :D
.
Quoting 55. Barefootontherocks:

Revered by ancients, thunder never has been safe. Has it? Perhaps I misunderstand...



Thunder is SAFE, it is the Lightning that will KILL you.....
Quoting 64. PedleyCA:



Thunder is SAFE, it is the Lightning that will KILL you.....
I have seen windows shatter from the thunder but that means the lightening strike would have been close like splitting the telephone pole right outside the door close it has happen to me when I was 3 I still remember my uncle Johnny coming to the door yelling open the door too my mother its me
Game tied 6-6
A few showers for game 7. Lucky the storm system to the west wasn't 6 hours faster.



If they ever did have a Cat 6 hurricane, it would probably have a numbing effect on people. They would have to call it a Novacane.
"You're going to remember this game for the rest of your life, whether you're an Indians fan, a Cubs fan, a baseball fan or a martian."
~Zach Meisel on twitter
Quoting 66. PedleyCA:

Game tied 6-6
Maybe it will go to 18 innings and be rained out!
Quoting 68. Grothar:

If they ever did have a Cat 6 hurricane, it would probably have a numbing effect on people. They would have to call it a Novacane.


I think a Cat 6 should be called a Kochcane.
(That has pretty much been my main joke today, it seems)
and it is starting to Rain.....

Quoting 68. Grothar:

If they ever did have a Cat 6 hurricane, it would probably have a numbing effect on people. They would have to call it a Novacane.
Wanted to give you a  plus from me and a groan .... but I could not find that option  ;>)

Quoting 64. PedleyCA:



Thunder is SAFE, it is the Lightning that will KILL you.....
And hand in hand they go, talking of michaelangelo. Hope you saw the fault maps I left "for you" on the previous blog.

Extra innings I hear, after a rain delay. Classic baseball. Magic in this game is hard to believe.
"Medicanes aren't considered full-fledged tropical systems,"

But they are...? If there's symmetric, organized convection around a well-defined low pressure system with an associated warm core, then it's fully tropical. It doesn't matter if the waters aren't the stereotypical 26C. Haven't Alex and countless other storms proved that?
India Meteorological Department
Tropical Cyclone Advisory #1
DEPRESSION BOB04-2016
5:30 AM IST November 3 2016
=======================================

At 0:00 AM UTC, Latest observations & satellite imagery indicate that a depression has formed over central & adjoining southeast Bay of Bengal and lay centered near13.0N 87.0E, about 650 km southeast of Vishakhapatnam, 810 km south southeast of Paradip and 1050 km south southwest of Khepupara (Bangladesh).

The system is very likely to move initially northwestwards and then re-curve northeastwards towards Bangladesh coast during next 72 hours and intensify into a deep depression during next 24 hours; subsequently intensify further into a cyclonic storm.

According to satellite imagery, the intensity of the system is T1.5. Associated broken low/medium clouds with embedded intense to very intense convection lays over Bay of Bengal between latitude 12.0N to 20.0N and 83.E to 90.0E. The 24 hours animation of satellite imagery indicate gradual organization of convection and increase in depth of convection. The cloud top temperature is about -83C.The convection shows banding pattern.The banding approaches towards the center from northeast.

3 minute sustained winds near the center is 25 knots with gusts of 35 knots. The state of the sea is very rough around the center of the depression. The central pressure is 1004 hPa.

Additional Information
====================
The upper tropospheric ridge runs along 16.0N and hence the winds are southeasterly over the region of the depression. The vertical wind shear is 10-20 knots (moderate) around the system center. It increases towards north becoming more than 20 knots to the north of 15.0N. The upper level divergence Has increased during past 24 hours and is about 40x10-5 s-1. The lower level convergence has also increased during past 24 hours and is about 15x10-5 s-1 around the system center. The relative vorticity at 850 HPA has increased and is around 150x10-6 s-1 .The relative vorticity, lower level convergence and upper level divergence are oriented from south southwest to north-northeast, indicating possible recurvature of the system towards northeast after some time. A trough in mid-tropospheric westerlies runs along 80.00e and to the north of 17.00n. It will help in steering the system towards northeast from November 4th onward. Madden-Jullian Oscillation index lies in phase 5. It will enter into phase 4 during next 2 days. This condition is favorable for intensification of system. Sea surface temperature is 29-30C. The ocean thermal energy is about 60- 80 kj/cm2 around the system center over central Bay of Bengal. It is relatively higher over west central Bay of Bengal (60-80 kj/cm2) off northern Andhra Pradesh and adjoining Odisha coast. It is less than 50 kj/cm2 over northern Bay of Bengal.

Most numerical weather prediction models show further intensification into a cyclonic storm by Friday. Regarding movement of the system also there is continuity in the forecast by the models. Majority of the models suggest northwestward movement and the system would reach west central Bay of Bengal off northern Andhra Pradesh coast by Friday. The models are unanimous about the recurvature of the system from November 4th towards northeast skirting east coast of India. The system is expected to cross Bangladesh coast by Sunday November 6th.
Japan Meteorological Agency
9:00 AM JST November 3 2016
=================================

GALE WARNING

West Of Mariana Islands
At 0:00 AM UTC, Tropical Depression (1000 hPa) located at 18.0N 143.0E has 10 minute sustained winds of 30 knots. The depression is reported as moving northwest at 10 knots.

Dvorak Intensity: T2.0

Forecast and Intensity
===============
24 HRS: 17.8N 141.5E - 35 knots (Tropical Storm/CAT 1) West Of The Mariana Islands

TROPICAL CYCLONE WARNING

Sea East Of The Philippines
At 0:00 AM UTC, Tropical Storm Meari (996 hPa) located at 13.2N 137.2E has 10 minute sustained winds of 35 knots with gusts of 50 knots. The cyclone is reported as moving west slowly.

Gale Force Winds
============
90 NM from the center

Dvorak Intensity: T2.5

Forecast and Intensity
===============
24 HRS: 13.6N 136.1E - 40 knots (Tropical Storm/CAT 1) Sea East Of The Philippines
48 HRS: 13.7N 135.3E - 50 knots (Severe Tropical Storm/CAT 2) Sea East Of The Philippines
72 HRS: 13.7N 134.5E - 60 knots (Severe Tropical Storm/CAT 2) Sea East Of The Philippines
Quoting 10. OviedoWatcher:

As we currently have a 'sceptic' amongst us, I would like to repost a simple question I posed a couple of days ago and got no reply to.

Just as a general question to the AGW sceptics / deniers. What exactly is it about AGW that you do not believe to be occurring? I see it at its most basic as 3 simple steps of logic

1) Infrared radiation from the planet is absorbed be certain molecules in the atmosphere - Methane, CO2 etc thus reducing heat loss to space - this is easily verified in the lab

2 )We are burning vast quantities of fossil fuels and thus increasing the levels of CO2 in the atmosphere - this is measurable directly (through atmospheric sampling) and indirectly (through sales of fossil fuels)

3) As the amount of heat absorbed due to (1) should be proportional to the amount of gas doing the absorbing, and that amount is known to be increasing (2), then the amount of heat retained in the atmosphere must increase, all other factors being equal.

What am I missing?


You're missing "stupid". It's okay, many people are missing stupid. Turns out the FDA recommended allowance of stupid is 0%, and is regarded as both a disease and a neurotoxin. The side effects are varied, even bizarre. There's this Biff Tannen impersonator I keep seeing on TV, who's apparently experiencing the side effects of oranging skin and bad comb-overs. Fascinating, but also sad.

At any rate, you're not missing anything. The basic physics, chemistry, and theory were worked out at the end of the 19th century. An AP high school student can handle the math. But when it comes to math and science the American population is...well...more interested in how their favorite reality TV star can manage to stay on the island. :P
Quoting 58. hotroddan:


I am not going to even bother responding or reasoning with you.


To reason, one must first have facts and logic. You have neither.

Let's make this really simple. You post a zero dimensional energy balance model using known physics and chemistry that demonstrates how a planet with increased greenhouse gases can LOSE energy without violating the laws of thermodynamics, then we can talk. Till then take your nonsensical conspiracy onto WUWT or some other neo-crazy alt-right nut bar. It will be far more appreciated there.
LOL, Xyrus. Are you a Cleveland Indian fan? The Cubs won the World Series for the first time since 1908. You could apply physics, I suppose, but it wouldn't do any good. It's baseball.
OMG!! I could said I saw Cubs winning the WS
What has changed since the last time the Cubs won the World Series. Click to expand.



In 1908, the most Republican state was Vermont. The most Democratic state was South Carolina.
I have a condition considered as exceptional memory. Right now I'm thinking about the guy that wrote in his yearbook awhile back that the Cubs would win the world series this year. This was posted here before, and just curious what he's up to now?

Thanks

BTW, many posters must not have this condition after following this blog for over/close to ten years. Don't mean to rude, but a majority of people tend to only care about what effects them on a daily basis. Not what effects are happening to others, and what long term effects could happen on the path we are on. This planet is our home, and until we decide it's time for spring cleaning, it will only continue to be a dump. One day the trash truck will decide it's full and not show up again. Won't be a pretty site!
The moment Cubs fans outside Wrigley Field find out the Cubs have won the World Series:

Quoting 29. hurricaneryan87:


Question for you ... what do you think of the medicane that was dubbed "maximo." It occured in 1985 although im not sure of the date off the top of my head. Closest thing ive seen to a full fledged hurricane in the Mediterranean ... including the jan. 1995 system.


I saw it earlier in this Italian database, and yes, it looked very good. Link Also the 1982 January cyclone had a nice eye, possibly even better than the 1985 cyclone.



But I think that these winter cyclones are much more questionable than which occured in autumn. In winter, the SST's are much below 20 °C in the whole Mediterranean Sea, so only minimal latent heat is available, and more special upper troposphere parameters needed for the transition. These cyclones possibly stand closer to a polar low rather than a tropical cyclone, but I haven't studied they yet.

There was also a nice medicane on September 1983, which was similar to Trixie, firstly transitioned into a subtropical, then a tropical cyclone. But from this only worse resolution reanalysis data were available, which didn't show well the tropical characteristics. I found a good satellite animation from the cyclone earlier: Link And I have a reanalysis animation from it: Link

Also many other tropical-like system developed in this basin in the past, some of them had a well-defined eye. But the available data are very limited because there wasn't satellite wind measurements until the middle of 2000s and the land measurements archives are usually only 1 or 3-hourly. And as I said, there are no high-resolution reanalysis data too.
89. vis0
Posted in Feb 2016 and ~may 2016 that Cubs would win championship where's my cookie! gonna have to change my avatar to Susan Lucci ...w/ a mustachio.
 
Oh BTW congrats to Grothar and ME! 

Grothars Hispaniola  area i thought had fully blended with an area i thought was to be the next TS  but its main area is swirling south of Puerto Rico other portion is still trying to blend with area i choose yet not as defined and as mentioned earlier by other members NHc has a yellow "X"  on "it".
As to yesterdays pick not as good missed on the TS i thought might form off the NE  though there still is a weird LOW ~350+ miles East of Long Island, NY most eastern tip...but its at least a swirl.
 
BTW TWI is alrigh(t) just has some water in his ear...pod.
 
CREDIT - careful images yanked did not visit sites to cap them so sites are not officially approved:: https://www.colourbox.com/vector/sailor-rowing-boa t-sketch-icon-vector-19501331, 
(picking nose [wikkipedia]) http://www.plognark.com/node/109
 
 
also when i hear $keptics say man is manipulating DATA, your half right.  Man and their greed has created such an influence on Nature via man's greenhouse gases that the DATA is being manipulated via the natural action and reaction that the rise of greenhouse gases cause. (not using the pure sense of manipulation)

 
back to OBs on weather  and just 'cause its cooler or even cold make sure you check the long term trend which shows a planet becoming warmer too fast to allow normal mutations to take hold (begin) .  When an animal cannot acclimate to its surroundings via mutations in time, that animal becomes history and in Earths case it could loose the ability to sustain life therefore a human being comeback becomes less likely.
Quoting 18. frank727:



How much longer can this be kept quite. The whole science community should be up in arms or maybe there all afraid or worried about there pensions.

If everyone looks away it'll remain quite.
Quoting 84. BaltimoreBrian:


Whoah.
The last time they won was only 43 years after the end of the Civil War. About the same amount of time since the end of Vietnam until now.

Wright Bros had only made powered flight possible a few years earlier on a cold, windy NC beach. The Titanic was probably a blueprint. WWI and WWII hadn't yet occurred.

Aloha and good morning. Been working in GA and SC with Matthew cleanup. 15 hour days. No time for the blog, but stayed up for that Game 7. Good job to both teams. Congrats Cubbies.

Quoting 85. BaltimoreBrian:

What has changed since the last time the Cubs won the World Series. Click to expand.



