WunderBlog Archive » Category 6™

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

Study: 97% Agreement on Manmade Global Warming

By: Angela Fritz 7:36 PM GMT on May 16, 2013



The scientific agreement that climate change is happening, and that it's caused by human activity, is significant and growing, according to a new study published Thursday. The research, which is the most comprehensive analysis of climate research to date, found that 97.1% of the studies published between 1991 to 2011 that expressed a position on manmade climate change agreed that it was happening, and that it was due to human activity.

The study looked at peer reviewed research that mentioned climate change or global warming. Peer review is the way that scientific journals approve research papers that are submitted. In peer review, group of scientists that weren't involved in the study, but who are experts in the field, look at the research being submitted and have approved that it meets scientific process standards, and the standards of that journal.

In 2011, 521 of those peer reviewed papers agreed that climate change is real, and that human activity is the cause. Nine papers in 2011 disagreed.

John Cook, founder of skepticalscience.com and the lead author on the study, said the motivation for the analysis was the importance of scientific consensus in shaping public opinion, and therefore policy. "When people understand that climate scientists agree on human-caused global warming, they're more likely to support climate policy," Cook said. "But when the public are asked how many climate scientists agree that humans are causing global warming, the average answer is around 50%."

This "consensus gap" is what Cook and the research team is trying to close. "Raising awareness of the scientific consensus is a key step towards meaningful climate action," Cook said.

This study is not the first to examine the overwhelming agreement among climate scientists. Surveys of actively publishing climate scientists as well as analyses of climate change papers have shown similar results.

In 2004 Naomi Oreskes, Professor of History and Science Studies at the University of California San Diego, published what many scientists consider the seminal study on climate change consensus. She also co-authored the book Merchants of Doubt, which identifies and examines the similarities between today's climate change conversation and previous controversies over tobacco smoking, acid rain, and the hole in the ozone layer.

Oreskes believes that the public isn't aware of the consensus because of deliberate efforts to cause confusion. "There has been a systematic attempt to create the impression that scientists did not have a consensus, as part of a broader strategy to prevent federal government action," Oreskes said. "The public have been confused because people have been trying to confuse us."

The study published Thursday is the first to take so many papers and authors into account. Doing a search on the popular science article website Web of Science for "climate change" or "global warming" produces over 12,000 results. Of these, 4,014 papers were identified to state a position on climate change. Among those, 3,896, or 97.1% endorsed the consensus that climate change was happening and that it was caused by human activity.

In an interesting result, Cook and his team found that over time, scientists tend to express a position on climate change less and less in their research papers. This is likely a result of consensus -- that if a scientific conclusion has been reached, there's no need to continue to state that conclusion in new research. "Scientists tend to take the consensus for granted," says Cook, "perhaps not realizing that the public still think it's a 50:50 debate."

Climate Change

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

Tornadic cell

While the GFS nor its ensembles show a developed area of low pressure in the NW Caribbean, the ensembles do show a nice area of below average pressures in the NW Caribbean around the same time frame. It's still probably a little too early (May 26) and it probably won't be until AOA June 1st when we start having something to watch (if the MJO brings us anything at all).

Thanks, Angela.
Watch out Shreveport!
Link Shreveport, LA Radar
NOAA to issue 2013 Atlantic hurricane season outlook
on May 23



Excerpt:

NOAA will issue its initial outlook for the 2013 Atlantic hurricane season during a news conference at the NOAA Center for Weather and Climate Prediction in College Park, Md. FEMA will participate in the event to discuss the importance of personal preparedness for hurricane season. The six-month Atlantic hurricane season officially begins June 1.
Next week will be very rainy in PR and in most of the Caribbean.

AREA FORECAST DISCUSSION
NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE SAN JUAN PR
250 PM AST THU MAY 16 2013

.SYNOPSIS...UPPER TROUGH WILL CONTINUE TO MOVE THROUGH THE AREA
TODAY INTO TOMORROW AS IT WEAKENS. SURFACE HIGH PRESSURE WILL
REMAIN TO THE NORTH OF THE LOCAL ISLANDS THROUGH SATURDAY.
ENOUGH MOISTURE IS EXPECTED FOR THE NEXT SEVERAL DAYS TO HELP WITH
THE DEVELOPMENT OF SHOWERS AND THUNDERSTORMS EACH AFTERNOON FOR
THE NEXT SEVERAL DAYS.

&&

.DISCUSSION...SHOWERS AND THUNDERSTORMS DEVELOPED ACROSS PUERTO
RICO THIS AFTERNOON AND THIS ACTIVITY IS EXPECTED TO DIMINISH IN
THE EVENING HOURS. THEREAFTER...ISOLATED PASSING SHOWERS ARE
EXPECTED ACROSS THE LOCAL AREA AS MOISTURE DECREASES SLOWLY
OVERNIGHT. HOWEVER...AVAILABLE MOISTURE INCREASES ONCE AGAIN ON
FRIDAY AFTERNOON TO HELP WITH THE DEVELOPMENT OF SHOWERS AND
THUNDERSTORMS WHEN COMBINED WITH LOCAL EFFECTS AND DIURNAL
HEATING WITH THE MORE NUMEROUS SHOWERS EXPECTED TO OCCUR OVER THE
WESTERN INTERIOR AND WESTERN SECTIONS OF PUERTO RICO. HOWEVER...THE COVERAGE
AREA IS EXPECTED TO BE LESS THAN IT HAS BEEN FOR THE LAST FEW DAYS
DUE TO LESS AVAILABLE MOISTURE...ESPECIALLY IN THE MID LEVELS. THE
SAME COULD BE SAID FOR SATURDAY.

SUNDAY ONTO NEXT WEEK...MOISTURE INCREASES ONCE AGAIN AND
ACCORDING TO THE GFS MODEL...PRECIPITABLE WATER VALUES INCREASE
CLOSE TO 2 INCHES BY EARLY NEXT WEEK...STAYING AROUND 2 INCHES FOR
A GOOD PART OF NEXT WEEK. GFS MODEL ALSO HAS THE LOCAL ISLANDS
UNDER SOME FAIRLY CONSISTENT RAIN WITH THIS MOISTURE UNDER A
SOUTHEAST FLOW.

&&

.AVIATION...VFR CONDITIONS EXPECTED TO PREVAIL AT ALL TAF SITES
FOR THE NEXT 24 HRS...WITH BRIEF MVFR CONDITIONS POSSIBLE IN
SHRA/TSRA AT TJMZ/TJPS AND TJBQ THROUGH ABOUT 16/22Z. SURFACE
WINDS FROM THE EAST AT 10 TO 15 KTS.


&&

.MARINE...SMALL CRAFT SHOULD EXERCISE CAUTION STARTING LATE
TONIGHT AND TOMORROW ACROSS THE ATLANTIC OFFSHORE WATERS AS SEAS
ARE EXPECTED TO REACH 6 FEET. SEAS EXPECTED TO REACH UP TO 5 FEET
ON SATURDAY AND THEN INCREASE UP TO 6 FEET ON SUNDAY.


&&

.PRELIMINARY POINT TEMPS/POPS...
SJU 78 87 77 86 / 20 20 0 20
STT 78 88 78 88 / 20 20 10 20
updated Dr. Forbes Torcon Index..
this was his forecast earlier..he had to up the numbers
TODAY
Isolated severe thunderstorms in west and central NY, PA, MD, south OH, south IN, south IL, central MO. TORCON - 2. Isolated to scattered severe thunderstorms in central TX, south-central and southwest OK. TORCON - 3 north-central TX.


Thursday, May 16

Isolated severe thunderstorms and a couple of tornadoes under the upper low in northeast TX,
southeast OK, southwest AR, northwest LA. TORCON - 4 northeast TX.

Isolated severe thunder-
storms along the cold front in southeast WV, north and central VA, southeast MD. TORCON - 2
or less. Isolated severe thunderstorms in southwest SD, central NE. TORCON - 2 or less.
In other words 97% of scientists like government grants
Statement as of 2:46 PM CDT on May 16, 2013

... A Tornado Warning remains in effect until 300 PM CDT for Caddo and De Soto parishes...

At 238 PM CDT... National Weather Service meteorologists continued to detect a possible tornado.

his possible tornado was located near Mount Olive... or 13 miles southwest of Shreveport... moving southeast at 35 mph.

Damage has been reported near Waskom.

Other locations in the warning include but are not limited to Spring Ridge... Keithville... Stonewall and Forbing.

Precautionary/preparedness actions...

The safest place to be during a tornado is in a basement. Get under a workbench or other piece of sturdy furniture. If no basement is available... seek shelter on the lowest floor of the building in an interior hallway or room such as a closet. Use blankets or pillows to cover your body and always stay away from windows.

If in Mobile homes or vehicles... evacuate them and get inside a substantial shelter. If no shelter is available... lie flat in the nearest ditch or other low spot and cover your head with your hands.


Lat... Lon 3236 9404 3241 9404 3251 9399 3246 9368
3243 9367 3242 9369 3241 9367 3240 9369
3239 9367 3240 9365 3217 9379
time... Mot... loc 1943z 296deg 29kt 3237 9396


Thanks Angela
Well, looks like Alvin is starting to lose his grip. BIG win for the CMC, both in forecasting cyclogenesis and only moderate strengthening.
I wonder what the percentage is of scientists/scientific papers that are pro-AGW? Not sure if we've heard that one recently.
NHC saying Alvin won't become a hurricane.

Quoting MississippiWx:
I wonder what the percentage is of scientists/scientific papers that are pro-AGW? Not sure if we've heard that one recently.

Look at the chart in Angela's article...is that maybe 4%?
Quoting MississippiWx:
I wonder what the percentage is of scientists/scientific papers that are pro-AGW? Not sure if we've heard that one recently.


We find that 66.4% of abstracts expressed no position on AGW, 32.6% endorsed AGW, 0.7% rejected AGW and 0.3% were uncertain about the cause of global warming.
Quoting Chicklit:

Look at the chart in Angela's article...


That was a tongue-in-cheek statement. Pretty sure Dr. Masters had this same info last week, just a different source.
Quoting aburttschell:
In other words 97% of scientists like government grants

What does that have to do with a consensus upon which scientists agree 97% that man is contributing to warming the Globe?
For Monday.

Nice low, directly tapping moisture from the gulf. Hmmmm...

Quoting Chicklit:
Statement as of 2:46 PM CDT on May 16, 2013

... A Tornado Warning remains in effect until 300 PM CDT for Caddo and De Soto parishes...

At 238 PM CDT... National Weather Service meteorologists continued to detect a possible tornado.

his possible tornado was located near Mount Olive... or 13 miles southwest of Shreveport... moving southeast at 35 mph.

Damage has been reported near Waskom.

Other locations in the warning include but are not limited to Spring Ridge... Keithville... Stonewall and Forbing.

Precautionary/preparedness actions...

The safest place to be during a tornado is in a basement. Get under a workbench or other piece of sturdy furniture. If no basement is available... seek shelter on the lowest floor of the building in an interior hallway or room such as a closet. Use blankets or pillows to cover your body and always stay away from windows.

If in Mobile homes or vehicles... evacuate them and get inside a substantial shelter. If no shelter is available... lie flat in the nearest ditch or other low spot and cover your head with your hands.


Lat... Lon 3236 9404 3241 9404 3251 9399 3246 9368
3243 9367 3242 9369 3241 9367 3240 9369
3239 9367 3240 9365 3217 9379
time... Mot... loc 1943z 296deg 29kt 3237 9396


IS this the same system that hit texas last night?..if it is then folks along the northern gulf had better stay alert tonight...
Shreveport is getting smacked.
Quoting LargoFl:
IS this the same system that hit texas last night?..if it is then folks along the northern gulf had better stay alert tonight...
from the way it's turning looks like deja vu all over again just further east
Quoting Chicklit:
from the way it's turning looks like deja vu all over again just further east


I think we will see bigger stuff on Monday though

Thank you Angela.

A damaging tornado has been confirmed near Shreveport, possibly still on the ground.
Quoting Chicklit:
from the way it's turning looks like deja vu all over again just further east
oh boy, I sure hope folks in the path of this system stay alert to their local warnings
Alvin no longer meets the criteria to be considered a tropical cyclone according to ASCAT.

Good afternoon.

I put up a new video:

Tropical Tidbit for Thursday, May 16th
That Shreveport storm basically just got its own tornado watch.

Quoting TropicalAnalystwx13:
Alvin no longer meets the criteria to be considered a tropical cyclone according to ASCAT.



Figured that would happen. Just looks like a disturbance in the monsoon trough now.

Quoting Levi32:
Good afternoon.

I put up a new video:

Tropical Tidbit for Thursday, May 16th


Any opinion on what's going on with the MDR anomalies? I'm guessing it has to do with trade winds increasing to above average and causing evaporative cooling.
folks in Arkansas and Tenn has better stay alert as well.


MESOSCALE DISCUSSION 0656
NWS STORM PREDICTION CENTER NORMAN OK
1257 PM CDT THU MAY 16 2013

AREAS AFFECTED...CNTRL VA...SRN MD

CONCERNING...SEVERE POTENTIAL...WATCH POSSIBLE

VALID 161757Z - 162030Z

PROBABILITY OF WATCH ISSUANCE...40 PERCENT
Quoting aburttschell:
In other words 97% of scientists like government grants
No, it means that thousands of editors from 1,980 scientific journals around the globe secretly colluded on the biggest scientific scam of this century and the last one--and they managed to do so without anyone producing a single shred of evidence that such collusion happened! Darn you, underhanded and malevolently genius science journal editors! ;-)
Quoting Neapolitan:
No, it means that thousands of editors from 1,980 scientific journals around the globe secretly colluded on the biggest scientific scam of this century and the last one--and they managed to do so without anyone producing a single shred of evidence that such collusion happened! Darn you, underhanded and malevolently genius science journal editors! ;-)
U r so wicked... :o)
Quoting LargoFl:
oh boy, I sure hope folks in the path of this system stay alert to their local warnings

What happened in Texas yesterday was all over the news today, so I expect people are on the alert.
40. bwi
Quoting allahgore:



83% thought global cooling in the 1970's!