In 1908, the most Republican state was Vermont. The most Democratic state was South Carolina.
Quoting 24. cynyc2:

Not everywhere, Keep. Here in Tucson it goes from 10 degrees F above average for a month to 5 days of "average" temps, then back to a month of 10 above.

I think I am just sick of the heat - high 80's later this week....
You live in a desert, arid region what do you expect.
Quoting 92. HaoleboySurfEC: Aloha and good morning. Been working in GA and SC with Matthew cleanup. 15 hour days. No time for the blog.

Good to see you!. Was wondering why you haven't been around.
Good Morning Folks; strong low pressure systems, whether tropical, sub-tropical, or winter ones, are one of the primary drivers of significant weather events (wind/rain/snow, etc.) across the globe and amazing to track as they develop in different parts................The possibility of Mediterranean hurricanes in the future if SST's sustain a warm cored tropical system is fascinating.





Quoting 80. Xyrus2000:



You're missing "stupid". It's okay, many people are missing stupid. Turns out the FDA recommended allowance of stupid is 0%, and is regarded as both a disease and a neurotoxin. The side effects are varied, even bizarre. There's this Biff Tannen impersonator I keep seeing on TV, who's apparently experiencing the side effects of oranging skin and bad comb-overs. Fascinating, but also sad.

At any rate, you're not missing anything. The basic physics, chemistry, and theory were worked out at the end of the 19th century. An AP high school student can handle the math. But when it comes to math and science the American population is...well...more interested in how their favorite reality TV star can manage to stay on the island. :P



I know I wasn't missing anything from the basics. I just wanted someone who doesn't believe in AGW to show exactly what it is that they think is wrong with the basic science. What we get here is deliberate obfuscation and avoidance of the actual science. We often here 'I don't believe...', but I would like someone to say exactly what they consider flawed in the basic science, so we could actually discuss it rationally. Yeah, I know, wildly optimistic, but I live in hope.
Quoting 77. KoritheMan:

"Medicanes aren't considered full-fledged tropical systems,"

But they are...? If there's symmetric, organized convection around a well-defined low pressure system with an associated warm core, then it's fully tropical. It doesn't matter if the waters aren't the stereotypical 26C. Haven't Alex and countless other storms proved that?


In that case, the following pic shows a hurricane:



At least I'm happy, that your definition isn't used. It would be awkward to read about "tropical systems" forming at 75 degrees North, over SSTs between -1.8 and +5 degrees Celsius. But given that the distribution of warm-core systems is pretty bimodal, I guess the best border between "polar lows" and "tropical cyclones" is at a SST somewhere near +13 Celsius. Half of what is traditionally thought to be needed for TC formation.
Per traditional tropical storm climatology, the most prevalent ones (whether Atlantic canes, East-Pac canes, or West-Pac Typhoons in the Northern Hemisphere) form out of the global ITCZ off of the Equator and the Mediterranean low pressure systems being discussed are way outside of this norm...............But there is merit in the points being made here that they often come awfully close to meeting the technical definition of a self-sustaining tropical system.
Quoting 98. elioe:



In that case, the following pic shows a hurricane:



At least I'm happy, that your definition isn't used. It would be awkward to read about "tropical systems" forming at 75 degrees North, over SSTs between -1.8 and +5 degrees Celsius. But given that the distribution of warm-core systems is pretty bimodal, I guess the best border between "polar lows" and "tropical cyclones" is at a SST somewhere near +13 Celsius. Half of what is traditionally thought to be needed for TC formation.

A polar low, sometimes called 'Arctic hurricane' in the lit for reasons of convective, warm-core, non-baroclinic characteristics.

I wouldn't take an arbitrary temp measure to determine tropicality. I'd demarcate according to height of tropopause, that is convection height.
101. MAstu
Let's not forget Hurricane Huron.

Link
Quoting 90. cRRKampen:


If everyone looks away it'll remain quite.


Quiet the statement.
latest vis of atlantic looks like the yellow area is trying to become a tropical system. if it does it would be named Otto
AMSU 89ghz image for the medicane around 19:40 on october 30

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B0z7MgyvUaMZa25T SFBVQ0FUNmM/view

copyright 2016 EUMETSAT
Quoting 32. Barefootontherocks:

A large piece of global warming mankind contributes to, and not just by using fossil fuels. Someday learn humans may learn to keep their legs crossed, and that would help reduce emissions.

I cannot speak for RichardBLong, whom I presume is your "designated skeptic." I can understand where Dick Long is coming from, maybe. Calling any or all extreme weather event(s) a result of Anthropomorphic (human-caused) Global Warming (AGW) is premature.* It is known some types of events are more likely than others to be exacerbated by global warming. Causal relationships have not been firmly established. As we all know, all types of weather have been happening for more than the two hundred or so years since societies leapt forward(?) to industrialization. As we all know, mankind's population has grown and placed itself in larger and larger numbers into harm's way causing any weather event judged by human casualty and property loss ismore likely to do greater damage today than it did 200, 400, 600 years ago.

Record heat. We know it's happened before. We know some of the data presented is questionable in the sense of the burgeoning human population, the data sites themselves changing location, yada yada... But more important than DATA is the YIN-YANG. Nature's attempts at balance at are quite obvious to someone who keys into them. Even if we believe the data, global heating has to continue in order for the rantings about AGW to prove true.

I'd love it if mankind could shut off all fossil fuel emissions right now, today. Then the rantings over rich people who own "big oil" could either be proven or put to bed. As it stands, we must observe a longer period of time to know.

And that's what some of you cannot think your way to - the "warming trend," and that's all it is until it lasts for an eon, or even if it lasts for longer than an eon, involves more than mankind's petty little busy-ness on Earth.

RUN FOR THE HILLS! WE'RE ALL GONNA DIE!!! (TM wu member Palmettobug53)

add: *Parentheticals included for those readers who may not understand the lingo.


OK, great, but what is actually wrong with the fundamentals that I list in my post? I find it fascinating that a number of people here are skeptical, but none seem to challenge the basic premise that we are raising the levels of greenhouse gasses in the atmosphere, and that will cause temperatures to rise, given a constant heat input.

Yes, we can discuss if the data presented is completely accurate, if the correction factors applied are appropriate, whether our perception of the changing climate is due to changes in population, if an individual event is 'caused' by AGW etc. I have no issue with that, but these just tell us how fast things are changing, not if the fundamentals of atmospheric changes impact the long term trends.

I find the statement that the Yin-Yang of nature balancing our climate is more important than data showing that it is changing rather interesting. Do you have any scientific basis to this Yin-Yang theory? Over what time scale does it occur, what causes it, by what mechanisms does it work, hiw can we measure it, where the midpoint is etc?

Quoting 97. OviedoWatcher:




I know I wasn't missing anything from the basics. I just wanted someone who doesn't believe in AGW to show exactly what it is that they think is wrong with the basic science. What we get here is deliberate obfuscation and avoidance of the actual science. We often here 'I don't believe...', but I would like someone to say exactly what they consider flawed in the basic science, so we could actually discuss it rationally. Yeah, I know, wildly optimistic, but I live in hope.

Maybe I'm misreading between the lines, but often when I read a denier post, I get a whiff of "I don't believe it, therefore it can't possibly be true", or "I don't believe it, therefore no action can be taken, because I have veto power". Humility in the face of the natural world doesn't seem to be present. Unfortunately, humility is the only door through which knowledge can enter our limited minds.
Quoting 35. Barefootontherocks:

Wait for what? Eons to see the real truth? Because that is how long it will take.

Already too late? We don't know. Even if so, "too late" does not mean all humans will die. Nor does it mean humans as individuals should wait for their leadership to dictate change. We can each do what we can as individuals now, and we can educate the young ones about Earth-care and their own survival.

What have you or any one else who posts here done lately, this year let's say, to smallen your carbon footprint?

I hear thunder. bbl, bf


I think for most, the answer would be not much, or not enough. In my case, replaced a gas guzzler with a hybrid, gone vegetarian (cattle-produced methane is a major source of methane), attempted to source as much of my food as I can from local sources, and started moving to LED lighting. I include myself in the 'not enough' category by the way.
Quoting 93. NativeSun:

You live in a desert, arid region what do you expect.

Did you miss the "10 degrees above average part"?
Quoting 108. ACSeattle:


Did you miss the "10 degrees above average part"?

That's normal in arid regions. Temperatures are always ten degrees above average there.
Quoting 106. ACSeattle:


Maybe I'm misreading between the lines, but often when I read a denier post, I get a whiff of "I don't believe it, therefore it can't possibly be true", or "I don't believe it, therefore no action can be taken, because I have veto power". Humility in the face of the natural world doesn't seem to be present. Unfortunately, humility is the only door through which knowledge can enter our limited minds.


I would agree. I get the impression that at least for some, the logic runs something on the lines of "I don't believe in government intervention in the economy. Addressing global warming would require government intervention, therefore I do not to believe in global warming". I am sure there are plenty of AGW sceptics that don't follow that logic, but there seem to be a large number that do .
Quoting 102. LoveReignoerMe:



Quiet the statement.

77% of the Australian electorate polled want govt to do something about climate change. At the same time the same electorate chose the coal shill govt for its second term. End of story. End of Barrier Reef - and some.
Quoting 109. cRRKampen:


That's normal in arid regions. Temperatures are always ten degrees above average there.


Brilliant. That brought a smile to my face :-)
113. OKsky
Quoting 109. cRRKampen:


That's normal in arid regions. Temperatures are always ten degrees above average there.


lol, yeah all temperatures are normal. everyone gets a trophy. =P

EDIT: perhaps we just figured out Oviedo's "what is missing" question. By labeling temperatures as "normal", we are temperature bigots. The kind hearted GOP have a vision of the future that includes temperature diversity....a real melting pot.
Oklahoma is so oil involved in their education system they had to switch to a 4 day school week.


Another GOP led failed state of affairs.

True dat.

😵😱😟😛😓😭
115. OKsky
Quoting 114. Patrap:

Oklahoma is so oil involved in their education system they had to switch to a 4 day school week.


Another GOP led failed state of affairs.

True dat.

😵😱😟😛😓😭


The 5th day is reserved for praying for the oil fields, and they throw a baby seal off of devon tower to finish off the ceremony.
Quoting 112. OviedoWatcher:



Brilliant. That brought a smile to my face :-)

There is a nasty twist on this, however.
Certain climate revisionists, e.g. the late Bob Carter have been on a mission to delete the very concept of 'average' from people's mind. I saw him irl during the presentation of the NIPCC report in The Hague in 2013 doing it as follows: 'Take all the telephone numbers in Holland and average them... See what a meaningless number you get?'.
What this ruse was about was to delete in the public mind the concept of 'average global temperature' whence its rise would be meaningless as well. S. Fred Singer tried the same thing.
Quoting 109. cRRKampen:


That's normal in arid regions. Temperatures are always ten degrees above average there.
its been so abnormal we don't even know what's normal anymore
Quoting 117. KEEPEROFTHEGATE:

its been so abnormal we don't even know what's normal anymore

That is a sensation I suffered in December a year ago. In the Netherlands average minimum temperature went over the record daily average of the previous record warm December (way back in 1974). It would have been a quite warm April. Now, I'd be totally comfy with a frostless December (including the nights). Never mind at all that never happened before last year.
Hello Miami, one more test coming your way :

If you only see one astronomical event this year, make it the November supermoon, when the Moon will be the closest to Earth it’s been since January 1948.

During the event, which will happen on the eve of November 14, the Moon will appear up to 14 percent bigger and 30 percent brighter than an average full moon. This is the closest the Moon will get to Earth until 25 November 2034, so you really don’t want to miss this one.


Link
Moonrise every evening over the Atlantic Ocean horizon around the 14th will be a beautiful sight to see if you can get anywhere along the Eastern Coast to see it and the darker (beach area) the better..................I remember so many spectacular ones in South Florida from the beaches, boats, or Clevelander Hotel bar on South Beach between the 60's and 90's............Even from I-95 in recent years while driving along dark stretches as it comes up on the horizon at dusk; almost pulled over in Georgia a few months ago it was so beautiful.

Would a system entering as a TD from North Atlantic into Mediterrenean get a North-Atlantic name or a Medicane name? By the way there is currently a blob (storm) right where Trixie passed by.
Quoting 92. HaoleboySurfEC:

The last time they won was only 43 years after the end of the Civil War. About the same amount of time since the end of Vietnam until now.

Wright Bros had only made powered flight possible a few years earlier on a cold, windy NC beach. The Titanic was probably a blueprint. WWI and WWII hadn't yet occurred.

Aloha and good morning. Been working in GA and SC with Matthew cleanup. 15 hour days. No time for the blog, but stayed up for that Game 7. Good job to both teams. Congrats Cubbies.




Are you a tree surgeon? Or a landscaper?
Quoting 32. Barefootontherocks:

A large piece of global warming mankind contributes to, and not just by using fossil fuels. Someday learn humans may learn to keep their legs crossed, and that would help reduce emissions.


yes yes yes yes yes
why do we gotta breed like bunnies, huh? Why we got too many people? Why do so many people think it's ok?
NOT OK

If ya can't feed'm, house'm, clothe'm and medically insure them, ON YOUR OWN-

then don't have'm.

And I'm walking away now so I won't see the responses. Go ahead and ban me for a while, Keeper- I'm in a foul mood anyway.
XKCD is sick...sick I tell you!

http://xkcd.com/1754/

Tornado Safety Tips
Tropical Storm Meari is a convective mauler.

Quoting 109. cRRKampen:


That's normal in arid regions. Temperatures are always ten degrees above average there.


It might be less unproductive to just ignore deniers. The level of ignorance is simply staggering and must be willfull.
Quoting 101. MAstu:

Let's not forget Hurricane Huron.

Link

I was 9 living in SE michigan when that happened. Honestly that got me interested in weather anomolies and i was hooked from there. Im 29 now ... i often have wondered if there will be another storm like that in my lifetime ... still in SE mich waiting for it :)
Quoting 125. TheBigBanana:


FEMA is hiring in Durham, NC for people to help with after Matthew recovery and rebuilding. Some of these pay pretty good..

Drove up US1 this morning. Lots of new fence up. They are still picking up storm debris.

Got round one of mine on Sunday:)


Wrote a blog the other night about Matthew erosion, USGS had released info and before and afters.. Also looked up the NOAA event imagery for the storm. Great resource to see how particular buildings fared from above. They added alot of images from the inland flooding too.

This paper would be worth finding if someone has a moment. Published Thurs in Science Magazine by Julienne Stroeve, senior scientist at the National Snow and Ice Data Center. It replaces climate models with simple math to figure when the Arctic Ice would mostly be gone. For every tonne of CO2 that enters the atmosphere, sea ice declines by 3 square meters. By those calculation at business as usual the forecast is ice disappears by mid century.
Quoting 14. MontanaZephyr:


There is one silver lining, I guess, to ACC: The first sector of humans to go extinct will be the CC deniers.


I hate to disagree. They are selfish survivialsts, planning for wars and surviving them. That the wars will be forced by climate change (by people crowding other areas for limited resources) means squat to them. They are just about me, me, me, big trucks and big guns, making up for their other deficiencies. JMO.
Engineering firm providing services to gov. agencies seeking FEMA assjstance.

Quoting 125. TheBigBanana:



Are you a tree surgeon? Or a landscaper?
Quoting 133. Pipejazz:



I hate to disagree. They are selfish survivialsts, planning for wars and surviving them. That the wars will be forced by climate change (by people crowding other areas for limited resources) means squat to them. They are just about me, me, me, big trucks and big guns, making up for their other deficiencies. JMO.


Well I can't argue with that.

Here is a fresh Rob Scribbler : Drifting into Arctic Un-Winter Link
Greetings and Blessings to All!

Thus far thankfully the trough system affecting most of the Lesser Antilles islands has not been too much of a Nuisance here in the Nature Island of the Caribbean, Dominica. To God be the Glory, since the weather was most co-operative for the majority of our Major Independence/ Creole attractions/ Celebrations like Creole in the Park, and of course the World Creole Music Festival; 3 sensational Nights of pulsating rhythms comprising scores of International as well as phenomenal local artistes. Truly Fabulous.

Indeed, we have been so Very Blessed with fair weather in this year's major celebrations for which we are very grateful. This year Sweet Dominica thankfully and proudly celebrates 38yrs of Independence- today, November 3rd. Bright sunshine earlier today shone upon a stronger more resilient Nation under God, and provided the perfect window of opportunity for the National Independence Parades at the Windsor park stadium viewed by thousands of Dominicans.
Although, this system will continue to produce cloudiness, showers and isolated thunderstorms over the island- it has been occasional in nature & made for generally very cool, and relaxing atmospheric conditions.
Our thoughts and prayers to those being affected badly in the other Lesser Antilles islands.
A very Happy and Joyous Independence 2016 Once again to one and All! Vive La Dominique!!! & God Bless Dominica!

Blessings Everyone!
Here’s how much of the Arctic you’re personally responsible for melting

Link
139. elioe
Quoting 132. Skyepony:



Quoting the link in the comment

Or, in the words of the paper: "The 30-year running mean of monthly mean September Arctic sea-ice area is almost linearly related to cumulative anthropogenic CO2 emissions."


Oh, great. A scientific paper like that has likely as much value as the "XTRP" model has in spaghetti plots.
Leo's little movie -
7,521,922 views
219,818 up 8,496 down
Quoting 93. NativeSun:

You live in a desert, arid region what do you expect.
In a normal world, I would expect normal temps, not record highs every year. In the current world, I don't know what to expect, but I do know what I get, and that is above average for most of the summer. It may not be record setting temps constantly, but even us desert rats enjoy sub 90's temperatures...especially in October!
Leo's little movie -

7,521,922 views
219,818 up 8,496 down
Story in our local news.

November activity in Florida since 1842. There's only been
1 hurricane (Kate)
4 tropical storms

I thought this list was interesting.
Consider the Atlantic's hurricane and tropical storm totals by month from 1842 to October 2016.

January: 2 hurricanes, 2 tropical storms
February: 0 hurricanes, 1 tropical storm
March: 1 hurricane, 1 tropical storm
April: 0 hurricanes, 2 tropical storms
May: 7 hurricanes, 22 tropical storms
June: 44 hurricanes, 70 tropical storms
July: 70 hurricanes, 66 tropical storms
August: 320 hurricanes, 167 tropical storms
September: 432 hurricanes, 238 tropical storms
October: 211 hurricanes, 159 tropical storms
November: 45 hurricanes, 53 tropical storms
December: 5 hurricanes, 10 tropical storms

More information Link
Quoting 113. OKsky:



lol, yeah all temperatures are normal. everyone gets a trophy. =P

EDIT: perhaps we just figured out Oviedo's "what is missing" question. By labeling temperatures as "normal", we are temperature bigots. The kind hearted GOP have a vision of the future that includes temperature diversity....a real melting pot.
Sorry to suck the levity from your post, but...

In a way, we are. My local met uses the current 30 year average. In a warming world, that average is warming as well, and blurs out what the historical, measured, record was.

In other words, it is actually worse than what the current 30 year average tells us...
Climate Change Captured in Stunning Antarctic Ice Photos
NASA's IceBridge missions provide visual evidence of melting ice.


Link

By Brian Clark Howard
Photographs by Mario Tama
PUBLISHED NOVEMBER 3, 2016
Climate change can be hard to visualize, because it tends to happen at a relatively creeping pace, not in one dramatic surge, as Hollywood often likes to depict.



But new photos from NASA flights provide a fresh look at melting ice. For the past eight years, NASA has been flying Operation IceBridge missions in research planes over the poles, in order to gather more visual data on the impact of warming temperatures.

To help make this work more accessible to the public, in late October, photographer Mario Tama flew on three of NASA's IceBridge flights over Western Antarctica and the surrounding sea ice, leaving out of Punta Arenas, Chile. The trip was timed to coincide with the start of the melt season (spring) in the Southern Hemisphere.

The photos couldn't be more timely, since NASA and University of California, Irvine scientists have recently reported the fastest retreats of Western Antarctica's glaciers yet recorded.

Tune in to National Geographic's special new series on Antarctica, Continent 7, later this month.
A study published on October 25, drawing on IceBridge data, found that warm water is melting the undersides of the ice sheets. This could cause the large buttresses holding up vast amounts of ice to fail, leading to a rapid release of ice into the sea, along the lines of pancake batter flattening out.

If all the ice on the world's land melted it would raise sea level about 216 feet. Scientists have estimated melting all that ice could take 5,000 years, although the precise rate is hotly debated. How much the world is able to hold down carbon emissions will also strongly affect the rate of melting, scientists warn.
Flying in an "old, sturdy, beautifully reliable DC-8," Tama was most struck by the massive scale of the existing ice.

"Occasionally one could spot a seal or a penguin, but they were so tiny amidst the never-ending landscape that they were essentially impossible to photograph," he says.

"At times it really felt like a lunar mission, or a mission to Venus," says Tama. "The scenes, shapes, and sizes of the features in Antarctica were often otherworldly ... and just insanely, unimaginably beautiful."

Picture of people working in the cockpit of NASA's Operation IceBridge
View Images
NASA flight crew members work inside the cockpit of the Operation IceBridge DC-8 research airplane.
PHOTOGRAPH BY MARIO TAMA, GETTY
Such a sea of ice had once covered North America during the last ice age, a reminder of how variable climate can be over time, and how just a few degrees in average temperature can make a huge difference in the landscape.

Tama says his goal was to "document this slice of the planet that is alien to most of us." He adds, "I hope my photographs will in some small way support the incredibly important work the scientists are doing. These folks are the heroes."



POV: Why Are Leopard Seals Eating So Many Fur Seal Pups?
The IceBridge work comes at the same time that the United Nations Environment Programme has released a report analyzing all the commitments that countries have made to address global warming, based on the agreement struck in Paris last year. The current commitments on the table will only put the world on track to keep average global warming at 3 degrees Celsius, the report warns, instead of the 2 degrees that countries had agreed would stave off the worst impacts of warming, such as rising seas and extreme weather.

“If we don’t start taking additional action now, we will grieve over the avoidable human tragedy,” Erik Solheim, chief of the UNEP, told the Guardian.

That tragedy could include flooded cities, inundation by saltwater of wells, extreme weather, and searing heat waves, among other impacts.

Representatives of most countries will be meeting to discuss implementation of the Paris climate agreement next week in Morocco, at a United Nations summit.
146. bwi
Record high temp in DC this afternoon
Quoting 144. cynyc2:

Sorry to suck the levity from your post, but...

In a way, we are. My local met uses the current 30 year average. In a warming world, that average is warming as well, and blurs out what the historical, measured, record was.

In other words, it is actually worse than what the current 30 year average tells us...


I hadn't bothered to think about that, but you are right. They should fix a baseline, say the average for the 20th century, and stick to it. Sadly, the way things are going, they should start using the difference between the temperature and what the extrapolated average temperature is, ie "today is going to be 2 degrees hotter than global warming would predict it should be in the first week of November this year" :-(
what about the disturbed area to the west of the leewards?
my matthew pile is probably killed the grass by now. Hard to believe its been 4 weeks!
Quoting 148. islander101010:

what about the disturbed area to the west of the leewards?


That's just Grothar waking up from his nap? I hope that he is in a good mood when he reads this.
Quoting 121. RobertWC:

Hello Miami, one more test coming your way :

If you only see one astronomical event this year, make it the November supermoon, when the Moon will be the closest to Earth it’s been since January 1948.

During the event, which will happen on the eve of November 14, the Moon will appear up to 14 percent bigger and 30 percent brighter than an average full moon. This is the closest the Moon will get to Earth until 25 November 2034, so you really don’t want to miss this one.


Link



I assume that this is "Rob Scribbler". If it is, thanks for your work.
Quoting 128. 1900hurricane:

Tropical Storm Meari is a convective mauler.




All I can say is....


WOW!!!!! Look at all the DEEP CONVECTION!!!!!
I predict a few more yellow Xs maybe an orange one or 2, but thats it for this season.
Quoting 141. cynyc2:

In a normal world, I would expect normal temps, not record highs every year. In the current world, I don't know what to expect, but I do know what I get, and that is above average for most of the summer. It may not be record setting temps constantly, but even us desert rats enjoy sub 90's temperatures...especially in October!
You will get them, when nobody knows.
Everyone have a great and safe weather weekend; the Arctic melt issues continue to be well documented. Here is a brief overview statement as to the related issues folks are studying...............Great snapshot:

http://www.sciencemag.org/topic/changing-arctic

In a world where the climate is changing at a rate not exceeded in the geological record, the Arctic is on the front lines, experiencing the most rapid warming of any region on the planet. Once considered remote and disconnected, now we know that changes within the Arctic can have a direct impact on the rest of the world, affecting physical and biological systems near and far at regional and global scales. Such changes range from how much solar radiation the region reflects back into space to the structure of the ecological communities in Arctic waters; meanwhile, melting permafrost is driving the transformation of frozen tundra into wetlands, and grassy plains are shifting into lusher landscapes of bushes and trees. To understand the scope and details of these changes, scientists have intensified their efforts across all areas of Arctic research. This collection highlights some of their most important and interesting findings, as published in the pages of Science as well as in other journals, offering an overview of the direction of the field. 
Quoting 81. Xyrus2000:



To reason, one must first have facts and logic. You have neither.