You see, there's this thing about science -- you have to back up your facts and assertions and opinions with replicable data and thoughtful analysis or experimentation. If you don't, your work will be rightfully criticized and discarded, or just ignored and superceded by better work that can be duplicated and that has predictive power.

However, on the Internet, you can just say whatever pops into your mind without ever having your evidence checked, or having any evidence at all.

So, what is your evidence for this assertion?
Quoting aburttschell:
In other words 97% of scientists like government grants


It's rather odd that you can't refute the evidence, so you make up something about government grants.

The myth you cite is widely debunked.

Try the "it's the sun" or "it's cosmic rays" line of denial. Better yet, the old standby "climate has changed before."

At least with those you can find attempts at evidence.

looks like it might deserve it.





Quoting MAweatherboy1:
That Shreveport storm basically just got its own tornado watch.

The storm damage in TX is astounding...
I'll be back later..I cant do the GW/AGW arguments..I just ate lunch..I mean its not like there any dangerous weather to discuss..

SPC added another slight risk for today



SPC AC 161951

DAY 1 CONVECTIVE OUTLOOK
NWS STORM PREDICTION CENTER NORMAN OK
0251 PM CDT THU MAY 16 2013

VALID 162000Z - 171200Z

...THERE IS A SLGT RISK OF SVR TSTMS ACROSS PARTS OF THE CNTRL HIGH
PLAINS...

...THERE IS A SLGT RISK OF SVR TSTMS ACROSS PARTS OF THE ARKLATEX...

...THERE IS A SLGT RISK OF SVR TSTMS OVER PARTS OF VA...

SEVERAL MINOR MODIFICATIONS HAVE BEEN APPLIED TO 1630Z
OUTLOOK...NAMELY TO INCREASE SEVERE PROBS ACROSS THE CNTRL HIGH
PLAINS AND TO EXPAND SEVERE THREAT ACROSS PARTS OF NRN LA.
OTHERWISE...SEVERE PROBABILITIES HAVE BEEN ADJUSTED OVER THE MIDDLE
ATLANTIC TO BETTER REFLECT ONGOING THREAT.

Quoting MAweatherboy1:
Yikes!
Thank you so much Angela....I do agree with you ,and the other scientists. But, It seems to hit a bad note with many, and, many seem to become offensive here if there is any doubt at all on this subject. A very touchy subject it is.
Quoting ncstorm:
I'll be back later..I cant do the GW/AGW arguments..I just ate lunch..I mean its not like there any dangerous weather to discuss..

SPC added another slight risk for today



SPC AC 161951

DAY 1 CONVECTIVE OUTLOOK
NWS STORM PREDICTION CENTER NORMAN OK
0251 PM CDT THU MAY 16 2013

VALID 162000Z - 171200Z

...THERE IS A SLGT RISK OF SVR TSTMS ACROSS PARTS OF THE CNTRL HIGH
PLAINS...

...THERE IS A SLGT RISK OF SVR TSTMS ACROSS PARTS OF THE ARKLATEX...

...THERE IS A SLGT RISK OF SVR TSTMS OVER PARTS OF VA...

SEVERAL MINOR MODIFICATIONS HAVE BEEN APPLIED TO 1630Z
OUTLOOK...NAMELY TO INCREASE SEVERE PROBS ACROSS THE CNTRL HIGH
PLAINS AND TO EXPAND SEVERE THREAT ACROSS PARTS OF NRN LA.
OTHERWISE...SEVERE PROBABILITIES HAVE BEEN ADJUSTED OVER THE MIDDLE
ATLANTIC TO BETTER REFLECT ONGOING THREAT.



Same here. Climate change/Global warming stuff is not for me. Cleburne torando rated EF-3, btw.
Quoting MississippiWx:


Any opinion on what's going on with the MDR anomalies? I'm guessing it has to do with trade winds increasing to above average and causing evaporative cooling.


Well trade winds have averaged near-normal over the last week, which relative to the weaker than normal trades before that probably allowed some cooling. There have also been some negative OLR anomalies in the MDR during this time.

Zonal wind anomaly May 7-14:



OLR anomaly May 7-14:

...A TORNADO WARNING REMAINS IN EFFECT UNTIL 330 PM CDT FOR
BOSSIER...CADDO AND DE SOTO PARISHES...

AT 312 PM CDT...NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE METEOROLOGISTS CONTINUED TO
DETECT A POSSIBLE TORNADO. THIS TORNADO WAS LOCATED NEAR FRIERSON...
OR 12 MILES SOUTHEAST OF SHREVEPORT...MOVING EAST AT 30 MPH.

OTHER LOCATIONS IN THE WARNING INCLUDE BUT ARE NOT LIMITED TO
ROBSON...TAYLORTOWN AND ELM GROVE. LARGE HAIL AND WIDESPREAD DAMAGE
TO TREES AND POWERLINES HAS BEEN REPORTED WITH THIS STORM.


PRECAUTIONARY/PREPAREDNESS ACTIONS...

THE SAFEST PLACE TO BE DURING A TORNADO IS IN A BASEMENT. GET UNDER A
WORKBENCH OR OTHER PIECE OF STURDY FURNITURE. IF NO BASEMENT IS
AVAILABLE...SEEK SHELTER ON THE LOWEST FLOOR OF THE BUILDING IN AN
INTERIOR HALLWAY OR ROOM SUCH AS A CLOSET. USE BLANKETS OR PILLOWS TO
COVER YOUR BODY AND ALWAYS STAY AWAY FROM WINDOWS.

IF IN MOBILE HOMES OR VEHICLES...EVACUATE THEM AND GET INSIDE A
SUBSTANTIAL SHELTER. IF NO SHELTER IS AVAILABLE...LIE FLAT IN THE
NEAREST DITCH OR OTHER LOW SPOT AND COVER YOUR HEAD WITH YOUR HANDS.

&&

LAT...LON 3226 9386 3244 9375 3242 9350 3223 9359
3223 9360 3221 9360 3215 9362
TIME...MOT...LOC 2013Z 288DEG 28KT 3231 9371

$$

12
Quoting TropicalAnalystwx13:
Alvin no longer meets the criteria to be considered a tropical cyclone according to ASCAT.

As fast as it develop it rapidly dissipate.what a storm.
Quoting Levi32:


Well trade winds have averaged near-normal over the last week, which relative to the weaker than normal trades before that probably allowed some cooling. There have also been some negative OLR anomalies in the MDR during this time.

Zonal wind anomaly May 7-14:



OLR anomaly May 7-14:

OLR WHAT?
Quoting PalmBeachWeather:
Thank you so much Angela....I do agree with you ,and the other scientists. But, It seems to hit a bad note with many, and, many seem to become offensive here if there is any doubt at all on this subject. A very touchy subject it is.
Thanks Baha
Quoting bwi:


You see, there's this thing about science -- you have to back up your facts and assertions and opinions with replicable data and thoughtful analysis or experimentation. If you don't, your work will be rightfully criticized and discarded, or just ignored and superceded by better work that can be duplicated and that has predictive power.

However, on the Internet, you can just say whatever pops into your mind without ever having your evidence checked, or having any evidence at all.

So, what is your evidence for this assertion?



1972 and 1974 National Science Board [edit]

The National Science Board's Patterns and Perspectives in Environmental Science report of 1972 discussed the cyclical behavior of climate, and the understanding at the time that the planet was entering a phase of cooling after a warm period. "Judging from the record of the past interglacial ages, the present time of high temperatures should be drawing to an end, to be followed by a long period of considerably colder temperatures leading into the next glacial age some 20,000 years from now."[27] But it also continued; "However, it is possible, or even likely, that human interference has already altered the environment so much that the climatic pattern of the near future will follow a different path."[27]

The Board's report of 1974, Science And The Challenges Ahead, continued on this theme. "During the last 20-30 years, world temperature has fallen, irregularly at first but more sharply over the last decade."[28] However discussion of cyclic glacial periods does not feature in this report. Instead it is the role of man that is central to the report's analysis. "The cause of the cooling trend is not known with certainty. But there is increasing concern that man himself may be implicated, not only in the recent cooling trend but also in the warming temperatures over the last century".[28] The report can not conclude whether carbon dioxide in warming, or agricultural and industrial pollution in cooling, are factors in the recent climatic changes, noting; "Before such questions as these can be resolved, major advances must be made in understanding the chemistry and physics of the atmosphere and oceans, and in measuring and tracing particulates through the system."[29]
global warming is happening
and man is the cause of it
therefore we will suffer its wrath
the greatest because of it

Not sure if anybody posted this, but the tornado that hit Cleburne has been given a preliminary rating of an EF3.

NWS Fort Worth
#BREAKING: #Cleburne TX tornado has been given a preliminary EF-3 rating. The most significant damage was just E of Lake Cleburne.


NWS also confirmed an EF1 in Parker County.

NWS Fort Worth
The Millsap Tornado (Parker County) has been rated an EF1. #txwx
Quoting bwi:


You see, there's this thing about science -- you have to back up your facts and assertions and opinions with replicable data and thoughtful analysis or experimentation. If you don't, your work will be rightfully criticized and discarded, or just ignored and superceded by better work that can be duplicated and that has predictive power.

However, on the Internet, you can just say whatever pops into your mind without ever having your evidence checked, or having any evidence at all.

So, what is your evidence for this assertion?






974 Time Magazine article [edit]

While these discussions were ongoing in scientific circles, other accounts appeared in the popular media. In their June 24, 1974 issue, Time presented an article titled Another Ice Age? that noted "the atmosphere has been growing gradually cooler for the past three decades" but noted that "Some scientists... think that the cooling trend may be only temporary" [32]

1975 Newsweek article [edit]

An April 28, 1975 article in Newsweek magazine was titled "The Cooling World",[33] it pointed to "ominous signs that the Earth's weather patterns have begun to change" and pointed to "a drop of half a degree [Fahrenheit] in average ground temperatures in the Northern Hemisphere between 1945 and 1968." The article claimed "The evidence in support of these predictions [of global cooling] has now begun to accumulate so massively that meteorologists are hard-pressed to keep up with it." The Newsweek article did not state the cause of cooling; it stated that "what causes the onset of major and minor ice ages remains a mystery" and cited the NAS conclusion that "not only are the basic scientific questions largely unanswered, but in many cases we do not yet know enough to pose the key questions."
Yesterday is a good example of why you should be prepared for severe weather and tornadoes at any time, regardless of the magnitude forecast. Yesterday was "only" a slight risk with a 5% unhatched tornado probability, yet we ended up with two significant tornadoes -- an EF3 and EF4 (both preliminary) -- and many other, weaker ones. It's also a good example of why the Storm Prediction Center needs to change their outlook categories. On Facebook I've seen posts saying "it was only a slight risk", and the individuals thought that meant there were only going to be a slight probability of severe weather.
Quoting PalmBeachWeather:
Thanks Baha
You're welcome. Just think we can disagree without being rude to each other.

However, sly comments are the rule rather than the exception.... lol...
Gee, I don't see anything about your 83% claim there.
Be gone, troll.

Quoting allahgore:



1972 and 1974 National Science Board [edit]

The National Science Board's Patterns and Perspectives in Environmental Science report of 1972 discussed the cyclical behavior of climate, and the understanding at the time that the planet was entering a phase of cooling after a warm period. "Judging from the record of the past interglacial ages, the present time of high temperatures should be drawing to an end, to be followed by a long period of considerably colder temperatures leading into the next glacial age some 20,000 years from now."[27] But it also continued; "However, it is possible, or even likely, that human interference has already altered the environment so much that the climatic pattern of the near future will follow a different path."[27]

The Board's report of 1974, Science And The Challenges Ahead, continued on this theme. "During the last 20-30 years, world temperature has fallen, irregularly at first but more sharply over the last decade."[28] However discussion of cyclic glacial periods does not feature in this report. Instead it is the role of man that is central to the report's analysis. "The cause of the cooling trend is not known with certainty. But there is increasing concern that man himself may be implicated, not only in the recent cooling trend but also in the warming temperatures over the last century".[28] The report can not conclude whether carbon dioxide in warming, or agricultural and industrial pollution in cooling, are factors in the recent climatic changes, noting; "Before such questions as these can be resolved, major advances must be made in understanding the chemistry and physics of the atmosphere and oceans, and in measuring and tracing particulates through the system."[29]
Quoting SouthernIllinois:

What does that have to do with a consensus upon which scientists agree 97% that man is contributing to warming the Globe?

It doesn't have anything to do with it, but some have the bizarre notion that the only grants ever offered by the federal government are to study climate change, and you only get them if you say in advance that you "believe" in the enhanced greenhouse effect due to human activities.
Quoting Angela Fritz:
In an interesting result, Cook and his team found that over time, scientists tend to express a position on climate change less and less in their research papers. This is likely a result of consensus -- that if a scientific conclusion has been reached, there's no need to continue to state that conclusion in new research. "Scientists tend to take the consensus for granted," says Cook, "perhaps not realizing that the public still think it's a 50:50 debate."
That's a great point. As I read somewhere else today, certain accepted scientific facts don't generally need to be restated in every single paper that's published--for instance, few papers dealing with advanced nuclear physics begin, "Everything is made up of atoms, which are really, really small". But so long as there remains so much pushback by an anti-science crowd dedicated to denying the truth of climate change, perhaps papers should state those facts. That would be sad, but understandable...
Gotta run. Will be back later tonight...
Quoting evilpenguinshan:
Gee, I don't see anything about your 83% claim there.
Be gone, troll.

Currently, the concern that cooler temperatures would continue, and perhaps at a faster rate, has been observed to be incorrect by the IPCC.[7] More has to be learned about climate, but the growing records have shown that the cooling concerns of 1975 have not been borne out.

As for the prospects of the end of the current interglacial (again, valid only in the absence of human perturbations)[citation needed]: it isn't true that interglacials have previously only lasted about 10,000 years; and Milankovitch-type calculations indicate that the present interglacial would probably continue for tens of thousands of years naturally.[42] Other estimates (Loutre and Berger, based on orbital calculations) put the unperturbed length of the present interglacial at 50,000 years.[43] Berger (EGU 2005 presentation) believes that the present CO2 perturbation will last long enough to suppress the next glacial cycle entirely.