Let's make this really simple. You post a zero dimensional energy balance model using known physics and chemistry that demonstrates how a planet with increased greenhouse gases can LOSE energy without violating the laws of thermodynamics, then we can talk. Till then take your nonsensical conspiracy onto WUWT or some other neo-crazy alt-right nut bar. It will be far more appreciated there.

I can't even understand what you are trying to convey through your post. I also do not understand your need to attack me because I have a different point of view. THAT doesn't sound very logical.
How Unstable are the Ice Masses on Greenland and Antarctica?

Link
Quoting 137. KEEPEROFTHEGATE:





Thanks for that Keeper! Hat's off to whomever put that together!
Quoting 52. hotroddan:

Well to begin with there have been instances where Climate scientists have been manipulating data in favor of the Climate Change argument. .............

This is a lie, pure and simple.
To paraphrase Twain -

A lie can run around the world, while the truth is still trying to put it's boots on.
Quoting 156. hotroddan:


I can't even understand what you are trying to convey through your post. I also do not understand your need to attack me because I have a different point of view. THAT doesn't sound very logical.


To quote Yoda -
"This is why you fail. "
Quoting 134. HaoleboySurfEC:

Engineering firm providing services to gov. agencies seeking FEMA assjstance.


How did the damage from Matthew compare to other disasters you've seen?
162. OKsky
Quoting 156. hotroddan:


I can't even understand what you are trying to convey through your post. I also do not understand your need to attack me because I have a different point of view. THAT doesn't sound very logical.


He wants you to tie your point of view to known facts about physics. I doubt anyone is surprised that you don't think that's logical.
Quoting 77. KoritheMan:

"Medicanes aren't considered full-fledged tropical systems,"

But they are...? If there's symmetric, organized convection around a well-defined low pressure system with an associated warm core, then it's fully tropical. It doesn't matter if the waters aren't the stereotypical 26C. Haven't Alex and countless other storms proved that?

There are clearly warm core storms, but to be "tropical", they have to have some association with the tropics.
Quoting 109. cRRKampen:


That's normal in arid regions. Temperatures are always ten degrees above average there.


I think you just made a yogi-ism!
165. elioe
What can you do, if you procrastinate and avoid studying at all costs? You can, for example, make a model to estimate, how the filling of Lake Chad basin would affect climate and weather. And write a blog about it. Have a look if you're interested.
Quoting 147. OviedoWatcher:



I hadn't bothered to think about that, but you are right. They should fix a baseline, say the average for the 20th century, and stick to it. Sadly, the way things are going, they should start using the difference between the temperature and what the extrapolated average temperature is, ie "today is going to be 2 degrees hotter than global warming would predict it should be in the first week of November this year" :-(


Come to think of it... Has anyone questioned the numbers....? As in, might temps be actually warmer than what is being reported? I know that that sounds absurd, but when you look at what the US government does with economic numbers, then if there was a way, why wouldn't they do it with any other measure that they wish to manipulate perception with?

For some idea of what has been done with economic numbers visit shadowstats.comLink
Quoting 117. KEEPEROFTHEGATE:

its been so abnormal we don't even know what's normal anymore


There is no normal now. We've quite gone through the looking-glass, it seems.

Thanks for blogging Keeper.

As a matter of fact, thanks to ALL of you! ALL of your contributions help to make this net-space a dynamic, engaging, and 'fine' (in the 19th century sense of the term) place to visit.

(Some of you are thinking: "Well, he can't mean the ACC deniers....~"}

Au Contraire!

The deniers give us all examples of PR tactics being used. You're most of you scientists. Make some observations. Notice patterns. Draw some hypotheses. Test. Move on.
I'm wearing shorts and short sleeves on a November evening outside in D.C.Only reason why opened toed shoes were not worn were because of all the leaves and acorns on the ground.
Quoting 165. elioe:

What can you do, if you procrastinate and avoid studying at all costs? You can, for example, make a model to estimate, how the filling of Lake Chad basin would affect climate and weather. And write a blog about it. Have a look if you're interested.

Goodness, why stop there? Let's go for the big kahuna and fill the Caspian Basin. After all, that's where the real action is. 'Course, the folks in Azerbaijan might feel differently about that, but that's their problem, right?
Quoting 159. RobertWC:


This is a lie, pure and simple.
To paraphrase Twain -

A lie can run around the world, while the truth is still trying to put it's boots on.


I think that we can be more productive as a group if we simply ignore deniers. Responding to them just wastes time. Observe them, yes. Meditate on their tactics, (as distasteful as that may seem to promise), and you will learn some things that may become of use.
171. elioe
Quoting 169. ACSeattle:


Goodness, why stop there? Let's go for the big kahuna and fill the Caspian Basin. After all, that's where the real action is. 'Course, the folks in Azerbaijan might feel differently about that, but that's their problem, right?


How the folks in Azerbaijan might feel about that, might depend on how they are compensated :)

But good statement, in terms of rhetorics. This is a pretty common reaction for those who oppose geoengineering, often for beliefs that dictate that Earth should stay as it has been, even if the changes, that are opposed, would be beneficial to mankind. Whether it be a consequence of traditional religions, or the modern "religions" of ecology and environmentalism. Point out the negative impacts happening to a certain group of people, however minuscule the impacts are, however minuscule the group of people. Ignore the great picture. Well done.
Quoting 117. KEEPEROFTHEGATE:
its been so abnormal we don't even know what's normal anymore
Our concept of normal is stability. We don't have that normal. We have change. Our new normal is change.
Statements about climate researchers' carbon footprints affect their credibility and the impact of their advice

Yes, the article is behind a pay wall. You might be able to go to a local university library where they will give you a logon id for free (happens here in Texas) that will let you take advantage of the library's subscription to the journal.

You might also check out the Twitter conversation such as here.
Profound change begins in our own lives and in our own communities. It helps encourage us that larger scale change is possible & even likely
Quoting 170. MontanaZephyr:



I think that we can be more productive as a group if we simply ignore deniers. Responding to them just wastes time. Observe them, yes. Meditate on their tactics, (as distasteful as that may seem to promise), and you will learn some things that may become of use.


Fair point , but I've been at this for a while now. My turnip truck just didn't drive up yesterday. This folks are bullies.
One does not ignore bullies.
And like all bullies they whine, when one punches then in the nose.
I understand your theory, but history teaches us that ignoring bullies, puts us into the frying pan. I had a bully, once , one day I jumped him and beat crap out of him. He never ever crossed me again.

MontZ -
My old dead blog.

Thursday, September 07, 2006
" MONSTERS BEHIND THE DOOR "



Link



Quoting 168. washingtonian115:

I'm wearing shorts and short sleeves on a November evening outside in D.C.Only reason why opened toed shoes were not worn were because of all the leaves and acorns on the ground.


Not good Washi... Might not be a white xmas for you.
.

Puny humans, how could we change the Earth ?
Quoting 166. MontanaZephyr:



Come to think of it... Has anyone questioned the numbers....? As in, might temps be actually warmer than what is being reported? I know that that sounds absurd, but when you look at what the US government does with economic numbers, then if there was a way, why wouldn't they do it with any other measure that they wish to manipulate perception with?

For some idea of what has been done with economic numbers visit shadowstats.comLink

Eh..... that's certainly debatable. Using those statistics, goods today should cost something like 10-11x what they did in the 1980s. That doesn't seem very realistic.
http://www.economonitor.com/dolanecon/2015/03/31/ deconstructing-shadowstats-why-is-it-so-loved-by-i ts-followers-but-scorned-by-economists/
The Bureau of Labor Statistics also provides a rebutall:
http://www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/2008/08/art1full.pdf

Do yourself a favor... give extra scrutiny to big claims. Big claims require big evidence. And yes, claiming that multiple branches of government have all been lying, manipulating numbers, and getting away with it for decades is a big claim.
Quoting 176. RobertWC:

.

Puny humans, how could we change the Earth ?

Well, when we do change it, it's only for the better. Where once there was darkness, now there is light, lotsa, lotsa light.


In 1908 , there was no sliced bread. And Italy did not look like this at night. To say that man cannot change the Earth is to say that man is helpless pawn for the last 500 years.
We can obliterate the globe in a afternoon via all out thermo nuclear war.

We have imparted such a rapid rise of heat into a system that is trending toward chaos in vectors and forcings unmodeled and underestimated grossly.

The looking glass shattered at 350 ppm CO2, decades ago.

Into the warming future we all go.

Welcome to the Anthropocene

New Orleans had a 28F low temp this date in 1966.

🌚☎📇🎷🎺
we are gonna ban all 5 of yer names. LinusPauling your time here is done

This Election Has Exposed the Climate Movement's Lack of Political Muscle

Lots of quotable statements in this article. Here's the closing thought.
To protect what we love the most from climate chaos, we need climate policy. Very few politicians champion climate leadership. That is why the climate movement needs political strategies that are as effective and powerful as possible. The climate is changing. We need to change too.
195. vis0
Quick nutty reminder its 2WkAnom time (only those (3) that read or try to read my zilly blog kind-of understand what that is...BTW if Grothar and ME (or i...any of my personalities) create a WxU Blog it might be called "KatSic'...the cool kat Grothar and "sic" member ...uh... me/// sic is short? for nut.. 3 letters vs. 3 letters ???d a r n 
oh well what we do know is that the warmer globe is causing problems as to the normal steady flow of nature to become wacky and chaotic (that can also include droughts) to top notch "informists"/writers/science minds to use words like "quirky" ; - P ... what next DON MARTIN (of MAD) wurdz???

 
Back to observing how that LOW (~ ~ 30N 50W) builds up (24-36hrs) where ever its heading towards (Europe?) and lets see what the next 2 wks (specifically the next ~11 days) brings to the coasts.

 i wunder how that GoMx "warmth "  would look if a fall/winter superstorm tapped into it...i wunder if washi115 wants to see a snowmacane? (of course if possible just enough off shore that winds don't exceed 35mph yet fetch enough moisture to dump a foot  of snow on empty lots near beaches not on peoples property.)
Quoting 98. elioe:



In that case, the following pic shows a hurricane:



At least I'm happy, that your definition isn't used. It would be awkward to read about "tropical systems" forming at 75 degrees North, over SSTs between -1.8 and 5 degrees Celsius. But given that the distribution of warm-core systems is pretty bimodal, I guess the best border between "polar lows" and "tropical cyclones" is at a SST somewhere near 13 Celsius. Half of what is traditionally thought to be needed for TC formation.


Even traditional TCs are cultivated through lapse rates (temperature change with height). That effect is obviously far more pronounced for Mediterranean hurricanes, and is one of the primary reasons that they're able to exist in the first place, but that doesn't make them not tropical; heat fluxes can still occur under that kind of pattern. Here on the Gulf Coast, we regularly get hit with surface low pressure systems that form in the Gulf during the winter and spring and briefly take on tropical characteristics at 850 mb. Remember Vince in 2005? Similar location (somewhat warmer waters, though). The resemblance between last week's system and that one are pretty darn striking.

I stick to my guns. You can't pick and choose definitions just because the atmosphere isn't responding in a way that's easily classifiable in a meteorological textbook. Knowledge should evolve as we discover more, which means the rules should change, too. Frankly, I find it rather baffling that so many people are continually flabbergasted by these supposedly unprecedented events.

A better term would be that they're not "classically" tropical. See the distinction?
Quoting 163. BayFog:


There are clearly warm core storms, but to be "tropical", they have to have some association with the tropics.


lol no they don't. Otherwise all subtropical storms that eventually transition to tropical wouldn't exist in the NHC database.
Every time I see the light pollution pics from above, the first thing that enters my mind is what the other beings think looking down on us!
Yep, tried that, didn't work here! Silly humans!

Quoting 176. RobertWC:

.

Puny humans, how could we change the Earth ?
199. vis0
Introducing WATSONs WxInfoCube
...no?  i just can't make up a name and upload it...DARN. 

ImgLand.net image

This an idea for webnet WxU use (odds are it exists via  focused touch screen controls for serious users of WATSON as with medical uses)  as when one FOCUSES in or out and crops a weather animation WATSON adjusts all weather  info around the image so one is constantly being shown the Date-time-info and  need not scroll back down to where original D&T was/is.

SAT CREDIT:: NOAA/NASA
The technology to manage earth systems has come and it is going...(zero point) has been manifest in Area 51 S4 and Dugway Proving Ground among other areas that have borders protected by deadly force... The science is a step beyond (or does someone here know about it) and the resulting technology is evolutionary, virtually free... Solves most energy needs... No CO2 emissions...

We are held hostage by the elite who control these areas...Google “solar warden”... it is an abomination...

171. elioe
11:19 PM GMT on November 03, 2016
0 +
Quoting 169. ACSeattle:


Goodness, why stop there? Let's go for the big kahuna and fill the Caspian Basin. After all, that's where the real action is. 'Course, the folks in Azerbaijan might feel differently about that, but that's their problem, right?