As the NAS report indicates, scientific knowledge regarding climate change was more uncertain than it is today. At the time that Rasool and Schneider wrote their 1971 paper, climatologists had not yet recognized the significance of greenhouse gases other than water vapor and carbon dioxide, such as methane, nitrous oxide, and chlorofluorocarbons.[44] Early in that decade, carbon dioxide was the only widely studied human-influenced greenhouse gas. The attention drawn to atmospheric gases in the 1970s stimulated many discoveries in future decades. As the temperature pattern changed, global cooling was of waning interest by 1979.[36]


You are right it's higher than 83% in the 1970's




Quoting TropicalAnalystwx13:
Yesterday is a good example of why you should be prepared for severe weather and tornadoes at any time, regardless of the magnitude forecast. Yesterday was "only" a slight risk with a 5% unhatched tornado probability, yet we ended up with two significant tornadoes -- an EF3 and EF4 (both preliminary) -- and many other, weaker ones. It's also a good example of why the Storm Prediction Center needs to change their outlook categories. On Facebook I've seen posts saying "it was only a slight risk", and the individuals thought that meant there were only going to be a slight probability of severe weather.

In what way do they need to change their outlook categories? A forecast shouldn't necessarily be judged by the outcome, but also by the information available at forecast issuance. If the atmosphere looked like it was not favorable for a widespread severe outbreak, then a slight risk was warranted.
Keep in mind, there are many days when some pretty hefty severe weather can occur, not because of the predictable synoptic conditions, but by something microscale... something as simple as intersecting outflow boundaries. Look at the Jarrel, TX, tornado as an example.
I think there were way more than just 5 tornado reports yesterday....

Quoting SouthernIllinois:

What does that have to do with a consensus upon which scientists agree 97% that man is contributing to warming the Globe?


That's exactly where one has either to re-evaluate one's position, or go down the rabbit-hole of conspiracist ideation.

The very idea of a giant cabal of geoscientists pulling off any kind of conspiracy just makes me laugh. That particular community is just too full of individualists and contrarians.
There was mention of the internet as a tool for information... INDEED IT IS. but Be weary... Anyone,anytime can make a post that is so believeable, but so full of ****.Myself, I could post about the mating habits of the cicada and everyone would think I really know what the heck I'm talkin' bout... Pictures and all.I have no idea about cicadas except they keep me awake at certain times of the year..... That being said, If there is a post that seems reasonable, get a second, third, fourth,and fith opinion...bwi, great post.
Instead of wasting all that blog space, why not just link to the wikipedia article you are copy-pasting?

Quoting allahgore:
Quoting ScottLincoln:

In what way do they need to change their outlook categories? A forecast shouldn't necessarily be judged by the outcome, but also by the information available at forecast issuance. If the atmosphere look like it was not favorable for a widespread severe outbreak, then a slight risk was warranted.
Keep in mind, there are many days when some pretty hefty severe weather can occur, not because of the predictable synoptic conditions, but by something microscale... something as simple as intersecting outflow boundaries. Look at the Jarrel, TX, tornado as an example.

Because it, as I've given an example of, gives people in the warned areas a false sense of security. Even my parents do it...'we're in a slight risk? won't be too bad'. Sure, it's a fine term for those of us who actually know what it means, but one of the biggest goals of the Storm Prediction Center is to warn the public.
Quoting evilpenguinshan:
Instead of wasting all that blog space, why not just link to the wikipedia article you are copy-pasting?

One species of penguins can actually fly
I'm hoping we won't see tornadoes quite as severe as yesterday's tornadoes, but tornadoes seem likely during this upcoming severe weather event.

Day 3 (Saturday)


Day 4 & 5 (Sunday and Monday)
Who started the global cooling myth?

In 2008 climate scientists reviewed scientific papers on global warming from 1965-1979 and found 7 that predicted global cooling and 44 that predicted global warming. In other words papers predicting warming outnumbered those predicting cooling by a margin of more than 6 to 1. Claims that in the 1970s the scientific community was predicting global cooling are hoaxes.
[citation needed]

Quoting PalmBeachWeather:
One species of penguins can actually fly
Quoting evilpenguinshan:
Instead of wasting all that blog space, why not just link to the wikipedia article you are copy-pasting?

We all waste blog space penguin.... Nature of the beast... But I do love the "Madagascar" animated movies.... Sorry for the waste
Quoting aburttschell:
In other words 97% of scientists like government grants


4 out of 5 dentists prefer Trident too.

I'm just not telling you which 5 dentists :)
This isn't new information and the results aren't surprising.

1) Papers which write dissenting opinions on climate change do not pass the peer review process and, therefore, would not show up in this study. (Also, papers supporting the consensus with questionable research, and unsubstantiated findings and conclusions have passed the peer review process and would show up on this study).

2) Studies which will/will likely support the consensus are much more likely to receive funding. AGW is a popular and sexy topic right now in politics and science and is, therefore, more likely to get funded than a funding request from a known skeptic on the 'Effect of ocean cycles on Global Temperatures.'

3) Scientists who identify as 'climate scientists' and, therefore, would write papers about the climate are already convinced that the null hyptothesis is that humans are warming the planet. Therefore, anything they find during their study that does not explicitly refute that assumption is evidence of human induced climate change. Example:

Findings: We observed a 10% reduction in marine life diversiy in this section of ocean over the past 20 years. This section of ocean has also warmed by 1 degree in the same time period.

Conclusion: Human induced climate change has caused a 10% reduction in marine life diversity for the section of ocean studied. Further warming of 2 degrees by the year 2100 could cause an additional 20% reduction in marine life diversity.

4) If the science supporting global warming is so obvious and so robust, why do we continue to do subsequent studies trying to convince people that there is a scientific consensus? I am a skeptic and even I know that a majority of those claiming to be climate scientists agree with the consensus. However, as a skeptic. I don't want to take the word of others - I want something I can look at -- that I can understand. It's not good enough to say:
-The Earth has warmed
-CO2 has risen
-CO2 causes a greenhouse effect
-Humans burn fossil fuels which emit CO2
Therefore, humans are causing an increase in atmospheric CO2 which is warming and will continue to warm the climate. A warming Earth will lead to a multitude of positive feedbacks which will result in catastrophy.

In my opinion, there are too many logical leaps in that simple statement.
-What are all the possible reasons the Earth may have warmed? Do we even know them all, much less studied them in depth?
-Why has CO2 risen? Could there be other reasons? Can you prove with certainty that humans are responsible for all of the CO2 increase?
-Does the CO2 greenhouse effect observed in small scale experience work the same way in a large, complex system such as the Earth? If it does, how can you know for sure what the amplitude of such of an effect is? What are the effects of the diminishing returns of increased CO2 (each doubling produces less warming overall).
-How do we know the effect and direction of all the climate feedbacks? Since runaway positive feedbacks are necessary for the climate models to reach >1-2 degrees of warming, this is very important. How do we know the known feedbacks will work as expected, even with temperatures higher than current? How many feedbacks are there that we don't know a lot about? What about the feedbacks we don't know anything about?

You can prove all day that the Earth has warmed, that CO2 is going up and that humans emit CO2. What I need, to be comfortable with the concept, is more to tie it all together.
BULLETIN
TROPICAL STORM ALVIN ADVISORY NUMBER 6
NWS NATIONAL HURRICANE CENTER MIAMI FL EP012013
200 PM PDT THU MAY 16 2013

...ALVIN STRUGGLING...
...MAY NOT SURVIVE AS A TROPICAL CYCLONE FOR MUCH LONGER...


SUMMARY OF 200 PM PDT...2100 UTC...INFORMATION
----------------------------------------------
LOCATION...9.5N 109.1W
ABOUT 730 MI...1175 KM SSW OF MANZANILLO MEXICO
MAXIMUM SUSTAINED WINDS...45 MPH...75 KM/H
PRESENT MOVEMENT...WNW OR 285 DEGREES AT 12 MPH...19 KM/H
MINIMUM CENTRAL PRESSURE...1005 MB...29.68 INCHES
Quoting Neapolitan:
That's a great point. As I read somewhere else today, certain accepted scientific facts don't generally need to be restated in every single paper that's published--for instance, few papers dealing with advanced nuclear physics begin, "Everything is made up of atoms, which are really, really small". But so long as there remains so much pushback by an anti-science crowd dedicated to denying the truth of climate change, perhaps papers should state those facts. That would be sad, but understandable...


If it were only anti-science, how do 3% of scientists not agree?
Quoting oracle28:


4 out of 5 dentists prefer Trident too.

I'm just not telling you which 5 dentists :)
You wasting blog space again oracle? LOL
Quoting evilpenguinshan:
I won't bring up the waste of blog space penguin...You must be reading my mind
New NHC forecast on Alvin doesn't show dissipation until 96 hours, but it notes advisories could be ended at any time if the current trend continues. I would say that's probably the more likely scenario. It's very hard to distinguish a tropical cyclone within this:

Excellent post, Angela.

I considered discussing some of your points in the context of the psychology of climate (AGW/CC) denial, a legitimate field of study in what is sometimes referred to as eco-psychology. However, I don't want to make anyone whine and cry.

Quoting trumpman84:
This isn't new information and the results aren't surprising.

1) Papers which write dissenting opinions on climate change do not pass the peer review process and, therefore, would not show up in this study. (Also, papers supporting the consensus with questionable research, and unsubstantiated findings and conclusions have passed the peer review process and would show up on this study).

2) Studies which will/will likely support the consensus are much more likely to receive funding. AGW is a popular and sexy topic right now in politics and science and is, therefore, more likely to get funded than a funding request from a known skeptic on the 'Effect of ocean cycles on Global Temperatures.'

3) Scientists who identify as 'climate scientists' and, therefore, would write papers about the climate are already convinced that the null hyptothesis is that humans are warming the planet. Therefore, anything they find during their study that does not explicitly refute that assumption is evidence of human induced climate change. Example:

Findings: We observed a 10% reduction in marine life diversiy in this section of ocean over the past 20 years. This section of ocean has also warmed by 1 degree in the same time period.

Conclusion: Human induced climate change has caused a 10% reduction in marine life diversity for the section of ocean studied. Further warming of 2 degrees by the year 2100 could cause an additional 20% reduction in marine life diversity.

4) If the science supporting global warming is so obvious and so robust, why do we continue to do subsequent studies trying to convince people that there is a scientific consensus? I am a skeptic and even I know that a majority of those claiming to be climate scientists agree with the consensus. However, as a skeptic. I don't want to take the word of others - I want something I can look at -- that I can understand. It's not good enough to say:
-The Earth has warmed
-CO2 has risen
-CO2 causes a greenhouse effect
-Humans burn fossil fuels which emit CO2
Therefore, humans are causing an increase in atmospheric CO2 which is warming and will continue to warm the climate. A warming Earth will lead to a multitude of positive feedbacks which will result in catastrophy.

In my opinion, there are too many logical leaps in that simple statement.
-What are all the possible reasons the Earth may have warmed? Do we even know them all, much less studied them in depth?
-Why has CO2 risen? Could there be other reasons? Can you prove with certainty that humans are responsible for all of the CO2 increase?
-Does the CO2 greenhouse effect observed in small scale experience work the same way in a large, complex system such as the Earth? If it does, how can you know for sure what the amplitude of such of an effect is? What are the effects of the diminishing returns of increased CO2 (each doubling produces less warming overall).
-How do we know the effect and direction of all the climate feedbacks? Since runaway positive feedbacks are necessary for the climate models to reach >1-2 degrees of warming, this is very important. How do we know the known feedbacks will work as expected, even with temperatures higher than current? How many feedbacks are there that we don't know a lot about? What about the feedbacks we don't know anything about?

You can prove all day that the Earth has warmed, that CO2 is going up and that humans emit CO2. What I need, to be comfortable with the concept, is more to tie it all together.



Do we know how the whole universe works? If it's such settled science why are we still using tax dollars for more studies? Why not use that money to fix the problem?
I find it interesting that Angela and John Cook both claim that the Cook et al. 2013 paper supports that there is any sort of consensus.

From the press release, we have this quote:

From the 11 994 papers, 32.6 per cent endorsed AGW, 66.4 per cent stated no position on AGW, 0.7 per cent rejected AGW and in 0.3 per cent of papers, the authors said the cause of global warming was uncertain.

Less than a third of the papers analyzed in the paper supported human caused global warming. How is a consensus of any sort supposed to be derived from that?
Quoting PalmBeachWeather:
You wasting blog space again oracle? LOL


Nah, I use ONLY 100% recycled electrons
Quoting ScottLincoln:

In what way do they need to change their outlook categories? A forecast shouldn't necessarily be judged by the outcome, but also by the information available at forecast issuance. If the atmosphere look like it was not favorable for a widespread severe outbreak, then a slight risk was warranted.
Keep in mind, there are many days when some pretty hefty severe weather can occur, not because of the predictable synoptic conditions, but by something microscale... something as simple as intersecting outflow boundaries. Look at the Jarrel, TX, tornado as an example.


This is something most people just cannot comprehend - good decisions can lead to bad outcomes and, seemingly more frequent, bad decisions lead to good outcomes. The ONLY way to judge the quality of a decision is to examine the information on which that decision was based. Looking at the outcomes really has no bearing on the issue.

Quoting trumpman84:
This isn't new information and the results aren't surprising.

1) Papers which write dissenting opinions on climate change do not pass the peer review process and, therefore, would not show up in this study. (Also, papers supporting the consensus with questionable research, and unsubstantiated findings and conclusions have passed the peer review process and would show up on this study).

2) Studies which will/will likely support the consensus are much more likely to receive funding. AGW is a popular and sexy topic right now in politics and science and is, therefore, more likely to get funded than a funding request from a known skeptic on the 'Effect of ocean cycles on Global Temperatures.'

3) Scientists who identify as 'climate scientists' and, therefore, would write papers about the climate are already convinced that the null hyptothesis is that humans are warming the planet. Therefore, anything they find during their study that does not explicitly refute that assumption is evidence of human induced climate change. Example:

Findings: We observed a 10% reduction in marine life diversiy in this section of ocean over the past 20 years. This section of ocean has also warmed by 1 degree in the same time period.

Conclusion: Human induced climate change has caused a 10% reduction in marine life diversity for the section of ocean studied. Further warming of 2 degrees by the year 2100 could cause an additional 20% reduction in marine life diversity.

4) If the science supporting global warming is so obvious and so robust, why do we continue to do subsequent studies trying to convince people that there is a scientific consensus? I am a skeptic and even I know that a majority of those claiming to be climate scientists agree with the consensus. However, as a skeptic. I don't want to take the word of others - I want something I can look at -- that I can understand. It's not good enough to say:
-The Earth has warmed
-CO2 has risen
-CO2 causes a greenhouse effect
-Humans burn fossil fuels which emit CO2
Therefore, humans are causing an increase in atmospheric CO2 which is warming and will continue to warm the climate. A warming Earth will lead to a multitude of positive feedbacks which will result in catastrophy.

In my opinion, there are too many logical leaps in that simple statement.
-What are all the possible reasons the Earth may have warmed? Do we even know them all, much less studied them in depth?
-Why has CO2 risen? Could there be other reasons? Can you prove with certainty that humans are responsible for all of the CO2 increase?
-Does the CO2 greenhouse effect observed in small scale experience work the same way in a large, complex system such as the Earth? If it does, how can you know for sure what the amplitude of such of an effect is? What are the effects of the diminishing returns of increased CO2 (each doubling produces less warming overall).
-How do we know the effect and direction of all the climate feedbacks? Since runaway positive feedbacks are necessary for the climate models to reach >1-2 degrees of warming, this is very important. How do we know the known feedbacks will work as expected, even with temperatures higher than current? How many feedbacks are there that we don't know a lot about? What about the feedbacks we don't know anything about?

You can prove all day that the Earth has warmed, that CO2 is going up and that humans emit CO2. What I need, to be comfortable with the concept, is more to tie it all together.
Every one of these points has been addressed a thousand times. A million times. The thing is, I or anyone else could take the time to patiently answer each one in detail, complete with footnotes and citations and links to peer-reviewed papers--yet to the pretend "skeptic", that wouldn't make a lick of difference, and the effort would be wasted. (Believe me: I've tried.) That's because such fake "skeptics" aren't the least bit interested in finding out the truth through rigorous examination and experimentation; they're interested only in those data that sustain their preconceived notions. If someone wants to believe that scientific articles that DON"T support climate change theory aren't being published because of some global conspiracy and not because there simply are not very many of them, no amount of actual data is going to convince them otherwise.
AGW is bad.. direct hit by X-class solar flare will be much worse... Solution for AGW is very complicated... Solution for Solar Flare is NO PROBLEM!... Everyone can drop off their spare foil at the NSF!

Whoa, what?

"
The study published Thursday is the first to take so many papers and authors into account. Doing a search on the popular science article website Web of Science for "climate change" or "global warming" produces over 12,000 results. Of these, 4,014 papers were identified to state a position on climate change. Among those, 3,896, or 97.1% endorsed the consensus that climate change was happening and that it was caused by human activity.
"

So, the evidence is a browser search engine?

I could type "COTTON CANDY" in google and probably get
a) a sugary candy
b) a porn star
c) a street drug

So, now it appears that 66% of scientists think cotton candy is a drug or porn star.
Quoting MAweatherboy1:
New NHC forecast on Alvin doesn't show dissipation until 96 hours, but it notes advisories could be ended at any time if the current trend continues. I would say that's probably the more likely scenario. It's very hard to distinguish a tropical cyclone within this:


Alvin got jelous about us ignoring him last night (for a good purpose) so he'd decide to just leave us...
Quoting TropicalAnalystwx13:

Because it, as I've given an example of, gives people in the warned areas a false sense of security. Even my parents do it...'we're in a slight risk? won't be too bad'. Sure, it's a fine term for those of us who actually know what it means, but one of the biggest goals of the Storm Prediction Center is to warn the public.

I see that all the time as well, people, who know I like the weather, ask me if we will get storms and I say a slight risk of severe weather. They associate the word slight with nothing. So they think that nothing or small little storms will hit
Another lesson: just because a storm looks weak on radar doesn't mean it is.

Operationally, one would assume that, if a tornado was on the ground at this point, it was weak.

That being said, this storm was in the outer edge of the radar range so it [the radar] may not have been picking up the circulation well.



This cell was producing an EF4 tornado.
Quoting Neapolitan:
Every one of these points has been addressed a thousand times. A million times. The thing is, I or anyone else could take the time to patiently answer each one in detail, complete with footnotes and citations and links to peer-reviewed papers--yet to the pretend "skeptic", that wouldn't make a lick of difference, and the effort would be wasted. (Believe me: I've tried.) That's because such fake "skeptics" aren't the least bit interested in finding out the truth through rigorous examination and experimentation; they're interested only in those data that sustain their preconceived notions. If someone wants to believe that scientific articles that DON"T support climate change theory aren't being published because of some global conspiracy and not because there simply are not very many of them, no amount of actual data is going to convince them otherwise.


Meanwhile, it snowed in May in Arkansas.
Quoting Snowlover123:
I find it interesting that Dr. Masters and John Cook both claim that the Cook et al. 2013 paper supports that there is any sort of consensus.

From the press release, we have this quote:

From the 11 994 papers, 32.6 per cent endorsed AGW, 66.4 per cent stated no position on AGW, 0.7 per cent rejected AGW and in 0.3 per cent of papers, the authors said the cause of global warming was uncertain.

Less than a third of the papers analyzed in the paper supported human caused global warming. How is a consensus of any sort supposed to be derived from that?
Ah, that's the Anthony Watts response! (I saw it yesterday). You--and Mr. Watts--need to read the entire thing carefully. As Angela herself states, "97.1% of the studies published between 1991 to 2011 that expressed a position on manmade climate change agreed that it was happening, and that it was due to human activity.
Huge win for ECMWF on the MJO forecast. This entire last week the GFS has been gradually coming inline with the ECMWF forecast and is now sending the MJO into no-man's land. Still disagreement in the long range, however. GFS takes the MJO into the Atlantic, ECMWF disagrees and restarts it in the Indian ocean.

GEFS (bias corrected) MJO Forecast




ECMWF MJO Forecast

Quoting oracle28:
Meanwhile, it snowed in May in Arkansas.
Why, yes, it did--a few days before it reached nearly 110 in Iowa. I remember that well... ;-)
Quoting aburttschell:
In other words 97% of scientists like government grants

Nobody gave me a grant!
I watched the news and they had blizzards today in the Barcelona area,
Its throwing it down with rain right now over my roof 50 miles north of Gibraltar.
Howling gales and cold too as we walk about in cardigans and long Johns in mid May.
Maybe they should give us a grant to prove that things are not as normal as they would like us to think they are; whoever they are? The grant givers that is.
You can lead a horse to water but you cant make it drink?
You can lead a man to knowledge but you cant make him think!
Maybe I should just go to the bar and thank somebody that there is still something coming out of a tap to get lost in?
Its not that the end is nigh?
It just that times they are a changing! (Pedley!)
Oh well its only 5 weeks to midsummer.
Hows the ice doing?
Quoting trumpman84:
You can prove all day that the Earth has warmed, that CO2 is going up and that humans emit CO2. What I need, to be comfortable with the concept, is more to tie it all together.
You obviously have not studied the science of climate change - most of your questions have already been answered - but you probably don't want to know that.

The physics of atmospheric CO2 and it's effectiveness in blocking solar energy that is re-radiated as infra-red has been known for over 100 years.

From Wikipedia: "In 1896 Svante Arrhenius calculated the effect of a doubling atmospheric carbon dioxide to be an increase in surface temperatures of 5-6 degrees Celsius."

The "new" CO2 in the atmosphere has been positively identified as coming from the burning of fossil fuels by isotopic analysis, e.g. fossil fuel carbon in the atmosphere can be identified by isotope ratios - fact, proven, case closed!!

Yesterday's tornado event is just day one of what will be a multi-day outbreak. Sunday in particular catches my eye. More later.
Quoting JNCali:
AGW is bad.. direct hit by X-class solar flare will be much worse... Solution for AGW is very complicated... Solution for Solar Flare is NO PROBLEM!... Everyone can drop off their spare foil at the NSF!



one flare coming right up

anything else

Quoting allahgore:



Do we know how the whole universe works? If it's such settled science why are we still using tax dollars for more studies? Why not use that money to fix the problem?


Well, in the U.S., Congress controls the Purse strings. Currently there are enough elected officials that oppose spending any money to help solve the problem. There are even a few that elected officials that will say that AGW is the greatest hoax ever put on mankind.

Then there is the private sector that could make its own adjustments. Some within the private sector are doing so, but to no avail when others within the private sector (and with much more capital) make every attempt to halt or derail such attempts.

Then there is the personal efforts that we all can make. Saying AGW is a hoax or refusal to make any adjustments to one's own lifestyle hampers, but does not prevent, the efforts of the others. Individual efforts are our best hope, for now. At least until those that are illiterate in the sciences no longer hold office.
Quoting oracle28:
Whoa, what?

"
The study published Thursday is the first to take so many papers and authors into account. Doing a search on the popular science article website Web of Science for "climate change" or "global warming" produces over 12,000 results. Of these, 4,014 papers were identified to state a position on climate change. Among those, 3,896, or 97.1% endorsed the consensus that climate change was happening and that it was caused by human activity.
"

So, the evidence is a browser search engine?

I could type "COTTON CANDY" in google and probably get
a) a sugary candy
b) a porn star
c) a street drug

So, now it appears that 66% of scientists think cotton candy is a drug or porn star.



Maybe someone will explain?
This from Twitter not too long ago:

BHO

The President has more than 30 million followers. I think this is a good thing...
Quoting Some1Has2BtheRookie:


Well, in the U.S., Congress controls the Purse strings. Currently there are enough elected officials that oppose spending any money to help solve the problem. There are even a few that elected officials that will say that AGW is the greatest hoax ever put on mankind.

Then there is the private sector that could make its own adjustments. Some within the private sector are doing so, but to no avail when others within the private sector (and with much more capital) make every attempt to halt or derail such attempts.

Then there is the personal efforts that we all can make. Saying AGW is a hoax or refusal to make any adjustments to one's own lifestyle hampers, but does not prevent, the efforts of the others. Individual efforts are our best hope, for now. At least until those that are illiterate in the sciences no longer hold office.



Could it be too late to reverse things?
Quoting PlazaRed:

You can lead a horse to water but you cant make it drink?
You can lead a man to knowledge but you cant make him think!
One of the most appropriate sayings I have ever seen regarding AGW/CC denialism!
Quoting TropicalAnalystwx13:
Another lesson: just because a storm looks weak on radar doesn't mean it is.

Operationally, one would assume that, if a tornado was on the ground at this point, it was weak.

That being said, this storm was in the outer edge of the radar range so it [the radar] may not have been picking up the circulation well.



This cell was producing an EF4 tornado.



How tight do you think the radar network should be? As in the maximum distance from a radar transmitter that any location should be?
01E/XX/A/XX

Quoting oracle28:
Whoa, what?

"
The study published Thursday is the first to take so many papers and authors into account. Doing a search on the popular science article website Web of Science for "climate change" or "global warming" produces over 12,000 results. Of these, 4,014 papers were identified to state a position on climate change. Among those, 3,896, or 97.1% endorsed the consensus that climate change was happening and that it was caused by human activity.
"

So, the evidence is a browser search engine?

I could type "COTTON CANDY" in google and probably get
a) a sugary candy
b) a porn star
c) a street drug

So, now it appears that 66% of scientists think cotton candy is a drug or porn star.


Your logic, when drawn to its evident conclusion, actually argues that 66% of the internet has no opinion on cotton candy while 97.1% of the people who do have an opinion on it think that it is a sugary candy, while a measly 2.9% think of it as a drug or adult actor/actress.
Quoting BaltimoreBrian:



How tight do you think the radar network should be? As in the maximum distance from a radar transmitter that any location should be?

Probably somewhere around 40 nautical miles. We really need more radars...especially in Mississippi.

BULLETIN - EAS ACTIVATION REQUESTED
TORNADO WARNING
NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE SHREVEPORT LA
408 PM CDT THU MAY 16 2013

THE NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE IN SHREVEPORT HAS ISSUED A

* TORNADO WARNING FOR...
SOUTH CENTRAL BIENVILLE PARISH IN NORTHWEST LOUISIANA...
NORTH CENTRAL NATCHITOCHES PARISH IN NORTHWEST LOUISIANA...
RED RIVER PARISH IN NORTHWEST LOUISIANA...

* UNTIL 430 PM CDT.

* AT 403 PM CDT...NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE METEOROLOGISTS DETECTED A
SEVERE THUNDERSTORM CAPABLE OF PRODUCING A TORNADO 7 MILES NORTH OF
COUSHATTA...OR 23 MILES EAST OF MANSFIELD...MOVING SOUTHEAST AT
35 MPH. NUMEROUS REPORTS OF DAMAGE AND LARGE HAIL HAVE BEEN
RECEIVED AS THIS STORM MOVED ACROSS WASKOM AND SHREVEPORT.

* OTHER LOCATIONS IN THE WARNING INCLUDE BUT ARE NOT LIMITED TO
CAMPTI...
Quoting allahgore:



Could it be too late to reverse things?


I am not able to give you the definitive answer that you seek. I can only tell you that the clock is ticking and that with each tick of the clock we are closer to it being too late to reverse things. ... My personal opinion? Yes, it is too late to reverse things, but not too late to avert the worst of what it could become. The primary basis for this opinion is with the Arctic sea ice loss. This will not be reversible now by any of our efforts, but we may still prevent worse damages beyond this.
I thought that cell might be cycling...rotation fell apart for a bit, but now it's back.



Quoting Doppler22:

BULLETIN - EAS ACTIVATION REQUESTED
TORNADO WARNING ...
thank goodness..they left

Quoting TropicalAnalystwx13:

Probably somewhere around 40 nautical miles. We really need more radars...especially in Mississippi.