How the folks in Azerbaijan might feel about that, might depend on how they are compensated :)

But good statement, in terms of rhetorics. This is a pretty common reaction for those who oppose geoengineering, often for beliefs that dictate that Earth should stay as it has been, even if the changes, that are opposed, would be beneficial to mankind. Whether it be a consequence of traditional religions, or the modern "religions" of ecology and environmentalism. Point out the negative impacts happening to a certain group of people, however minuscule the impacts are, however minuscule the group of people. Ignore the great picture. Well done.
Quoting 185. KEEPEROFTHEGATE:

we are gonna ban all 5 of yer names. LinusPauling your time here is done




Wait, somebody here caused trouble and it wasn't me? :)
Quoting 171. elioe:

This is a pretty common reaction for those who oppose geoengineering, often for beliefs that dictate that Earth should stay as it has been, even if the changes, that are opposed, would be beneficial to mankind.
-bold added

I'd like to see some substantive evidence that the part I bolded is true. Obviously, I don't read everything, but I have yet to see anyone oppose geoengineering on that basis who wasn't a climate change denier. If such evidence cannot be produced, then I assert that the charge of "rhetoric" you made is misplaced.

FWIW, my impression from what I have had time to read is that most non-deniers opposed to geo-engineering are so opposed for reasons of cost, unintended consequences, or long-term efficacy.
Quoting 156. hotroddan:


I can't even understand what you are trying to convey through your post. I also do not understand your need to attack me because I have a different point of view. THAT doesn't sound very logical.
Hi, If you are going to discuss climate change on here, you need to have a very tough skin mentality, unless you believe as they do. There are always a lot of personal attacks on this site when it comes to climate change, and that is so sad, as at one time this was really a nice WEATHER BlOG you could come to and learn something about the weather and tropical systems. Their is an IGNORE TAB you can use if it becomes too intense for you. I have a lot of people on my special list because of this, as I enjoy coming here to try to better myself when it comes to tropical and severe weather, not climate change. Enjoy the weather, as it is the only weather we have, and use the button when you see fit, it really works.
Quoting 203. NativeSun:

Hi, If you are going to discuss climate change on here, you need to have a very tough skin mentality, unless you believe as they do. There are always a lot of personal attacks on this site when it comes to climate change, and that is so sad, as at one time this was really a nice WEATHER BlOG you could come to and learn something about the weather and tropical systems. Their is an IGNORE TAB you can use if it becomes too intense for you. I have a lot of people on my special list because of this, as I enjoy coming here to try to better myself when it comes to tropical and severe weather, not climate change. Enjoy the weather, as it is the only weather we have, and use the button when you see fit, it really works.

No, you have to have a tough skin if you are going to offer nonsense in response to the science of Climate Change. Belief doesn't enter into it.
Quoting 204. Misanthroptimist:


No, you have to have a tough skin if you are going to offer nonsense in response to the science of Climate Change. Belief doesn't enter into it.

At least he has one good advise (yeah, taken weeks ago).
Quoting 204. Misanthroptimist:


No, you have to have a tough skin if you are going to offer nonsense in response to the science of Climate Change. Belief doesn't enter into it.
Some people are utterly incapable of understanding the world without "beliefs", no matter how contradictory those beliefs are to reality.
Quoting 204. Misanthroptimist:


No, you have to have a tough skin if you are going to offer nonsense in response to the science of Climate Change. Belief doesn't enter into it.

If anyone is going to claim that AGW does not exist, then they are free to do so, but people will come down hard on them if they do so based on just stating what they believe, rather than by providing scientific evidence. The theories and evidence upon which climate change models are based is not a religion,it is based on hundreds of thousands of hours of detailed peer-reviewed analysis, so if you want to discuss it here you have to discuss it on the same level as everyone else, ie measurements, computer simulations, thermodynamics etc. It is very apparent that whenever anyone issues a direct request to someone denying AGW to provide a scientific basis for their position, they do not get a science-based answer. To my mind, the reason for this is simple - they don't have a rational basis for their opinions.
there's a number of people on here who do great work gathering relevant articles and posting bunches of news stories (barbamz is one i think) where the hyper link is the actual title of the article, and not just a blue hyperlink that says 'Link". can anyone explain to me how to do this correctly? thanks in advance!

for anyone too, who doesn't get too depressed reading endlessly about climate change, it's very informative to sometimes just type into google 'climate change', and then sort through the news articles to see the insane breadth of the things that are being affected.
Good Morning; on the issue of AGW, we are past the point of a difference of opinion; it is a scientific fact that we are in an unprecedented warming period on Earth that can be traced to carbon emissions as the result of fossil fuel burning as the result of the modern industrial era.

There are lots of blogs out there for folks who do not believe in AGW but this blog represents the majority science view.  Some deniers, and trolls, just like to get a rise out of people on different sites just to stir up the pot.  Don't let the deniers get under you skin when they post on here.

Just ignore them and move on.
Good morning abroad. Although NHC doesn't expect any (sub)tropical development, the storm in the central Atl got an impressive look right now:


Click it for a little loop.


Tropical Cyclone Formation Probability next 24h.

Quoting 209. earthisanocean:

there's a number of people on here who do great work gathering relevant articles and posting bunches of news stories (barbamz is one i think) where the hyper link is the actual title of the article, and not just a blue hyperlink that says 'Link". can anyone explain to me how to do this correctly? thanks in advance!

To make a hyperlink click on the link icon (it looks like two chain links), paste the URL in and click OK. Then replace the word "link" in then tenxt with whatever text you want in the hyperlink.
Quoting 209. earthisanocean:

there's a number of people on here who do great work gathering relevant articles and posting bunches of news stories (barbamz is one i think) where the hyper link is the actual title of the article, and not just a blue hyperlink that says 'Link". can anyone explain to me how to do this correctly? thanks in advance!

Copy and paste or type the full title into the WU comment section. Then copy the html address of the article (it should be opened in a different window than WU). Now mark the title of the article in the WU comment section. Click the link symbol below the comment section and paste the html address into the opening field. Click okay. Preview the comment. If the link is working, post the comment.
Quoting 210. weathermanwannabe:

Just ignore them and move on.

Have to do something more. They killed the Barrier Reef, you see.
Quoting 181. Patrap:

We can obliterate the globe in a afternoon via all out thermo nuclear war.

We have imparted such a rapid rise of heat into a system that is trending toward chaos in vectors and forcings unmodeled and underestimated grossly.

The looking glass shattered at 350 ppm CO2, decades ago.

Into the warming future we all go.

Welcome to the Anthropocene




I still prefer termites because they're more easily denied while the weakening house continues to stand, until..


it doesn't.


Deniers do have certain properties of hydras though.
Quoting 201. KoritheMan:



Wait, somebody here caused trouble and it wasn't me? :)


Now you are just trying to cause some trouble. ;)

Arctic Sea Ice Is Losing Its Bulwark
NASA Earth Observatory, November 4, 2016

EXPERT VIEWS-Paris Agreement fires starting gun for faster climate action
by Megan Rowling | Thomson Reuters Foundation, Friday, 4 November 2016 12:55 GMT

For second time in a week, China berates Trump on climate pact threat
By Sue-Lin Wong by Reuters, Friday, 4 November 2016 12:26 GMT
U.S. would be main victim if Republican presidential candidate were elected and backed out of climate accord, says official
BEIJING, Nov 4 (Reuters) - The U.S. would be the main victim if Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump were elected and then backed out of a global climate accord, a Chinese official said on Friday, as the step would hurt its global standing and diplomatic ties.
It was the second rare comment on a foreign election by a Chinese official in a week, condemning Trump's threat to spurn the Paris Agreement, made by nearly 200 governments, which takes effect on Friday.
"If Trump were to insist on doing things his own way, then he would pay a heavy price both politically and diplomatically," said Zou Ji, deputy director of the National Centre for Climate Change Strategy, which is a part of China's state planner.
"The U.S. would suffer the greatest harm and of course, the rest of the world would also be implicated," he told reporters. ...

More see link above.

Quoting 175. Dakster:



Not good Washi... Might not be a white xmas for you.


Most aren't here in DC. Normal is brown/gray.
Quoting 168. washingtonian115:

I'm wearing shorts and short sleeves on a November evening outside in D.C.Only reason why opened toed shoes were not worn were because of all the leaves and acorns on the ground.


And I was griping about the stifling humid heat last night walking the dogs here in College Park/Riverdale . They were panting too. But I didn't crack and use the AC.
Quoting 218. georgevandenberghe:



Most aren't here in DC. Normal is brown/gray.

Hm, not 'green' like in the Netherlands? So sad.
Quoting 154. NativeSun:

You will get them, when nobody knows.


November/December sun is too weak for 90s in low midlatitudes (at least not without help from dynamics where the atmosphere can act as a heat pump warming warm areas and cooling cold areas (which can't happen without extracting kinetic or potential energy
from the basic state).) Incidentally both the American Southwest and (especially) the Arabian Middle East are hotter than the sun alone can make them in summer and are net heat sinks for earth losing more to space than they get from the sun.
222. OKsky
They advocate destroying the climate at everyone's expense, seems to me that ridiculing them and making jokes at their expense is literally the least we can do back. I will save my respect for people that care enough to know where their facts come from.
Do they need to be thick-skinned? Yeah.. mostly around the head area.
Quoting 203. NativeSun:

Hi, If you are going to discuss climate change on here, you need to have a very tough skin mentality, unless you believe as they do. There are always a lot of personal attacks on this site when it comes to climate change, and that is so sad, as at one time this was really a nice WEATHER BlOG you could come to and learn something about the weather and tropical systems. Their is an IGNORE TAB you can use if it becomes too intense for you. I have a lot of people on my special list because of this, as I enjoy coming here to try to better myself when it comes to tropical and severe weather, not climate change. Enjoy the weather, as it is the only weather we have, and use the button when you see fit, it really works.


Quit acting like you are victim in this! Any opposition to your stance on climate change is based on our understanding of The Laws of Physics, The Laws of Chemistry and The Laws of Thermodynamics. This has nothing to do with a belief in an ideology. This is about an understanding in what the scientific evidence reveals to us. You are whining simply because you cannot come up with some new Laws in Science that would tell us that our dumping tons/day of CO2 into the atmosphere would not have a warming influence on the global climate. When you are able to do so, then people will listen to what you have to say on climate change. I will go so far as to applaud your acceptance of a Nobel prize when you do.
90B riding offshore the eastern coast of India could be a very wet event for Bangladesh.
Here the latest outlook from the Meteorological Centre in India.


Current saved Himawari pic (cloud top temperatures). Source.



Quoting 219. georgevandenberghe:



And I was griping about the stifling humid heat last night walking the dogs here in College Park/Riverdale . They were panting too. But I didn't crack and use the AC.


Must feel better today.
Forecast for D.C. today
High 61, low 41

That's a cold day in January for us down here in S.W. Florida. We'd be wearing sweaters and jackets. We would even issue a warning to the students at school of the cold weather with a low of 41 degrees.
Usually whenever the temperature gets down in the 40s or colder, the students are warned so they will dress appropriately for the cold.
our plumerias are starting to bloom. this is the first time since they were de-leafed from matthew.
Quoting 210. weathermanwannabe:

Good Morning; on the issue of AGW, we are past the point of a difference of opinion; it is a scientific fact that we are in an unprecedented warming period on Earth that can be traced to carbon emissions as the result of fossil fuel burning as the result of the modern industrial era.

There are lots of blogs out there for folks who do not believe in AGW but this blog represents the majority science view.  Some deniers, and trolls, just like to get a rise out of people on different sites just to stir up the pot.  Don't let the deniers get under you skin when they post on here.

Just ignore them and move on.
Quoting 214. cRRKampen:


Have to do something more. They killed the Barrier Reef, you see.
cRRKampen,
Sounds you're saying "deniers" killed the Reef? Not logical. Perhaps you do not understand the difference between the plural pronouns "we" and "they" in English. (OP comment to which you responded included for clarity. My bold.)

Quoting 222. OKsky:

They advocate destroying the climate at everyone's expense, seems to me that ridiculing them and making jokes at their expense is literally the least we can do back. I will save my respect for people that care enough to know where their facts come from.
Do they need to be thick-skinned? Yeah.. mostly around the head area.
OKsky,
I have never seen a poster here advocate destroying the climate. Some here need to get real about their own fossil fuel and derivative commodities use.

I asked a question in this blog the other day and no one answered. I will ask it again, not just of you but of everyone who posts on this blog...

What have you done in the last year to smallen your own carbon footprint?
Quoting 227. Barefootontherocks:

cRRKampen,
Sounds you're saying "deniers" killed the Reef? Not logical. Perhaps you do not understand the difference between the plural pronouns "we" and "they" in English. (OP comment to which you responded included for clarity. My bold.)