I googled around and found a NOAA doppler radar (WSR-88D) costs about $2,000,000. That does not include maintenance and operational costs. But it doesn't seem like a whole lot either. I think we can afford better radar coverage.



YAY Rookie is back!
Quoting Xulonn:
One of the most appropriate sayings I have ever seen regarding AGW/CC denialism!

One of our Plaza Red lot said to me a couple of years ago.
"You cant be serious to think that a bit of CO" and the odd trace of transient pollution can have any long lasting effect on the climate, "Man!".
Well his ashes are residing on top of my upstairs bathroom roof now, I'm waiting for his American family to come over her from Oregon to scatter them somewhere where they might think the CO2 is low enough not to cause too much oxidation.
It always seems crazy to me and the rest of our survivors that the "laws of universal obviousness," are so blatantly ignored!
You smoke? you might get lung caner, as he did!
You drive like crazy, you might have an accident.
You play with fire, you might get burned.
But you tamper with the environment and you are crazy to say, or think it will have long and far reaching consequences?
As somebody once said, "reality's a state of mind brought upon by an absence of drugs?"
Bring on the occluded transfer non active receptor super suppressants, I'll take an handful and wait out for the consequences.
Meanwhile back in the upper atmosphere????
India Meteorological Department
Tropical Cyclone Advisory #47
DEPRESSION, FORMER MAHASEN (BOB01-2013)
23:30 PM IST May 16 2013
==========================================

At 18:00 PM UTC, The deep depression over Mizoram, northeastern India moved northeastward and weakened into a depression which lays over Manipur, northeastern India near 25.0N 93.5E, about 40 km west northwest of Imphal, India.

System is likely to move northeastwards and weaken into a low pressure area during next 12 hours.
Quoting Some1Has2BtheRookie:


I am not able to give you the definitive answer that you seek. I can only tell you that the clock is ticking and that with each tick of the clock we are closer to it being too late to reverse things. ... My personal opinion? Yes, it is too late to reverse things, but not too late to avert the worst of what it could become. The primary basis for this opinion is with the Arctic sea ice loss. This will not be reversible now by any of our efforts, but we may still prevent worse damages beyond this.

Rookie!
Its too late!
It was too late 20 years ago!
It will still be too late 20 years from now!
They wont admit its too late, it will affect global economics?
They wont give you a fair deal, or crack of the whip, because they hold all the cards and they also hold the whip hand?
Given that there are too many people for the given land area! I am glad to think that I shall give up my air space before somebody else needs it?
One thing about being really old now, is that its so depressing to think that I contributed to the future in which a lot of you will have to live in, while I get the old age bale out!
Good luck! Sorry for the inheritance.
From whats left of the Plaza Red.
Quoting Neapolitan:
This from Twitter not too long ago:

BHO

The President has more than 30 million followers. I think this is a good thing...


Hope he doesn't read the blog comments.
It looks as though the pattern is finally going to change. The following 8-14 day temperature probability outlook is the first one in a long while to show Alaska above normal:

cpc

Meanwhile, June is expected to be warmer than normal in the West, and mostly normal in the East:

cpc

...While summer is expected to be toasty across most of the US, with the exception of the upper Midwest, Northern Tier, and--no surprise--West Coast:

cpc
Quoting TropicalAnalystwx13:
Yesterday's tornado event is just day one of what will be a multi-day outbreak. Sunday in particular catches my eye. More later.

There was a break in the tornadoes, as such, it would be an outbreak sequence, not an individual outbreak.
122. wxmod
Satellite image of the north pole today. Contrast is increased to show the cracks better on the small view allowed on this blog. This is the real deal. The ice will be gone soon, then Greenland will melt in earnest. There is no stopping the process anymore and no one will benefit as the climate will shift faster and faster until Earth becomes uninhabitable. I just want to say a big thank you to the imbeciles who made extinction of everything on Earth possible. THANK YOU!

The storm from earlier is tornado warned again.

BULLETIN - EAS ACTIVATION REQUESTED
TORNADO WARNING
NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE SHREVEPORT LA
447 PM CDT THU MAY 16 2013

THE NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE IN SHREVEPORT HAS ISSUED A

* TORNADO WARNING FOR...
WEST CENTRAL WINN PARISH IN NORTH CENTRAL LOUISIANA...
NORTH CENTRAL NATCHITOCHES PARISH IN NORTHWEST LOUISIANA...

* UNTIL 515 PM CDT

* AT 442 PM CDT...NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE METEOROLOGISTS DETECTED A
SEVERE THUNDERSTORM CAPABLE OF PRODUCING A TORNADO NEAR BLACK
LAKE...OR 18 MILES NORTH OF NATCHITOCHES...MOVING SOUTHEAST AT 30
MPH.

* OTHER LOCATIONS IN THE WARNING INCLUDE BUT ARE NOT LIMITED TO
CRESTON AND CLEAR LAKE...

PRECAUTIONARY/PREPAREDNESS ACTIONS...

A TORNADO WARNING MEANS THAT STRONG ROTATION HAS BEEN DETECTED IN THE
STORM. A TORNADO MAY ALREADY BE ON THE GROUND...OR IS EXPECTED TO
DEVELOP SHORTLY. IF YOU ARE IN THE PATH OF THIS DANGEROUS STORM...
MOVE INDOORS AND TO THE LOWEST LEVEL OF THE BUILDING. STAY AWAY FROM
WINDOWS. IF DRIVING...DO NOT SEEK SHELTER UNDER A HIGHWAY OVERPASS.

IF IN MOBILE HOMES OR VEHICLES...EVACUATE THEM AND GET INSIDE A
STURDY SHELTER. IF NO SHELTER IS AVAILABLE...LIE FLAT IN THE NEAREST
DITCH OR OTHER LOW SPOT AND COVER YOUR HEAD WITH YOUR HANDS.

&&

LAT...LON 3195 9312 3201 9316 3210 9310 3194 9277
3178 9288
TIME...MOT...LOC 2147Z 301DEG 18KT 3201 9311

$$

06
Quoting Neapolitan:
This from Twitter not too long ago:

BHO

The President has more than 30 million followers. I think this is a good thing...


as an independent voter , given his current ability to play golf and basketball, dodge responsibilty for actions in his admin i would not go to him for support or evidence . the only action taken has been to fire an irs man in june who was retiring in june. dead police and mexicans, dead diplomats , the press wiretaped. he has not been the most environmantaly freindly president either (he aint no al gore) . btw those thirty million were inflated by twitters on admissions.if you want help from him , hope you wrote him(or any other president) a check. considering the current state of affairs in dc, global warming for him right now is a sideshow at best. americas dont ( or should not ) politicians on social media, espicially ones who throw out stats. i do not doubt global warming, i belive its roots are biblical ,that it is man made. when god calls his people,nature will run wild. the warnings are there, in black in white for all to read. if you belive , they you know whats coming, no politician can stop it.
My hope is it won't be necessary to convince every single (resisting) individual of the truth of AGW to accomplish change und improvement - at least on the longer run. Besides the question of AGW/CC there are a lot more reasons for not polluting, totally robbing and exhausting the treasures of our world in such a short time. There is already a strong trend in investments which indicates a change, and those, who decide to cling on the vanishing deposits of oil, will realize at some time, that they've missed the train. Of course, it would be much better for our world and every of it's inhabitants to realize this earlier than later ...

Call It What You Like - 2014 New Investing Approach Gains Followers
By Lisa Woll May 15, 2013 8:44 PM GMT 0200

More than 11 percent of investments under U.S. professional management were selected for companies' 2019 financial performance and their social and environmental responsibility in 2012. That's $3.74 trillion of the $33.3 trillion in investments scanned for environmental, social and governance criteria (known as ESG), according to a November report by the U.S. SIF Foundation.

Individuals and institutions are increasingly on the lookout for investment strategies that help them achieve environmental and social goals.

Call it what you like - 2014 sustainable investing, responsible investing, socially responsible investing, impact investing, green investing or just ESG - 2014 this practice is bringing new approaches into the traditional investment industry. The field has expanded tremendously since trail-blazing funds, such as the Dreyfus Third Century Fund and the Pax World Fund were launched in the early 1970s. Today, sustainable investors might be concerned with climate change, alternative energy, human rights, diversity, community investing or other issues. We have seen a blossoming of specialized advisors and consultants and new investment products across all asset classes.

Read the whole article on Bloomberg's
Finally got GRLevelX radar! its about time
It's a nice little storm.



Top left is base reflectivity
Top right is base velocity (used for damaging winds)
Bottom left is storm relative velocity (used for tornado detection)
Bottom right is VIL (used for hail tracking)
One thing's for sure, when the Doc brings up GW, the blog heats up. Well, it's off-topic, but I was a bit stunned when I discovered this chart. I knew you pretty much quadruple force with a doubling of speed, but this gives one even greater respect.

Hurricane Damage Potential

These values indicate increases in damage potential ABOVE damage that occurs with a 75 mph hurricane.

Source: NWS
Quoting TropicalAnalystwx13:


Someone is knocking at the door.
The sun just threw out a low-end M-class flare. There's an 80% chance of more of those, and a whopping 60% chance of X-class flares.

sun
Quoting TropicalAnalystwx13:

Amazing!
Then you sort of notice the state of the Tree?
Amazing that 97% of scientists agree with man-made global warming? Thats like saying that 97% of Democrats believe Obama is doing a great job.Imagine a builder builds a house and the inhabitants move in, after a few days the inside temp goes up and the inhabitants are screaming, OMG, we have to decrease our population!!!
Perhaps,maybe,they should just consult the builder?
Quoting wxmod:
Satellite image of the north pole today. Contrast is increased to show the cracks better on the small view allowed on this blog. This is the real deal. The ice will be gone soon, then Greenland will melt in earnest. There is no stopping the process anymore and no one will benefit as the climate will shift faster and faster until Earth becomes uninhabitable. I just want to say a big thank you to the imbeciles who made extinction of everything on Earth possible. THANK YOU!



Lol. I recommend Xanax and a shrink.
Quoting Neapolitan:
The sun just threw out a low-end M-class flare. There's an 80% chance of more of those, and a whopping 60% chance of X-class flares.

sun
To compare:
Quoting number4steel:


as an independent voter , given his current ability to play golf and basketball, dodge responsibilty for actions in his admin i would not go to him for support or evidence . the only action taken has been to fire an irs man in june who was retiring in june. dead police and mexicans, dead diplomats , the press wiretaped. he has not been the most environmantaly freindly president either (he aint no al gore) . btw those thirty million were inflated by twitters on admissions.if you want help from him , hope you wrote him(or any other president) a check. considering the current state of affairs in dc, global warming for him right now is a sideshow at best. americas dont ( or should not ) politicians on social media, espicially ones who throw out stats. i do not doubt global warming, i belive its roots are biblical ,that it is man made. when god calls his people,nature will run wild. the warnings are there, in black in white for all to read. if you belive , they you know whats coming, no politician can stop it.
Most of what you wrote is completely off-topic, so I won't address it. I'll just say this: every Twitter account has fake and inactive followers--and the more popular a person is, the more fake accounts are attached (usually for purposes of spam). But since it's not economical to state "JohnSmith has 1,234 Twitter followers, minus 70% that are fake (864)", it's considered normal to simply state the published number. And by any account, President Obama has many millions of actual living, breathing followers--so pointing them at a mainstream media article discussing the scientific consensus over climate change is a fantastic thing...
Psychological research indicates that people who claim to be "independent" are just as partisan as people who claim to be "left" or "right", it's just that self-proclaimed "independents" don't recognize their own bias.

Source

I submit post #125 as further evidence to support this theory.

In weather news...

This cell in western Kansas spawned the first severe T-storm warning of the day when it was in eastern Colorado. Given its persistence I think folks in Kansas should keep their eyes on it:

Quoting TropicalAnalystwx13:

Probably somewhere around 40 nautical miles. We really need more radars...especially in Mississippi.
if they put one every 40 nautical miles that would come to approx 1,100 radar sites... I would like to see at least good radar coverage upstream (average severe wx approach path) of population centers to provide maximum warning time... imho
139. VR46L
This has to be a pleasing Map to everyone ..12 week gft of drought Monitor ... there is noticeable improvement nearly everywhere in the east and the west has shown much inprovement too!

SevereStudios‏@severestudios1 min
Tornado Warning for Natchitoches and Winn Parish in LA until 6:00pm CDT. #lawx
Quoting Neapolitan:
The sun just threw out a low-end M-class flare. There's an 80% chance of more of those, and a whopping 60% chance of X-class flares.

sun

Got you covered!

Here is the preliminary data of the 12 tornadoes of last night.


PUBLIC INFORMATION STATEMENT
NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE FORT WORTH TX
418 PM CDT THU MAY 16 2013

...NWS DAMAGE SURVEY FOR 05/15/2013 TORNADO EVENT...

THIS INFORMATION IS CONSIDERED VERY PRELIMINARY. SURVEY
TEAMS ARE STILL OUT SURVEYING THE TORNADO DAMAGE. SURVEY TEAMS
WERE SENT TO JOHNSON COUNTY...HOOD COUNTY...PARKER COUNTY...AND
MONTAGUE COUNTY. ONE TEAM IS HOPING TO SURVEY THE ENNIS AREA IN
ELLIS COUNTY BUT THIS MAY OCCUR ON A LATER DATE. OVER THE NEXT
FEW DAYS WE WILL CONTINUE TO COLLECT DATA...TALK WITH EMERGENCY
OFFICIALS AND RESPONDERS...AND EYE WITNESSES...REVIEW RADAR
DATA...PICTURES AND VIDEOS. THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS
REPORT IS SUBJECT TO AND LIKELY WILL CHANGE.

SO FAR 12 TORNADOES HAVE BEEN CONFIRMED. THE FIRST TORNADO
OCCURRED IN MONTAGUE COUNTY AROUND 538 PM CDT. THE LAST REPORTED
TORNADO WAS AROUND 945 PM SOUTHEAST OF CLEBURNE.

THE TORNADOES REPORTED BELOW ARE IN NO PARTICULAR ORDER.

.TORNADO #1 - NORTHERN MONTAGUE COUNTY...

THIS TORNADO WAS REPORTED BY STORM SPOTTERS. NO ADDITIONAL
DETAILS ON THIS TORNADO ARE AVAILABLE AT THIS TIME. ADDITIONAL
INFORMATION WILL BE PROVIDED ON THIS TORNADO LATER.


.TORNADO #2 - LAKE AMON G. CARTER/MONTAGUE COUNTY...

RATING: EF-1
ESTIMATED PEAK WIND: 100 MPH

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION WILL BE PROVIDED ON THIS TORNADO AFTER
SURVEY CREWS RETURN.


.TORNADO #3 - ALVORD/WISE COUNTY...

THIS TORNADO WAS REPORTED BY THE PUBLIC AND STORM SPOTTERS. NO
ADDITIONAL DETAILS ON THIS TORNADO ARE AVAILABLE AT THIS TIME.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION WILL BE PROVIDED ON THIS TORNADO LATER.


.TORNADO #4 - MILLSAP/PARKER COUNTY...

RATING: EF-1
ESTIMATED PEAK WIND: 100 MPH

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION WILL BE PROVIDED ON THIS TORNADO AFTER
SURVEY CREWS RETURN.


.TORNADO #5 - GRANBURY/HOOD COUNTY...

RATING: EF-4
FATALITIES: 6
INJURIES: DOZENS

SIGNIFICANT DAMAGE OCCURRED WITH THIS TORNADO INCLUDING HOMES WIPED
CLEAR OFF THE FOUNDATION. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION WILL BE PROVIDED
ON THIS TORNADO AFTER SURVEY CREWS RETURN.


.TORNADO #6 - PECAN PLANTATION/HOOD COUNTY...

RATING: EF-1
ESTIMATED PEAK WIND: 90-100 MPH

SURVEY CREWS FOUND AN ADDITIONAL DAMAGE PATH SEPARATE FROM TORNADO
#5 THAT AFFECTED GRANBURY. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION WILL BE PROVIDED
ON THIS TORNADO AFTER SURVEY CREWS RETURN.


.TORNADO #7 - CRESSON/HOOD COUNTY...

THIS TORNADO WAS REPORTED BY STORM SPOTTERS. NO ADDITIONAL
DETAILS ON THIS TORNADO ARE AVAILABLE AT THIS TIME. ADDITIONAL
INFORMATION WILL BE PROVIDED ON THIS TORNADO LATER.


.TORNADO #8 - CLEBURNE/JOHNSON COUNTY...

RATING: EF-3
ESTIMATED PEAK WIND: 140 MPH
PATH LENGTH /STATUTE/: 8.5 MILES
PATH WIDTH /MAXIMUM/: 1060 YARDS

SIGNIFICANT DAMAGE OCCURRED WITH THIS TORNADO. ADDITIONAL
INFORMATION WILL BE PROVIDED ON THIS TORNADO AFTER SURVEY CREWS
RETURN.


.TORNADO #9 - 6 ESE CLEBURNE/JOHNSON COUNTY...

RATING: EF-0
ESTIMATED PEAK WIND: 85 MPH

SURVEY CREWS FOUND AN ADDITIONAL DAMAGE PATH SEPARATE FROM TORNADO
#8 THAT AFFECTED THE CITY OF CLEBURNE. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION WILL
BE PROVIDED ON THIS TORNADO AFTER SURVEY CREWS RETURN.


.TORNADO #10 - MILLS COUNTY...

THIS BRIEF TORNADO WAS REPORTED BY STORM SPOTTERS. NO ADDITIONAL
DETAILS ON THIS TORNADO ARE AVAILABLE AT THIS TIME. ADDITIONAL
INFORMATION WILL BE PROVIDED ON THIS TORNADO LATER.


.TORNADO #11 - WESTERN HAMILTON COUNTY...

THIS BRIEF TORNADO WAS REPORTED BY STORM SPOTTERS. NO ADDITIONAL
DETAILS ON THIS TORNADO ARE AVAILABLE AT THIS TIME. ADDITIONAL
INFORMATION WILL BE PROVIDED ON THIS TORNADO LATER.


.TORNADO #12 - WESTERN HAMILTON COUNTY...

THIS BRIEF TORNADO WAS REPORTED BY STORM SPOTTERS. NO ADDITIONAL
DETAILS ON THIS TORNADO ARE AVAILABLE AT THIS TIME. ADDITIONAL
INFORMATION WILL BE PROVIDED ON THIS TORNADO LATER.


EF SCALE: THE ENHANCED FUJITA SCALE CLASSIFIES TORNADOES INTO THE
FOLLOWING CATEGORIES.

EF0...WEAK......65 TO 85 MPH
EF1...WEAK......86 TO 110 MPH
EF2...STRONG....111 TO 135 MPH
EF3...STRONG....136 TO 165 MPH
EF4...VIOLENT...166 TO 200 MPH
EF5...VIOLENT...>200 MPH

NOTE:
THE INFORMATION IN THIS STATEMENT IS PRELIMINARY AND SUBJECT TO
CHANGE PENDING FINAL REVIEW OF THE EVENT AND PUBLICATION IN
NWS STORM DATA.

Link
Quoting Luisport:
To compare:



Probably just a little training for the next big shot.

Good night everyone, my eyelids are gaining weight...
Quoting allahgore:



Could it be too late to reverse things?
It kinda depends on what's causing global warming, doesn't it? You have said that you don't accept AGW as true, so you must think there's some other cause -- in which case your question doesn't make sense. How are you going to reverse warming caused by the sun or by changes in the earth's orbit or by cosmic rays or by "natural variations" in the earth's climate? Unless you have a better explanation?

So the AGW deniers and skeptics can just sit back and not worry about taking action. There's nothing to be done!

Hmm, I wonder if I can convince myself it's the sun.
Quoting VR46L:
This has to be a pleasing Map to everyone ..12 week gft of drought Monitor ... there is noticeable improvement nearly everywhere in the east and the west has shown much inprovement too!



thats GREAT!! thanks for posting that! nice to see some good news and not doom and gloom..I guess the drought monitor map is doing its own "whiplash"
Quoting Neapolitan:
No, it means that thousands of editors from 1,980 scientific journals around the globe secretly colluded on the biggest scientific scam of this century and the last one--and they managed to do so without anyone producing a single shred of evidence that such collusion happened! Darn you, underhanded and malevolently genius science journal editors! ;-)



"If you like Pina Coladas
And getting caught in the acid rain
If you're not into science
Because you have half a brain
If you'd like to smoke a stogey at midnight
In the dunes on the Cape under the ozone hole
Then I'm the love that you've looked for
Write to me and escape."

You know its desperate times when you take a perfectly good elevator song and change the words to reflect science..



They fixed the ammonia leak.
18z GFS is running..

171 hours
Quoting mikatnight:



They fixed the ammonia leak.



you are way way late they fixed that days a go
off topic mister nea ,you picked him as a cheerleader for your post, my response was not about global warming.it was about your choice to choose his tweet and about being a good thing. therefore , i responded about why is a poor choice. that was the topic you posted and the bulk of the response. never was a comment made against you or global warming. the back handed insult about being off topic doesnt seem to be the response from an well educated person. it is why many casual readers dont comment often. the arrogance of the elite bloggers, the willingness to crush the new to conform to "their blog" is why most stay in the shadows. many people come here to read about weather , not to see politics or prima donas. i will put it in simple terms now.... he is a poor choice for global warming ...he is not a weather man.....i have more respect for dr masters tweets on weather than his
Gravity waves from Tropical Cyclone Mahasen






and last frame
Quoting wxmod:
Satellite image of the north pole today. Contrast is increased to show the cracks better on the small view allowed on this blog. This is the real deal. The ice will be gone soon, then Greenland will melt in earnest. There is no stopping the process anymore and no one will benefit as the climate will shift faster and faster until Earth becomes uninhabitable. I just want to say a big thank you to the imbeciles who made extinction of everything on Earth possible. THANK YOU!


I pretty much think you're right about it being too late to stop an ice-free Arctic and some pretty hefty melting of the Greenland Ice Sheet.

I disagree that the Earth will be uninhabitable.
156. VR46L
Quoting ncstorm:


thats GREAT!! thanks for posting that! nice to see some good news and not doom and gloom..I guess the drought monitor map is doing its own "whiplash"


LOL!!!Glad YOU like it ! Yes I thought it was nice to post a little better news but I guess you see the same as I do when you see this image ...

Here's some video of the .6 mile wide EF3 tornado that moved into Cleburne last night.

TA13, It would be awesome to see an analysis from you of the upcoming multi-day severe weather outbreak. Brief little personal opinions on every day!
Quoting Tazmanian:



you are way way late they fixed that days a go


Dunno Taz,

Today's headline from "the day in pictures"

Spacewalking astronauts have replaced the suspected leaking ammonia pump with a new one at the International Space Station.

CAPE CANAVERAL, Fla. — NASA says an impromptu spacewalk seems to have fixed a big ammonia leak at the International Space Station.

The "gusher" erupted last Thursday. Two days later, spacewalking astronauts replaced a suspect ammonia pump. NASA is now calling the old, removed pump "Mr. Leaky."

On Thursday, a Mission Control official said the spacewalking repairs definitely took care of the big leak. Engineers don't know whether the pump replacement also took care of a smaller leak that has plagued the system for years. It will take at least a couple months of monitoring to know the full status.

Great pic anyway.
161. VR46L
Navgem 18z ...bit of a Caribbean soaker on the way



Quoting mikatnight:



They fixed the ammonia leak.

Cool photo.


The Barometer Bob Show for May 16, 2013.
Guests will be:
James Brinkley, from the National Hurricane Center Storm Surge Unit.

A spokesperson from The National Flood Insurance Program.

and Wayne Salade, Charlotte County Emergency Management and their project, "Know Your Zone".


Show starts at 8pm/ET, in about 45mins time.
You can call the show Live via the toll free number 1-866-931-8437, 904-259-4229 and on Skype or join us in Storm Chat to share your thoughts, ask questions, and watch the show. You can also call in via Skype. We are also available on AOL and Yahoo Instant Messengers during the show. Our username is BarometerBob.

I will be in Storm Chat, just sign-in with your WU handle.
163. wxmod
Quoting MississippiWx:


Lol. I recommend Xanax and a shrink.


You qualify as one of the people I want to offer my thanks to. Thanks for laughing when you should have helped. Thank You!
Quoting KEEPEROFTHEGATE:
Pretty
167. wxmod
Quoting Birthmark:

I pretty much think you're right about it being too late to stop an ice-free Arctic and some pretty hefty melting of the Greenland Ice Sheet.

I disagree that the Earth will be uninhabitable.


Yeah, maybe you're right. Let's be positive, so we don't offend anyone.
Quoting VR46L:
Navgem 18z ...bit of a Caribbean soaker on the way





one big moonsonal low..reminds me of Nicole

Quoting FLwolverine:
It kinda depends on what's causing global warming, doesn't it? You have said that you don't accept AGW as true, so you must think there's some other cause -- in which case your question doesn't make sense. How are you going to reverse warming caused by the sun or by changes in the earth's orbit or by cosmic rays or by "natural variations" in the earth's climate? Unless you have a better explanation?

So the AGW deniers and skeptics can just sit back and not worry about taking action. There's nothing to be done!

Hmm, I wonder if I can convince myself it's the sun.



I think AGW is about 10-15% of the problem!
Quoting Xulonn:
Excellent post, Angela.

I considered discussing some of your points in the context of the psychology of climate (AGW/CC) denial, a legitimate field of study in what is sometimes referred to as eco-psychology. However, I don't want to make anyone whine and cry.




Interesting!
Quoting allahgore:



I think AGW is about 10-15% of the problem!


Good for you. I think the Cubs are a cinch to take the Series this year.

Quoting KEEPEROFTHEGATE:
Looks healthier than Alvin.
176. wxmod
Quoting allahgore:



I think AGW is about 10-15% of the problem!


I want to thank you. Thank you for helping to side track real issues and turn reality upside down. I really didn't like reality the way it was anyway. Now that you have spoken on behalf of Exxon Mobil and BP, I feel so much better about life. Rather than worrying about my actions changing the climate, I can focus on becoming a lazy fat pig and a gas hog. Thanks again!
Quoting SouthTampa:
Looks healthier than Alvin.
alvin choke on himself and will never recover had its chance but failed
01E/XX/A/XX

Quoting Birthmark:

I pretty much think you're right about it being too late to stop an ice-free Arctic and some pretty hefty melting of the Greenland Ice Sheet.

I disagree that the Earth will be uninhabitable.


There'll always be cockroaches.... and Keith Richards
Quoting KEEPEROFTHEGATE:
alvin choke on himself and will never recover had its chance but failed


I see two cocs in Alvin, - I am so sick of multiple centers - one wanting to go N, the other W. Instead of fujiwharing, they're 'splitting the sheets', divorcing.
Of course we know from hacked emails that studies that didn't support human caused climate chance have a hard time getting published. Even CERN's CLOUD experiment was rejected a number of times before finally being published.
Quoting KEEPEROFTHEGATE:
land-o-cane.
CIPS analogue probabilities for Monday. Further shows we're likely dealing with an outbreak.

Quoting KEEPEROFTHEGATE:
alvin choke on himself and will never recover had its chance but failed
True. Poor Alvin. Sometimes these land-based systems are just wonderful to look at.
The Barometer Bob Show for May 16, 2013.
Guests will be:
James Brinkley, from the National Hurricane Center Storm Surge Unit. (on now)

A spokesperson from The National Flood Insurance Program.

and Wayne Salade, Charlotte County Emergency Management and their project, "Know Your Zone".


Show has started
You can call the show Live via the toll free number 1-866-931-8437, 904-259-4229 and on Skype or join us in Storm Chat to share your thoughts, ask questions, and watch the show. You can also call in via Skype. We are also available on AOL and Yahoo Instant Messengers during the show. Our username is BarometerBob.