Yes logical. They did, working for the fossil fuel moloch as they do, helping with the merchants of doubt.
Note: call 'm what they are: climate revisionists. Or thugs. On decent blogs they need to banned throughout.

Any nicer take on this is aiding the destruction and aiding next year's record rise of the Keeling Curve again.

(no driver's license. Fair home but only one room warmed, sometimes in winter, only when I am at home. Hydro in the energy mix. One or at most two lights on. Travel by bike five minutes to work).
229. OKsky
Quoting 227. Barefootontherocks:

What have you done in the last year to smallen your own carbon footprint?


I do the most powerful thing I can do....... I don't support politicians that are paid off by the oil industry....whichever side of the aisle they are on. And in the larger picture.. I am willing to support anyone that consistently shows they care about science education and critical thinking.... regardless of their political party.

EDIT: and the (sad) punchline is I have yet to see a politician make science and critical thinking their central issue, let me know if anyone knows of one!
Quoting 227. Barefootontherocks:

cRRKampen,
Sounds you're saying "deniers" killed the Reef? Not logical. Perhaps you do not understand the difference between the plural pronouns "we" and "they" in English. (OP comment to which you responded included for clarity. My bold.)

OKsky,
I have never seen a poster here advocate destroying the climate. Some here need to get real about their own fossil fuel and derivative commodities use.

I asked a question in this blog the other day and no one answered. I will ask it again, not just of you but of everyone who posts on this blog...

What have you done in the last year to smallen your own carbon footprint?


I will answer your question for you, Barefoot. What I have done is to not continue to pretend that we, not they, are harming nearly every species on this planet by our, not their, activities on this planet. What I will also do is to bring into the light the lack of evidence that the deniers will bring to the conversation when they try to pretend that it is not our activities that are threatening nearly every species on this planet. Now I have a question for you, Barefoot. What will you do? Will you only continue to defend the people that bring their flawed opinions and then expect everyone to just listen to them?
Quoting 229. OKsky:



I do the most powerful thing I can do....... I don't support politicians that are paid off by the oil industry....whichever side of the aisle they are on. And in the larger picture.. I am willing to support anyone that consistently shows they care about science education and critical thinking.... regardless of their political party.
You did not answer the question which is about "your own" carbon footprint.

Your response is a great example of the kind of statement that prevents compromise and solution. Fixing human contribution to climate change in the U.S. is a politically charged issue, low on the totem pole behind such issues as the economy, foreign relations, health care, income tax, gun control and immigration.

My question is not about politics. Since you bring it up though, I will say this: I watched all three presidential debates. Not live, recorded. I wanted to be able to go back and listen. Took me all day last Sunday to watch and digest the third debate. Through the three, I saw / heard no mentionable discussion of climate change policy. What I saw and heard and took away from the debates that distinguished the candidates in my mind: Clinton seems itchy to start a war with Russia; Trump is poorly educated on women's issues.

Away from the political arenas, climate change is not about politics, and until both "sides of the aisle" are willing to compromise and find an approach that works, nothing will happen at the federal level to help reduce carbon emission. I say do what you can on your own, and, if you vote, vote for people on both sides of the aisle who have the capability to work toward compromise.
Quoting 210. weathermanwannabe:

Good Morning; on the issue of AGW, we are past the point of a difference of opinion; it is a scientific fact that we are in an unprecedented warming period on Earth that can be traced to carbon emissions as the result of fossil fuel burning as the result of the modern industrial era.

There are lots of blogs out there for folks who do not believe in AGW but this blog represents the majority science view.  Some deniers, and trolls, just like to get a rise out of people on different sites just to stir up the pot.  Don't let the deniers get under you skin when they post on here.

Just ignore them and move on.


I sent this to yer guvnas office in a e mail.

Thanx.

🎲 📻 📀
Quoting 231. Barefootontherocks:

You did not answer the question which is about "your own" carbon footprint.

Your response is a great example of the kind of statement that prevents compromise and solution. Fixing human contribution to climate change in the U.S. is a politically charged issue, low on the totem pole behind such issues as the economy, foreign relations, health care, income tax, gun control and immigration.

My question is not about politics. Since you bring it up though, I will say this: I watched all three presidential debates. Not live, recorded. I wanted to be able to go back and listen. Took me all day last Sunday to watch and digest the third debate. Through the three, I saw / heard no mentionable discussion of climate change policy. What I saw and heard and took away from the debates that distinguished the candidates in my mind: Clinton seems itchy to start a war with Russia; Trump is poorly educated on women's issues.

Away from the political arenas, climate change is not about politics, and until both "sides of the aisle" are willing to compromise and find an approach that works, nothing will happen at the federal level to help reduce carbon emission. I say do what you can on your own, and, if you vote, vote for people on both sides of the aisle who have the capability to work toward compromise.

My carbon footprint may be small for Dutch counts, but remains terrible compared to global average. This is in large part politically induced. As you probably know fossil fuels are massively subsidized, in Holland a factor of over 40 compared to renewables. This is because politics in this country favour Shell/Exxon/Nam above anything else including of course people (who, otoh, keep voting for this).
Holland is importing coal from the States (adding to shipping polution, which is sometimes forgotten a bit as a particularly large polluter). Probably this year will be the third in a row with decline of renewable fraction in the Dutch energy mix.
Politics organize this, present the people with a lack of choice, letting our solar panel firm go bust THEN levying taxes on Chinese panels.
Politics. Or the corporate coup.
Quoting 231. Barefootontherocks:

You did not answer the question which is about "your own" carbon footprint.

Your response is a great example of the kind of statement that prevents compromise and solution.

Away from the political arenas, climate change is not about politics, and until both "sides of the aisle" are willing to compromise .... on both sides of the aisle who have the capability to work toward compromise.


One other note. Scrap 'compromise'. This is about survival.
235. OKsky
Quoting 231. Barefootontherocks:

You did not answer the question which is about "your own" carbon footprint.
...(some stuff about trump and hillary admittedly I just scanned over this part)....

I say do what you can on your own, and, if you vote, vote for people on both sides of the aisle who have the capability to work toward compromise.


Worrying about our own carbon footprint and taking individual action is what we have collectively been forced to do for the past 40 yrs.... with no effect... you have seen the data. It is going to take regulation at a mass scale.
Compromise? No thanks....
Laws of physics don't compromise with oil companies....
Quoting 230. Some1Has2BtheRookie:



I will answer your question for you, Barefoot. What I have done is to not continue to pretend that we, not they, are harming nearly every species on this planet by our, not their, activities on this planet. What I will also do is to bring into the light the lack of evidence that the deniers will bring to the conversation when they try to pretend that it is not our activities that are threatening nearly every species on this planet. Now I have a question for you, Barefoot. What will you do? Will you only continue to defend the people that bring their flawed opinions and then expect everyone to just listen to them?
As I attempted to point out to cRRKampen and OKsky at comment 231, WE... THEY is the problem here, Rookie.

You also avoid the question I asked about smallening your own carbon footprint. Anyone who reads here knows those many commenters feel duty-bound to respond to those they perceive as "deniers." As long as they do so logically and without a personal attack or profanity, that's cool with me.

In your questions to me, you have assumed I am defending the "they" point of view. There is no evidence of that, and that is not what I am doing. I am looking for logic, civility and open minds from both "we" and "they." With these attributes in the discussion, the potential to reach successful solutions to reduce human-caused carbon emission is highly increased. Otherwise all you got's a lot of negative energy flying around that drives people away.
Quoting 234. cRRKampen:



One other note. Scrap 'compromise'. This is about survival.
You're preaching to the choir. I believe I mentioned the survival aspect of the issue in a previous comment, probably on the previous blog, one that had more to do with climate change than this one does.

What exactly do you propose as immediate soulution(s) to reducing human-caused carbon emissions?
Quoting 235. OKsky:



Worrying about our own carbon footprint and taking individual action is what we have collectively been forced to do for the past 40 yrs.... with no effect... you have seen the data. It is going to take regulation at a mass scale.
Compromise? No thanks....
Laws of physics don't compromise with oil companies....


Nevada and Florida lead in this race to kill solar.





NV Energy fights to keep rooftop solar from cutting into its profit


240. OKsky
Quoting 237. Barefootontherocks:

You're preaching to the choir. I believe I mentioned the survival aspect of the issue in a previous comment, probably on the previous blog, one that had more to do with climate change than this one does.

What exactly do you propose as immediate soulution(s) to reducing human-caused carbon emissions?


Somehow dismantle the ability for the fossil fuel industry to mislead people with PR that invents scientific controversy where none actually exists would be a good start. The doubt they create by taking advantage of people's science illiteracy is the only reason AGW is a political issue...and it being a political issue makes it harder to solve.
Quoting 235. OKsky:



Worrying about our own carbon footprint and taking individual action is what we have collectively been forced to do for the past 40 yrs.... with no effect... you have seen the data. It is going to take regulation at a mass scale.
Compromise? No thanks....
Laws of physics don't compromise with oil companies....
Forced to do? Hardly. Reducing your own carbon footprint by choice is what has been ahppening since the mid-70s in the US. "Regulation at a mass scale" will not happen without politicians whoa are able to compromise. But I repeat myself...

I like the idea of "carbon footprint" rationing, ala WW II commodities. Again, I mentioned this already in a precious (haha Freudian typo = previoius) comment, probably a blog back.

The part I bolded...
Oil companies employ scientists. What do you propose regarding oil companies? What would you (and anyone, please respond) propose to change the grip of fossil fuel?

I hope you recognize that each of us has the capability to reduce fossil fuel consumption, and that is the gist of my (still unanswered) original question to the board.
Good morning from St. Thomas

It's 85 and feeling like 97 on the island at the moment. Our third crop of skeeters are about to drop in on us. It's been a horrendous month with the little buggers. Seems that no matter what you do and how careful you are to not have any standing water, it's impossible to stay ahead of them. Don't need a barometer to tell me when rain is coming, the invasion I get before a downfall is warning enough!

As far as the weather goes over here, if you don't like what you are seeing, wait five minutes. As I said early last week, this wet pattern was supposed to last a week and has now been extended to another 10 days. I shouldn't complain though. There are enough times throughout the year that I worry too much about the lack of rain.

Hoping all is well with you folks out there!

Lindy
Florida Rooftop Solar Advocates Challenge Deceptive Anti-Solar Campaign In State Supreme Court
By Alex Kotch • Monday, March 7, 2016 - 12:08


he Sunshine State didn’t get its name for nothing: Florida ranks third nationally in rooftop solar energy potential. But thanks to restrictive laws supported by the state’s powerful utility monopolies, the country’s third most populous state is only fourteenth in installed solar capacity.

Florida is one of only four states that bar third-party solar financing, when non-utility companies install solar panels on the roofs of homes and businesses at little or no upfront cost, sometimes selling the energy generated back to the customer.

A battle in Florida is well underway between Big Energy and clean-energy advocates. The current conflict began when a coalition called Floridians for Solar Choice (FSC) proposed a ballot measure to legalize third-party solar agreements. FSC is an unlikely alliance of Tea Party activists and environmentalists, Libertarians, Republicans, a Christian coalition, and business groups.

Utilities are threatened by third-party solar, which could affect their bottom line because of net metering—when utilities pay solar users for excess energy generated by their solar panels—and less demand for grid-based energy and new power plants.


So utility giants teamed up with chambers of commerce and political and “social welfare” nonprofits to form Consumers for Smart Solar (CSS), which produced a competing ballot initiative that allegedly protects consumers and encourages the use of rooftop solar.

tics of CSS say the group, seeing the positive polling that FSC’s amendment had received, created its measure to confuse voters, mimicking language used in the first measure but with a very different meaning. The ballot title is “Rights of Electricity Consumers Regarding Solar Energy Choice,” echoing CSS’s competitor’s name, Floridians for Solar Choice.

Today the state Supreme Court will hear arguments from David Guest, managing attorney for Earthjustice’s Florida office. The environmental law firm is representing three conservation groups that are challenging the CSS ballot measure that purports to give consumers the right to install solar panels on their homes.

But here’s the catch: Floridians already have the right to do this.

Guest says that under the Florida constitution, residents have the right to own and use property as long as that property has no adverse effects on others. The measure, which would amend the state constitution, attempts to trick voters by pretending to afford them a constitutional right they already have, he says, which is impermissible under Florida law.

The amendment’s language is misleading in more ways than one, says Guest. The amendment summary says that state and local governments will “ensure that consumers who do not choose to install solar are not required to subsidize the costs of backup power and electric grid access to those who do.” But the true meanings of some of these terms, including “subsidize” and “backup power,” Guest says, are not what they might seem to the lay reader.

While many might think “backup power” refers to gas generators, for example, the amendment goes on to define the term as electricity that the utility provides solar users at times when solar energy is unavailable, like nighttime.