I'm in Storm Chat, just sign-in with your WU handle.
I believe that the May tornado season has woken up
Quoting washingtonian115:
land-o-cane.
wash that avatar is disturbing but i like it hope ya don't scare the kids and give em nightmares
Quoting wxmod:


I want to thank you. Thank you for helping to side track real issues and turn reality upside down. I really didn't like reality the way it was anyway. Now that you have spoken on behalf of Exxon Mobil and BP, I feel so much better about life. Rather than worrying about my actions changing the climate, I can focus on becoming a lazy fat pig and a gas hog. Thanks again!



No matter what your view is with AGW, we ALL should treat mother earth with respect. There are many on this globe that can't afford food much less a gallon of gasoline. Just because I might not agree with you with AGW that does not give you the right to make disrespectful remarks toward me!
Seems to be the case.

This storm is really far from the radar site but there is definitely some rotation.

BULLETIN - EAS ACTIVATION REQUESTED
TORNADO WARNING
NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE SHREVEPORT LA
656 PM CDT THU MAY 16 2013

THE NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE IN SHREVEPORT HAS ISSUED A

* TORNADO WARNING FOR...
CENTRAL UNION COUNTY IN SOUTH CENTRAL ARKANSAS...
THIS INCLUDES THE CITIES OF...NORPHLET...EL DORADO...

* UNTIL 800 PM CDT

* AT 654 PM CDT...NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE METEOROLOGISTS DETECTED A
SEVERE THUNDERSTORM CAPABLE OF PRODUCING A TORNADO NEAR EL
DORADO...MOVING EAST AT 30 MPH.

* OTHER LOCATIONS IN THE WARNING INCLUDE BUT ARE NOT LIMITED TO
CALION...LAWSON...URBANA AND STRONG...





Quoting Doppler22:
I believe that the May tornado season has woken up
Where's the -PDO?
194. wxmod
Quoting MacLorry:
Of course we know from hacked emails that studies that didn't support human caused climate chance have a hard time getting published. Even CERN's CLOUD experiment was rejected a number of times before finally being published.


Please tell me where you got this fabulous information, the gospel truth! The CERN experiment scandal I mean. Rejected by who? Thank you so much for bringing this hard evidence to light! Enquiring minds are fascinated.
Quoting MacLorry:
Of course we know from hacked emails that studies that didn't support human caused climate chance have a hard time getting published.

Allow me to put this as gently as possible: garbage.

Quoting MacLorry:
Even CERN's CLOUD experiment was rejected a number of times before finally being published.

Many papers are rejected for a wide variety of reasons. If you have some evidence that the CLOUD paper was rejected due to its conclusions (which in no way affect AGW theory, btw), then feel free to produce it. Or not, if you're good with innuendo.
Frankie's back with a Severe Weather Forecast for this weekend !!

Link
Quoting Gearsts:
Where's the -PDO?

It's still there. The horseshoe-shaped ring of cool waters has been temporarily warmed because the high pressure that usually keeps it cool has been displaced south.



The fact that the PDO is farther east than normal anyways keeps waters off the West Coast slightly warmer than they would otherwise be.
The reason that the 'nado season started late was because it was always one extreme or another (To cold in this case for the year last year to warm).Now that we have the warm moist flow from the Gulf and cold air we have some of the main ingredients.
Quoting Gearsts:
Where's the -PDO?
-PDO should return. Right now a daily value would probably be neutral though. Cool to see.

Quoting Gearsts:
Where's the -PDO?


Of interest further east is the Gulf of Guinea starting to cool.
CPC updated their long range forecasts today. These forecasts can be used to highlight areas at elevated risk for a landfall during hurricane season. Although the CPC doesn't directly product a 500mb height level forecast, we can infer where they believe the troughs and ridges will be setting up based off the temperature outlooks.

CPC JAS




CPC ASO




Based off these temperature anomalies the CPC is forecasting anomalous ridging in the west, troughiness over the northern Plains possibly extending into the Great Lakes region, and then ridging in the NE. This pattern puts areas along the eastern seaboard at greatest risk. Western Gulf Coast at lower risk, Eastern Gulf at a decent risk should a storm try and curve up out of the Caribbean/Gulf of Mexico. Not really anything new here but it's nice to know the CPC supports our thinking.
202. wxmod
Quoting allahgore:



No matter what your view is with AGW, we ALL should treat mother earth with respect. There are many on this globe that can't afford food much less a gallon of gasoline. Just because I might not agree with you with AGW that does not give you the right to make disrespectful remarks toward me!


I am all respect and nothing else. I am following your lead. I have decided to change my party affiliation and buy a dump truck because of your comments. You say global warming is not man made: I respond by turning up my coal fired stove to 80 and keeping the air conditioner on and the refrigerator open so I can see all the food! I respect you; thank you for being so kind to mother nature. Cutie!
Quoting BaltimoreBrian:
Gravity waves from Tropical Cyclone Mahasen


There are two very different kinds of "gravity wave" I just learned. I was about to call BS before I looked it up. In the pic are these gravity waves, while what had come to my mind was gravitational waves.

Learn something everyday I guess.

I would have just called them "waves" though, really big waves. =p
BULLETIN - EAS ACTIVATION REQUESTED
TORNADO WARNING
NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE SHREVEPORT LA
749 PM CDT THU MAY 16 2013

THE NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE IN SHREVEPORT HAS ISSUED A

* TORNADO WARNING FOR...
NORTHWESTERN UNION PARISH IN NORTH CENTRAL LOUISIANA...
SOUTH CENTRAL UNION COUNTY IN SOUTH CENTRAL ARKANSAS...
THIS INCLUDES THE CITY OF JUNCTION CITY...

* UNTIL 845 PM CDT

* AT 746 PM CDT...NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE METEOROLOGISTS DETECTED A
SEVERE THUNDERSTORM CAPABLE OF PRODUCING A TORNADO NEAR JUNCTION
CITY...MOVING EAST AT 30 MPH.

* OTHER LOCATIONS IN THE WARNING INCLUDE BUT ARE NOT LIMITED TO
STRONG...LILLIE AND OAKLAND
Quoting wxmod:


I am all respect and nothing else. I am following your lead. I have decided to change my party affiliation and buy a dump truck because of your comments. You say global warming is not man made: I respond by turning up my coal fired stove to 80 and keeping the air conditioner on and the refrigerator open so I can see all the food! I respect you; thank you for being so kind to mother nature. Cutie!
SARCASM FLAG:ON
re: Tom Taylor Post 201 -
I don't understand the difference between the two maps. Can you explain 1.5 - vs - 2.5 month lead?
-Thanks
Quoting aburttschell:
In other words 97% of scientists like government grants


That statement makes no sense no matter how you look at it. Climate scientist make up a small segment of the science community, and receive a paltry amount of grants compared to some other branches of science. They by no means make up 97% of scientists.
The Mid-May update of the ENSO models is out and are literally flat in Neutral until the end of 2013 going to the start of 2014.



Link
Quoting Tropicsweatherpr:
The Mid-May update of the ENSO models is out and are literally flat until the end of 2013 going to the start of 2014.



Link


Likely to stay neutral all the way..
Quoting KEEPEROFTHEGATE:
wash that avatar is disturbing but i like it hope ya don't scare the kids and give em nightmares


Just now saw it and thought hmmmm...not Wash's normal type of profile pic! LOL




Awww, am sad Alvin's falling apart. Really thought a lovely swirl was going to develop and whet our appetites!

Was gorgeous here in N Wales today. High was only mid 50's, but felt much warmer in the Sun. Had a bit of an in-car, beach front picnic on Anglesey after errands I needed to do before my weekend shifts...then while taking some photos in Newborough forest, thought how wrong is was to be taking photos of beds of Bluebells in mid-May! They're usually a Feb or early March flower here and only last that short time then. So jumped at the chance for some Bluebell's in spring weather.

Hope you're all well!
Quoting wxmod:


I am all respect and nothing else. I am following your lead. I have decided to change my party affiliation and buy a dump truck because of your comments. You say global warming is not man made: I respond by turning up my coal fired stove to 80 and keeping the air conditioner on and the refrigerator open so I can see all the food! I respect you; thank you for being so kind to mother nature. Cutie!
I have initiated protests to ban catalytic converters...
Fresh off the press!!

Caribbean Islands Hurricane Update May 16th 2013

img src="">

Link
Link
Quoting oldnewmex:
re: Tom Taylor Post 201 -
I don't understand the difference between the two maps. Can you explain 1.5 - vs - 2.5 month lead?
-Thanks

I'm not Tom, but I can help you out. The first image is valid for the July-August-September time period (July 1 to September 31). The lead time is roughly the amount of time from the time of the outlook and the start of whatever period you're viewing (JAS). The time from now until August 1 (because the second image is for the August-September-Octobe time period) is 2.5 months.

too long, didn't read: Current date = 1.5 months away from time forecast is valid for first image, 2.5 months away from time forecast is valid for second image.
.
Alvin remains a tropical storm, albeit down to 35 knots, according to the 0z ATCF update. I'm not sure how the National Hurricane Center is going to justify this now that it is completely embedded in the ITCZ and has no closed circulation.

EP, 01, 2013051700, , BEST, 0, 96N, 1101W, 35, 1006, TS, 34, NEQ, 40, 40, 0, 40, 1010, 180, 20, 0, 0, E, 0, , 0, 0, ALVIN, M,
Quoting stormchaser19:


Likely to stay neutral all the way..


It guarantees a very active North Atlantic season.
NWS Fort Worth @NWSFortWorth
More info coming soon but new Tornado count from yesterday's event is now at 15 tornadoes. Still lots of data to look at.



Cleburne TX tornado has been given a preliminary EF-3 rating. The most significant damage was just E of Lake Cleburne.


An EF-1 tornado has been confirmed in Ennis. That makes Tor #13 for the event. Ennis tornado was approx 6 miles long. #txwx
Quoting AussieStorm:
NWS Fort Worth ‏@NWSFortWorth
More info coming soon but new Tornado count from yesterday's event is now at 15 tornadoes. Still lots of data to look at.
I knew there would be more.Something wasn't right about that 13 count before.
Wow i did not see the 12Z CMC 998MB!:)
221. JRRP
Quoting Tropicsweatherpr:
The Mid-May update of the ENSO models is out and are literally flat in Neutral until the end of 2013 going to the start of 2014.



Link


less and less chance to see an El Nino during hurricane season
Hi-Res Vertically Integrated Liquid

Quoting Tropicsweatherpr:


It guarantees a very active North Atlantic season.


Yes..You have the ECMWF ensemble members for 3.4 Nino region, May forecast?
No kidding. When I looked at SPC this morning, 'yesterdays reports' showed only 3 tornadoes! Usually the preliminaries over-count, but not this time.

Quoting washingtonian115:
I knew there would be more.Something wasn't right about that 13 count before.
For everyone with a strong interest in radar/severe weather meteorology, I hope you are taking the time to work through the radar data of last night's event while the local NWS office in Dallas/Ft Worth does their surveying. I finally had a chance to really look at it tonight and to overlay some other geospatial data, and it is a really good case, for dual pol and just in general.

An overview:

2315-0010 UTC
A supercell moves from northeast Erath County to western Hood County. Nothing particularly significant. Hail is the main threat, and the character of the storm even appears to be somewhat elevated with only surface rotation but an on/off BWER signature.

0020-0050 UTC
This is where things start to get intersting. The original supercell continues to move across northern Hood County and starts to dissipate, although a weak surface circulation appears and moves into NW Granbury. At the same time, a new cell rapidly forms to the SW, almost in the updraft region of the first. A complex cell merger seems to take place over Granbury, and a new cell develops severe characteristics almost immediately (a BWER within ~10 minutes).
About the time of the 0049 UTC radar scan, a new RFD seems evident on radar and it quickly moves ESE across the southern portion of Granbury.

0055-0115 UTC
After about 10 minutes of this RFD moving into the storm, a tight near-surface circulation forms (0.5 degree tilt is ~1500ft) just west of David Rd between Granbury and DeCordova.
One scan (0058UTC), it was very disorganized shear, and the next scan (0102 UTC) there was a tight couplet. Estimated time of tornado formation from radar ~0100 UTC. Both SRM velocity and SW are indicative of a tight circulation, but no additional information from dual-pol during this scan.
At 0106 UTC, the ciruclation nears Davis Rd and Sundown Trail. BR is not very telling, but in SRM and SW, the circulation has strengthened. CC/RHO has dropped. The tornado is causing damage at this time, and perhaps lifting debris several thousand feet into the air.
At 0111 UTC, the BR suddenly increases, possibly due to debris, but is not quite as clear as in other strong tornadoes. It is by looking at the dual pol products that things are really telling... we have CC/RHO as low as 25% and ZDR is near 0dbz or negative. This is about the time the tornado was causing significant damage to the neighborhoods along Canyon Rd and Sundown Trail.

By 0106 UTC the circulation is occluding. It pulls to the north very slowly, as the main storm begins a right turn toward the SE. Over the last 30-60 minutes, the supercell went from somewhat elevated to surface-based, all while undergoing a complex merger with at least 2 cells almost right over Granbury. This case would be different from many other significant tornado cases in that there was not much warning prior to the severe damage that something very serious was about to occur. By 0115 UTC, the circulation that caused EF4 damage (as of 5/16) quickly dissipated, the parent supercell had formed a surface circulation to the SE, and another supercell had produced a brief circulation to the north, until its inflow was cut off by the Granbury storm.
Quoting stormchaser19:


Yes..You have the ECMWF ensemble members for 3.4 Nino region, May forecast?


The May update comes out on the 22nd. This was the April one.

Quoting Tropicsweatherpr:


The May update comes out on the 22nd. This was the April update.



Ok... Lets see, because in the Enso update they shows the Euro with these numbers..seems like ECMWF will come with negative numbers
ECMWF model -0.2 -0.1 0 -0.1 -0.1

Link
Quoting SFLWeatherman:
Wow i did not see the 12Z CMC 998MB!:)


229. beell
Guess I missed this yesterday. Currently located around 41W.