Earthjustice’s legal brief also contends that the practice of net metering, when utilities pay solar users for excess energy generated by their solar panels at the same rate that the utility charges for its electricity, does not constitute a subsidy, as the amendment suggests.

“This is a fake amendment that was designed for the purpose of defeating the real one,” says Guest. “It’s simply a device to trick voters into putting the brakes on solar while believing they’re promoting it.”

The CSS amendment “is an outright lie under the guise of solar freedom,” says Debbie Dooley, head of Conservatives for Energy Freedom, a founding organization with FSC, and a Tea Party co-founder who has led successful organizing efforts in Georgia and South Carolina to expand third-party solar agreements.

The CSS petitioners have engaged in dishonest signature gathering, members of the conservation groups have found. FSC members encountered voters who had already signed CSS’s petition, thinking it was FSC’s.

Guest says he was approached by CSS petitioners in November who presented him with both measures, falsely claiming that one covered local jurisdictions and the other covered the state. He signed only the FSC petition, and just recently he called his election supervisor, who had no record of his signed petition.

Big Corporations Back “Consumer” Group

Consumers for Smart Solar is hardly a consumer advocacy organization. In fact, it’s quite the opposite. As of March 4, data from the Florida Division of Elections reveals that major utilities, trade organizations, and a Koch-funded nonprofit provided the vast majority of the more than $7.3 million raised by the group from 2015 through January of this year.

Florida Power & Light, the state’s largest utility, has contributed the most to CSS ($1.3 million), with Duke Energy close behind ($1.2 million).

The 60 Plus Association, a “social welfare” nonprofit funded by many groups backed by the billionaire Koch brothers, put in $1.1 million.

Other energy companies donating large sums were Tampa Electric Company ($1 million) and Gulf Power Company ($715,000), while the Partnership for Affordable Clean Energy ($126,000) and Powersouth Energy Cooperative ($60,000) contributed lesser sums. Mysterious “social welfare” nonprofit Let’s Preserve the American Dream gave $840,000, and other “social welfare” groups Checks and Balances for Economic Growth ($421,000), Florida Faith and Freedom Coalition ($175,000), and Floridians for Government Accountability ($62,000) also pitched in. The National Black Chamber of Commerce gave $100,000, and the Florida Hispanic Chamber of Commerce, $50,000.

The CSS website lists its leaders, a group of political insiders from the Democratic and Republican parties, including a Tea Party head, the president and CEO of the Florida State Hispanic Chamber of Commerce, and a member of the Board of Governors of the state’s university system.

As it turns out, two of CSS’s leaders are profiting from the campaign.

CSS paid $50,000 last year to the consulting firm of co-chairman Dick Batchelor, a former Democratic member of the Florida House, for management and communications consulting, while Batchelor gave only $100 to the CSS, according to campaign finance records.

The government relations firm of “coalition member” and former executive director of the Florida Democratic Party, Screven Watson, received over $25,000 from CSS last year for management and communications consulting and travel. Watson donated $25 to CSS.

Endorsements from black and Hispanic organizations may be the result of a lengthy campaign by Big Energy to “turn people of color against solar power,” documented by Brentin Mock. Corporations like Exxon have funded groups such as the National Black Chamber of Commerce and lobbied members of Congress.

The Edison Electric Institute, a trade association for electricity companies, has successfully converted some lawmakers of color against net metering. In addition to the chambers of commerce, the Florida state NAACP and the National Congress of Black Women are listed as endorsing organizations.

Fundraising by FSC couldn’t compete with the big money that major corporations and deep-pocked political groups poured into CSS, and this funding imbalance was one reason FSC didn’t get the required number of signatures to put its amendment on the 2016 ballot. The group plans to push for its amendment again in 2018.

FSC’s donor list is much longer than its competitor’s, with many small individual donations, but most of the $2.1 million it raised came from the Southern Alliance for Clean Energy Action Fund, the Alliance’s “social welfare” nonprofit arm.

Members of the solar industry have contributed, including Infinite Energy ($25,000), founding organization the Florida Solar Energy Industry Association ($2,900), and Brilliant Harvest ($2,500), but the corporate backing of FSC is nowhere near that of CSS. Conservatives for Energy Freedom pitched in $25,000, and wealthy Democratic donor Barbara Stiefel contributed $100,000.

While the utilities have ponied up large sums to fund the misleading ballot measure, they’ve spent far more over the years to sway the Florida legislature and governor, making it a tough climate for clean-energy advocates.

“The legislature is owned by the utilities,” former GOP state legislator Nancy Argenziano told Rolling Stone. “To me, it's extremely corrupt. The legislature takes millions from utilities, who make billions” because of decisions made by the Public Service Commission, a five-member board that regulates the utilities and is appointed by the governor and confirmed by the state Senate. “They get what they pay for.”

The effort to derail solar in Florida is one of many from big utilities around the country. Duke Energy has fought third-party sales in North Carolina, and utilities have gone after net metering in Arizona and Nevada. DeSmog will continue to monitor these developments in this series on The War On Solar and Renewable Energy.

Quoting 237. Barefootontherocks:

You're preaching to the choir. I believe I mentioned the survival aspect of the issue in a previous comment, probably on the previous blog, one that had more to do with climate change than this one does.

What exactly do you propose as immediate soulution(s) to reducing human-caused carbon emissions?

Phase out coal and oil burning and rainforest chopping in a year. All of it.
Maybe we get off lucky in that case (it won't remove the 400ppm nor additional warming, in first decades, so the corals are done for anyway).

It's not a choice. It's an ultimatum. Quit, or die.


Quoting 240. OKsky:



Somehow dismantle the ability for the fossil fuel industry to mislead people with PR that invents scientific controversy where none actually exists would be a good start. The doubt they create by taking advantage of people's science illiteracy is the only reason AGW is a political issue...and it being a political issue makes it harder to solve.
Like when they banned cigarette ads? I don't see much TV so I don't know what you mean for sure. Maybe you can point me out a youtube as a example of what you mean.

Economics will always be at the forefront of politics. The large economic issues surrounding fossil fuel use make it political. Yet there was very little mention of of AGW and climate issues in the debates. I will say once more, each of us can do something on a individual level - NOW. Again, I repeat myself, so...
Quoting 236. Barefootontherocks:

As I attempted to point out to cRRKampen and OKsky at comment 231, WE... THEY is the problem here, Rookie.

You also avoid the question I asked about smallening your own carbon footprint. Anyone who reads here knows those many commenters feel duty-bound to respond to those they perceive as "deniers." As long as they do so logically and without a personal attack or profanity, that's cool with me.

In your questions to me, you have assumed I am defending the "they" point of view. There is no evidence of that, and that is not what I am doing. I am looking for logic, civility and open minds from both "we" and "they." With these attributes in the discussion, the potential to reach successful solutions to reduce human-caused carbon emission is highly increased. Otherwise all you got's a lot of negative energy flying around that drives people away.

Kind of talk never changed over 20, 30, 40 years. The debate of 15 years ago is identical to that of now. The result is the Keeling Curve as we know it.
I'm done with the chatter.

(I see OKsky just made the same point, my thanks)
Quoting 156. hotroddan:


I can't even understand what you are trying to convey through your post. I also do not understand your need to attack me because I have a different point of view. THAT doesn't sound very logical.


You don't have a point of view. You have an unsubstantiated opinion based on hearsay and ignorance.

Science is not a forum of opinion. It is a forum of facts. If you can't substantiate your claims by facts then you have no argument in the realm of science.

This isn't an "attack". If you wish to support your hypothesis, then provide a factual basis for it. Conspiratorial nonsense is in no way, shape, or form a basis for scientific argument. Remarkable claims require remarkable evidence. The sciences that support AGW have been established and built upon for well over a century. Some random blog commenter crying conspiracy with absolutely zero research or facts to back up that claim is a far cry from the rock solid science one would need to demonstrate most of modern physics and chemistry are incorrect.
248. OKsky
Quoting 241. Barefootontherocks:

Forced to do? Hardly. Reducing your own carbon footprint by choice is what has been ahppening since the mid-70s in the US. "Regulation at a mass scale" will not happen without politicians whoa are able to compromise. But I repeat myself...

I like the idea of "carbon footprint" rationing, ala WW II commodities. Again, I mentioned this already in a precious (haha Freudian typo = previoius) comment, probably a blog back.

The part I bolded...
Oil companies employ scientists. What do you propose regarding oil companies? What would you (and anyone, please respond) propose to change the grip of fossil fuel?

I hope you recognize that each of us has the capability to reduce fossil fuel consumption, and that is the gist of my (still unanswered) original question to the board.


I think you misunderstood what I meant when I said "forced to". We are forced to because that is the only option to try to make a direct impact, however (which im sure your eyes will glaze over at this point...since its the same point i made earlier than didn't seem to sink in) where was i? However.... individual action isn't enough.. like at all... to the point that its just a pointless empty gesture.. as I said we need change at a much bigger scale.
What do I propose oil companies do? Take all the money they spend trying to maintain the status quo and spend it on research so they don't have to be oil companies anymore... hell, I would even (be) for them building nuclear. :D
In India alone,where the power can fail many tiimes a day,rooftop diesel generators are used as backup to the outage.

Using just these backup generators,which burn diesel, they alone could power all of Australia.

Think of the carbon they alone are adding yearly.




252. OKsky
Quoting 245. Barefootontherocks:

Like when they banned cigarette ads? I don't see much TV so I don't know what you mean for sure. Maybe you can point me out a youtube as a example of what you mean.

Economics will always be at the forefront of politics. The large economic issues surrounding fossil fuel use make it political. Yet there was very little mention of of AGW and climate issues in the debates. I will say once more, each of us can do something on a individual level - NOW. Again, I repeat myself, so...


All these talking points that deniers bring up are born out of oil industry PR. Next time you see someone mention sunspots or ocean currents ask them where they are getting their info. EVERYTIME it will lead you to some site put up by something like the "heritage foundation", "national review" or some other 501(c)(3) GOP think tank, usually funded by the Koch bros.... you will never end up looking at published science if you follow the sources. And yes, those tactics should be banned like cigarette ads....
Quoting 244. cRRKampen:


Phase out coal and oil burning and rainforest chopping in a year. All of it.
Maybe we get off lucky in that case (it won't remove the 400ppm nor additional warming, in first decades, so the corals are done for anyway).

It's not a choice. It's an ultimatum. Quit, or die.



That sounds good. The flip side, of course, is what will people use to heat their homes, and how will they pay for a heating stove that will work on the new form of energy? This is part of what I call the "small" economic issue of getting off fossil fuel.

Reduced consumer demand for rainforest chopped products would help reduce tree cutting. As regards banning rainforest cutting, seems there have been movements for decades aimed at saving rainforest. I don't know the issues well enough to know why the cutting continues. Maybe "big Forest" economic interest coupled with small small economic issues of the "local" who benefit monetarily? From what I've seen in my lifetime - and when I consider the trees chopped off the earth and the human population increase since Medieval times, especially since the Industrial Revolution - I'm afraid we have gone far beyond replacing the nearly-lost forest CO2 sink, not just in the Amazon basin but over the face of Earth.

Probably we'll die. A lot of us. Well, we all die anyway, but you know what I mean. Massive loss of human life could happen from climate change. Less developed areas with subsistence lifestyles will likely be more fortunate than highly populated places.
Quoting 244. cRRKampen:


Phase out coal and oil burning and rainforest chopping in a year. All of it.
Maybe we get off lucky in that case (it won't remove the 400ppm nor additional warming, in first decades, so the corals are done for anyway).

It's not a choice. It's an ultimatum. Quit, or die.





That sounds reasonable
Quoting 252. OKsky:



All these talking points that deniers bring up are born out of oil industry PR. Next time you see someone mention sunspots or ocean currents ask them where they are getting their info. EVERYTIME it will lead you to some site put up by something like the "heritage foundation", "national review" or some other 501(c)(3) GOP think tank, usually funded by the Koch bros.... you will never end up looking at published science if you follow the sources. And yes, those tactics should be banned like cigarette ads....
Your generalizations do not appeal to me. You and I think differently, and by that I don't mean "beliefs," I mean the way our minds work. I am not a joiner. I advocate eliminating division to sole solve problems. I also support a person or a corporation's free speech, even if the info may be considered shady. The problem you have been pointing out seems not that the "ads" or internet postings are incorrect from a scientific POV but that people chose to post them here and the possibility then exists that an "unthinking" reader might take them as truth. Most people have worse things to worry about.

If we could access click data, I'd bet we'd see more than the majority of wu users, members and non-members and probably not as many as used to, come to the wunderground for weather data and forecasts, not climate change discussion.

This has been a good morning discussion. I must run away now and burn some dead trees. :)
257. OKsky
Quoting 255. Barefootontherocks:

Your generalizations do not appeal to me. You and I think differently, and by that I don't mean "beliefs," I mean the way our minds work. I am not a joiner. I advocate eliminating division to sole problems. I also support a person or a corporation's free speech, even if the info may be considered shady. The problem you have been pointing out seems not that the "ads" or internet postings are incorrect from a scientific POV but that people chose to post them here and the possibility then exists that an "unthinking" reader might take them as truth. Most people have worse things to worry about.

If we could access click data, I'd bet we'd see more than the majority of wu users, members and non-members and probably not as many as used to, come to the wunderground for weather data and forecasts, not climate change discussion.

This has been a good morning discussion. I must run away now and burn some dead trees. :)


lol, My generalizations do not appeal to me either, but they are true.
If I was just making a baseless claim it would be very simple to debunk me with a just a single contrary example.
and yes, denier claims are incorrect from a scientific POV or else they would have published science to back themselves up with... Im guessing it was just you "thinking differently" that caused you to think I said something otherwise. ;)

It was nice chatting with ya... sry to anyone that found it annoying... welcome to the internet!
Also, Book burning is never the answer. <-- this is just a silly "burning dead trees" joke, btw. =P
As long as we are being frank about AGW today, and about the "spats" that believers and non-believers/denialists have (whether corporate interests with a fossil fuel profit motive or regular citizens like us on a blog or protesters), none of us on here (I don't think), or the general public, owns the tools of industry or fossil fuel giants around the Earth and the fact is that out current world is programmed for fossil fuel consumption.

All of the petty points that may people respond to in these arguments (what are you doing to reduce your footprint or why do you fly in a big jet or drive a muscle car instead of driving a Prius) are also often tinged with the I am smarter than you/more educated than you mentality and people lose their cool.  Not suggesting that reducing your personal footprint is a bad thing, to support your personal belief and perhaps shouting to the world about how much you are personally doing, but the real battle has to be waged at the corporate and government level.  The regular people like us have to back the scientists, continue to bring the science to light, and to continue to lobby and pressure companies and governments to change their policies and to get us to a renewable energy future and reduce emissions (if you really care about the future of your own descendants) if your main goal is to be proactive.

Climate  change is on the global radar (the changes are indisputable) and treaties are trying to address the issue but the real battle is whether we just continue to respond to a short-term crisis event (drought/flood/storm surge/etc), and continue to kick the can out to the future, or actually try to be pro-active about the issues.  Just noting, as one example, that regardless of what the Feds or a particular State might not being doing to address the issues,  the problem is often left in the hands of local governments like in the case of Miami and Miami Beach who are not only "reacting" to the sea-level/high tide issue with the infra-structure projects related to pumps and salt water intrusion measures in terms of  aquifers but looking at longer term engineering issues from  a pro-active standpoint.  

Just noting that I am past the point of trying to argue with the deniers and at the point of trying to support policies, and politicians, who understand the threat and want to do more than just kick the can ahead. That is what I at least owe to my children.          
Quoting 248. OKsky:



I think you misunderstood what I meant when I said "forced to". We are forced to because that is the only option to try to make a direct impact, however (which im sure your eyes will glaze over at this point...since its the same point i made earlier than didn't seem to sink in) where was i? However.... individual action isn't enough.. like at all... to the point that its just a pointless empty gesture.. as I said we need change at a much bigger scale.
What do I propose oil companies do? Take all the money they spend trying to maintain the status quo and spend it on research so they don't have to be oil companies anymore... hell, I would even (be) for them building nuclear. :D
Well, I am glad you cleared that up. Supports what I've been asking - what each individual is doing to small(en) his/her and family (if applicable) carbon footprint. Oh, wait, I see you said that's a "pointless, empty gesture." don't kid yourself. The "oil companies" know oil is limited, whether by regs or by nature. Betcha "they" are more ready for a transition off fossil fuel than the general public is. To me, nuclear is a worse alternative over a long period of time. Wind is good. Solar is great. And you know Boone Pickens is, right? If you truly live in OK, you know of him. He's a natural gas advocate, but also a wind power promoter.

So now you say it in words we all can understand, "Individual action is not enough." I (wrongly) assumed you realized by my comments on politics I also believe government needs to step in. And I further believe compromise on creative solutions is the only way to make that happen. Again, I would advocate for carbon footprint rationing.

I must end this discussion now. Thanks. Have a nice day.
And if you just want to be a pessimist about the whole issue of AGW and just talk about a doom scenario and about how the global corporate structure and man will never change, be my guest............................................. .......... 
Quoting 202. Misanthroptimist:

... most non-deniers opposed to geo-engineering are so opposed for reasons of cost, unintended consequences, or long-term efficacy.

I oppose it because it won't work on a global scale - any examples that prove me wrong?
Perhaps filling in or draining lakes might work if supported by proper research, but even for such a relatively small dimension I doubt it would happen according to plan. On a global scale we will never be able to gain and/or keep control, because the sheer complexity of all the issues involved will eventually overwhelm even the smartest finnish brain.
I have my opinions on AGW...and you have yours.
258. weathermanwannabe
4:42 PM GMT on November 04, 2016
a couple excellent points made in your comment. Also,
I'm gonna apply logic again. "Smarts" is an interpretation made that has nothing to do with an honest question.
To quote from your comment...
"All of the petty points that may people respond to in these arguments (what are you doing to reduce your footprint...) " To call this question "a petty point" suggests a person who might answer the question and doesn't

1) is doing nothing
and/or

2) believes even a small amount of energy savings multiplied by billions of humans would have no useful effect on CO2 emission
and/or

3) believes consumer demands, i.e. for more rang range in electric vehicles, has no useful effect (Consumer demand can have a large effect on fuel use. Take a look at the vehicle offerings by US car makers now vs. 5-8 years ago.)
and/or

4) has only a political agenda on the large scale
and/or

5) doesn't want to admit they won't give up their creature comforts for "the cause."
and/or

6) assumes, as in the case of your comment, that the person asking is one of "them" - a "denier."
I would suggest the opposite.
An individual who is doing something to reduce energy dependence is more realistic than one who takes the offense and will not answer the question. What keeps wu members from posting about their own energy-saving actions, and what makes them criticize the question? Seems like it would be a great blog topic even, where members could share their energy-saving ways.

I could probably think of more to add. Instead I will seize the word,

"Proactive."
Taking charge of your own situation is "proactive."
Complaining about politics and about people who don't believe science is reactive. Both the politics and the non-believers are part of reality. Neither is going away any time soon.

And now I am outta here.
Double Oops. (Trying to correct spellings in comment 263 and hit quote instead of modify.)
JeffMasters has created a new entry.
Quoting 266. WunderAlertBot:

JeffMasters has created a new entry.

Jeff Masters, really? ;)
268. OKsky
Quoting 265. Barefootontherocks:

Double Oops. (Trying to correct spellings in comment 263 and hit quote instead of modify.)

I just wanted to let you know that I have been thinking more about our discussion this morning.
Forgive me if I am wrong, but I take it that you tend to lean right politically and accept AGW despite the typical party line?
If so... then we actually have A LOT in common.
I admit that I lean to the left side of things, but I find myself at odds with many of the science related topics that "my side" likes to ignorantly rally against, evidence be damned.... gmos, nuclear power, the value of science based medicine.. for example.
Anyways... once I thought about how everything you were saying sorta fit with the "individual freedom" mythos of the Republicans, yet you are not a AGW denier.. it sorta clicked.
If I am wrong about my assumptions accept my apologies...
But if I am right, then I look forward to more discussions with you in the future about being at odds with "our own sides" wrt science issues.

PS: This was intended to be a PM, but it seems you have that feature switched off... so I hope you see this!
Quoting 207. SouthTampa:

Some people are utterly incapable of understanding the world without "beliefs", no matter how contradictory those beliefs are to reality.
Another one to my special list
Quoting 210. weathermanwannabe:

Good Morning; on the issue of AGW, we are past the point of a difference of opinion; it is a scientific fact that we are in an unprecedented warming period on Earth that can be traced to carbon emissions as the result of fossil fuel burning as the result of the modern industrial era.

There are lots of blogs out there for folks who do not believe in AGW but this blog represents the majority science view.  Some deniers, and trolls, just like to get a rise out of people on different sites just to stir up the pot.  Don't let the deniers get under you skin when they post on here.

Just ignore them and move on.
But Weather, why ruin a good weather blog with climate change speak, when you know people will argue over the same B* every time the subject is brought up. It will accomplish nothing and ruin a perfectly good weather blog. Doesn't Dr. Rood have a climate change blog, that everyone who wants to talk climate change speak can go to?
271. OKsky
Quoting 270. NaiveSun:

But Weather, why ruin a good weather blog with climate change speak, when you know people will argue over the same B* every time the subject is brought up. It will accomplish nothing and ruin a perfectly good weather blog. Doesn't Dr. Rood have a climate change blog, that everyone who wants to talk climate change speak can go to?


The latest Cat6 post is literally tagged "Climate Change Politics". Are you capable of saying anything that isn't demonstrably false?
Quoting 258. weathermanwannabe:

As long as we are being frank about AGW today, and about the "spats" that believers and non-believers/denialists have (whether corporate interests with a fossil fuel profit motive or regular citizens like us on a blog or protesters), none of us on here (I don't think), or the general public, owns the tools of industry or fossil fuel giants around the Earth and the fact is that out current world is programmed for fossil fuel consumption.

All of the petty points that may people respond to in these arguments (what are you doing to reduce your footprint or why do you fly in a big jet or drive a muscle car instead of driving a Prius) are also often tinged with the I am smarter than you/more educated than you mentality and people lose their cool.  Not suggesting that reducing your personal footprint is a bad thing, to support your personal belief and perhaps shouting to the world about how much you are personally doing, but the real battle has to be waged at the corporate and government level.  The regular people like us have to back the scientists, continue to bring the science to light, and to continue to lobby and pressure companies and governments to change their policies and to get us to a renewable energy future and reduce emissions (if you really care about the future of your own descendants) if your main goal is to be proactive.

Climate  change is on the global radar (the changes are indisputable) and treaties are trying to address the issue but the real battle is whether we just continue to respond to a short-term crisis event (drought/flood/storm surge/etc), and continue to kick the can out to the future, or actually try to be pro-active about the issues.  Just noting, as one example, that regardless of what the Feds or a particular State might not being doing to address the issues,  the problem is often left in the hands of local governments like in the case of Miami and Miami Beach who are not only "reacting" to the sea-level/high tide issue with the infra-structure projects related to pumps and salt water intrusion measures in terms of  aquifers but looking at longer term engineering issues from  a pro-active standpoint.  

Just noting that I am past the point of trying to argue with the deniers and at the point of trying to support policies, and politicians, who understand the threat and want to do more than just kick the can ahead. That is what I at least owe to my children.          
Hi Weather, you really want to do something to help the Earth, lets find a way to stop all the air and water pollution, as these two thing are number 2, and 3 on the list of the most harmful effects of what humans do to this planet. If you can solve these two problems, then this will go a long ways in solving problem 4. Know what problem 4 is, I will give you a hint, over population is the number 1 problem affecting this planet and until you find a way to correct problem 1, problems 2,3, and 4. will always be an issue. So lets get to work and solve problems 1,2, and 3, then we can move on to climate change problem 4.


Area forecast discussion
National Weather Service New Orleans la
336 am CST Mon Nov 7 2016

Discussion...
beneficial rains for the area are finally in the forecast for the
first half of the week as a weakening Central Plains low/trough
interacts with a northern stream upper trough that will move
across the northern plains today and amplify as it swings across the
Great Lakes and into eastern U.S. Tuesday into Wednesday. Moisture
will increase and deepen significantly across the region in
advance of this system with precipitable water values forecast to
approach 1.75 inches by later today.
Weak disturbances in the
southwest flow moving through the base of the trough will act on
this increasing moisture to bring enhanced rain chances to the
forecast area beginning today and continuing into Wednesday
during which time a weak inverted surface trough will traverse the
central Gulf Coast region. Radar early this morning was indicating
a few light showers in the coastal waters and across southwestern
sections of the forecast area. The better rain chances, however, will
hold off until late today and then continue through the day
Tuesday.
In general, rainfall totals across the area through mid
week are expected to range from three quarters of an inch to
around two inches or so, with the higher totals more likely near
the southeast Louisiana coast. The models have come into better
agreement with ending the rain on Wednesday from north to south.
Drier air will filter into the area for the the last half of the
week. Surface high pressure moving into the area in the wake of
the inverted trough will be reinforced by the end of the week as a
deep upper trough moves out of Canada and swings across the
eastern conus.
A closed upper low that forms this week over
northern Mexico and western Texas region may bring a chance of
rain back into the picture late in the weekend and for the
beginning of next week as it opens up into a trough and moves
east northeast into the lower and mid Mississippi valleys. 11







🎵🎼🎹🎷🎺