TROPICAL WEATHER DISCUSSION
NWS NATIONAL HURRICANE CENTER MIAMI FL
205 PM EDT WED MAY 15 2013

...TROPICAL WAVES...
TROPICAL WAVE EXTENDS FROM 02N37W TO 07N35W MOVING W AT 15 KT.
THE WAVE REMAINS LOW-AMPLITUDE AND EMBEDDED WITHIN THE ITCZ AXIS
COINCIDING WITH A GLOBAL MODEL INDICATED MAXIMUM OF POTENTIAL
VORTICITY AT 315K. TOTAL PRECIPITATABLE WATER AND SATELLITE
IMAGERY ALSO INDICATE A MAXIMUM IN LOW-LEVEL MOISTURE
CONVERGENCE AND CLOUDINESS IN THE VICINITY OF THE WAVE AXIS.
WIDELY SCATTTERED MODERATE CONVECTION IS FROM 03N-08N BETWEEN
32W-39W. THE WAVE IS EXPECTED TO CONTINUE MOVING WESTWARD WITH
PRECIPITATION PROBABILITIES INCREASING BY THE WEEKEND ACROSS THE
WINDWARD ISLANDS.
So.... NHC is off to a bad start to the season in term of forecasting tropical cyclone's strength the next few days. So much for Alvin becoming a 80 mph Category 1. Alvin really fell apart quickly.
Quoting Tropicsweatherpr:


Of interest further east is the Gulf of Guinea starting to cool.
That's a plus for the Atlantic hurricane season.
Here is another brief overview of the supercell after it moved SE from Granbury.

0119 UTC
By this time, the Granbury circulation has occluded and dissipated, and the parent supercell has rapidly produced a new surface circulation to the SE. This circulation becomes large within about 5 minutes, with a peak-to-peak distance of >1mi at 1300ft, and signs of convergent rotation. A drop in CC/RHO appears as the circulation crosses the plantation near the Granbury Lake dam, indicating the possibility of lofted debris.

0120-0149 UTC
The circulation continues SE through mostly rural areas over the next 30 minutes, producing off/on debris signatures in CC/RHO and exhibiting very strong rotation signatures. The circulation appears to dissipate just west of Bono.

0158 UTC
A new circulation forms south of Bono roughly 10 minutes later. This circulation moves eastward slowly for about 5-10 minutes as it increases in strength, then the directly suddenly shifts to the NNE.

0206-0230 UTC
After the circulation turns NNE, it is heading almost direclty for Cleburne. The circulation appears to grow in both strength and size, with peak-to-peak velocities spanning 1.0-1.5mi and velocity dealias failures occuring.
The circuation nears South Nolan River Road around 0215 UTC and acquires a very pronounced, wide, signature in CC/RHO consistant with lofted debris. There is even an apparent "BWER" in the 0.5 degree scan though the circulation, which may be a combination of rain/hail/debris wrapping around. The circulation moves into the far SW edges of Cleburne by 0219 UTC with continued strong signatures for strong rotation and debris. The circulation quickly dissipates after 0223 UTC after the circulation enters Cleburne, and possible debris signature in dual pol lingers through 0228 UTC.

This time frame roughly corresponds to when several chasers took photos and video of a very large tornado near Cleburne. Radar signatures are consistent with this. One thing of note is how very close this tornado came to causing substantial damage to Cleburne, as opposed to weakening quickly after entering town.
@NWSFortWorth
Tornado count is now up to 16 tornadoes. This number likely won't change anymore tonight. Here's the latest: Link
Quoting Gearsts:
That's a plus for the Atlantic hurricane season.


That is right as cooler GOG means ITCZ lifts northward causing the waves to emerge more north rather than doing so closer to the equator.
This is starting to sound more reasonable from yesterday:

The Weather Channel ‏@weatherchannel 4m
RT @nwsfortworth: Tornado count is now up to 16 tornadoes. This number likely won't change anymore tonight.
Quoting Bluestorm5:
So.... NHC is off to a bad start to the season in term of forecasting tropical cyclone's strength the next few days. So much for Alvin becoming a 80 mph Category 1. Alvin really fell apart quickly.
it tried too get it together but it simply fail to take off
and the day effect was not kind to it either

there will be others lots and lots of time left
Quoting AussieStorm:
@NWSFortWorth
Tornado count is now up to 16 tornadoes. This number likely won't change anymore tonight. Here's the latest: Link


thats a large number for just a "slight risk"..could be why the SPC didnt update their page with the tornado count?
239. wxmod
Quoting hydrus:
I have initiated protests to ban catalytic converters...


Right on. Keep up the good work. The damn things was just a conspiracy!
Quoting KEEPEROFTHEGATE:
it tried too get it together but it simply fail to take off
and the day effect was not kind to it either

there will be others lots and lots of time left
Long season still, I agree.
Quoting TropicalAnalystwx13:
*cough*





Quoting Gearsts:

Very high instability, extreme moisture (in the 70s F), decent wind shear and great crossovers, sufficient forcing, low LCLs, great lapse rates...

Tornado outbreak on Monday across central/eastern OK. Threat may--should, actually--extend northeastward to Wisconsin and southwestward into north-central Texas, however. Sunday looks equally as favorable.
Quoting Gearsts:

It is really favorable for supercells and tornadoes...
Quoting TropicalAnalystwx13:

Very high instability, extreme moisture (in the 70s F), decent wind shear and great crossovers, sufficient forcing, low LCLs, great lapse rates...

Tornado outbreak on Monday across central/eastern OK. Threat may--should, actually--extend northeastward to Wisconsin and southwestward into north-central Texas, however. Sunday looks equally as favorable.
Sorry i don't know much about severe weather and is nice to learn from you guys.
Quoting Neapolitan:
Ah, that's the Anthony Watts response! (I saw it yesterday). You--and Mr. Watts--need to read the entire thing carefully. As Angela herself states, "97.1% of the studies published between 1991 to 2011 that expressed a position on manmade climate change agreed that it was happening, and that it was due to human activity.


http://science.discovery.com/strange-science/10-s cience-mistakes.htm
From Masters heading.....Bold mine

" The research, which is the most comprehensive analysis of climate
research to date, found that 97.1% of the studies published between 1991
to 2011 that expressed a position on manmade climate change agreed that
it was happening, and that it was due to human activity."

How does a paper get published? and does the paper have a litmus test?

JMO
But it seems obvious that if the study does not fall into lockstep with previous studies,then it is not published or is relegated to publishing in neglected circles.

The practice is so concrete that even studies by well established scientists,that are actually studying parts of the dynamics of the atmosphere that arent well understood are being shoved aside.

They are trying to further science in areas that aren't completely or even partially understood.

And the only reason for the cold shoulder is non compliance.

The history of scientific study and the in crowd is rife with the blatant examples.
What makes people believe that today is any different than hundreds of years worth of historical examples?

It really looks like breaking ground science is peer squashed because it contradicts previous study's.

History repeats its self in MMGW, as in the earth is flat and the sound barrier cant be broken.

Scientific peers seem to have little problem publishing papers on STRING THEORY!

But cosmic rays,polarity,Earths reaction to increased CO2 and water vapor? or many others.
It wreaks of the disgusting label of DENIALISM so shut it down.

And to think how these Scientists are completely underfunded and how the Peers in control  of publishing are awash in extraordinary funds?

Does that seem like ,an inquiring minds want to know atmosphere?
Or a scientific process striving for new data?

My God,publish it and put a disclaimer on it.
But no!
There is an agenda,and its rife with un reviewed public monies.

How confident are you with the concerns or abilities of the Congressional over-site committees?

All this concern about "BIG"... Ag /Business/Pharm/... etc.
Quite often very worthy of concern.
How about the biggest big there is?
Big Gov?

And its most big of all..... The American tax payers wallet at its disposal with very little over-site.

The biggest big of all political and media talking points;that blame or sidetrack the direction of view to these brothers,that company,or a group of CEOs, are no comparison to the United States of America expenditures and influence .... BIG!

Just think about big, and follow the real money with influence.

Oh,dont get me wrong,big special influence "X" is powerful,but whom are they influencing?

You want to reduce/stop big industry influence on the Big Gov??????
You need to reduce Gov! There is no other way!

Just saw this...

@wxbrad 9h

Storm surge warnings will start being issued in 2015. Per @NHCDirector #biblf13


Think this is a great decision.
Quoting TropicalAnalystwx13:

Very high instability, extreme moisture (in the 70s F), decent wind shear and great crossovers, sufficient forcing, low LCLs, great lapse rates...

Tornado outbreak on Monday across central/eastern OK. Threat may--should, actually--extend northeastward to Wisconsin and southwestward into north-central Texas, however. Sunday looks equally as favorable.


I remember there was a major tornado outbreak predicted one day in 2010 or 2011, and it ended up mainly being a bust because the dew points were too close to the temperature of the air at peak heating (it was something like 85F temperature and 75 dewpoint), or something like that.

I'm not saying this will happen, it just happened to cross my mind when I read that description.
Quoting TropicalAnalystwx13:
*cough*











here some cough medicine
Quoting Forsaken:
There are two very different kinds of "gravity wave" I just learned. I was about to call BS before I looked it up. In the pic are these gravity waves, while what had come to my mind was gravitational waves.

Learn something everyday I guess.

I would have just called them "waves" though, really big waves. =p



I try to learn something new every day too. I learned about meteorological gravity waves just a couple years ago.
Quoting wxmod:


I am all respect and nothing else. I am following your lead. I have decided to change my party affiliation and buy a dump truck because of your comments. You say global warming is not man made: I respond by turning up my coal fired stove to 80 and keeping the air conditioner on and the refrigerator open so I can see all the food! I respect you; thank you for being so kind to mother nature. Cutie!


AGW, the world's newest religion.
The President and Congress along with the senate and every oversite comity state they had no idea what was going on with any of the latest scandals?

Why is that?

Just consider the fact that there has been litigation against the IRS for singling out and harassing groups of American Citizens from Nixon times.

And our President and our "Congress/Senate" had no idea that this type of thing was happening?

And the "Lady" in charge at the center of the IRS scandal is now in charge (at the IRS) of the American Affordable Health care division of............ Wait for it!..... THE IRS!

Do you want her in charge of your MEDICAL RECORDS and ???????????????


Wake up!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
253. beell
Quoting TropicalAnalystwx13:

Very high instability, extreme moisture (in the 70s F), decent wind shear and great crossovers, sufficient forcing, low LCLs, great lapse rates...

Tornado outbreak on Monday across central/eastern OK. Threat may--should, actually--extend northeastward to Wisconsin and southwestward into north-central Texas, however. Sunday looks equally as favorable.


Not too shabby. Decently low LCL's, but LFC's a little on the high side. Somewhat elevated convection on that profile.
Quoting Chucktown:
Frankie's back with a Severe Weather Forecast for this weekend !!

Link


I hadn't heard of Frankie. That is awesome!

Do you think you could use him for your station's weather segment on April Fool's Day?
Quoting spathy:
The President and Congress along with the senate and every oversite comity state they had no idea what was going on with any of the latest scandals?

Why is that?

Just consider the fact that there has been litigation against the IRS for singling out and harassing groups of American Citizens from Nixon times.

And our President and our "Congress/Senate" had no idea that this type of thing was happening?

And the "Lady" in charge at the center of the IRS scandal is now in charge (at the IRS) of the American Affordable Health care division of............ Wait for it!..... THE IRS!

Do you want her in charge of your MEDICAL RECORDS and ???????????????


Wake up!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
C'mon, spathy; try to keep it on topic. Your denialist and anti-government conspiracy theories really have no place here, do they?
Alvin is now a minimal TS and is expected to weaken further, no surprise there.
Quoting Xyrus2000:


That statement makes no sense no matter how you look at it. Climate scientist make up a small segment of the science community, and receive a paltry amount of grants compared to some other branches of science. They by no means make up 97% of scientists.


I think when the president linked 30 million people to this blog he indirectly sent the nonsensical "I-will-not-believe-it-because-fox-news-says-it's- fake" crowd to us.
Quoting CybrTeddy:


I think when the president linked 30 million people to this blog he indirectly sent the nonsensical "I-will-not-believe-it-because-fox-news-says-it's- fake" crowd to us.


Faux News--we distort--you comply!


Along with U.S. News and World Distort, Tame, and Newsweak.
Something tells me that the tables may turn this year with regard to tropical cyclone intensity in the Atlantic Basin.  The past few seasons the tropical cyclones in the Atlantic have underachieved when it came to intensity forecasts due to some factors such as decreased atmospheric instability, but in the EPAC the cyclones overachieved.  I have a bad feeling that this year, things may swing in the other direction (as we have already seen with Alvin underachieving).  What do you guys think?
Quoting Bluestorm5:
So.... NHC is off to a bad start to the season in term of forecasting tropical cyclone's strength the next few days. So much for Alvin becoming a 80 mph Category 1. Alvin really fell apart quickly.

Quoting Bluestorm5:
Just saw this...

@wxbrad 9h

Storm surge warnings will start being issued in 2015. Per @NHCDirector #biblf13

A member of the Storm surge unit was on the Barometer Bob show earlier talking about it.
I really wish you guys would keep your political views to yourself or take it to your own blog ..
Haven't seen many instances that I can recall that a tropical cyclone ended up dying because it merged itself back into the ITCZ. Alvin wasn't in a very good position - if he'd gain latitude away from the ITCZ he would have ran into heavy shear and have been decapitated.
Quoting lobdelse81:
Something tells me that the tables may turn this year with regard to tropical cyclone intensity in the Atlantic Basin.  The past few seasons the tropical cyclones in the Atlantic have underachieved when it came to intensity forecasts due to some factors such as decreased atmospheric instability, but in the EPAC the cyclones overachieved.  I have a bad feeling that this year, things may swing in the other direction (as we have already seen with Alvin underachieving).  What do you guys think?



I found it slightly strange the NHC named Alvin as he was still embedded in the ITCZ.
Quoting CybrTeddy:
Haven't seen many instances that I can recall that a tropical cyclone ended up dying because it merged itself back into the ITCZ. Alvin wasn't in a very good position - if he'd gain latitude away from the ITCZ he would have ran into heavy shear and be decapitated.


When has that happened before? I can't recall an example.
Quoting AussieStorm:


I found it slightly strange the NHC named Alvin as he was still embedded in the ITCZ.


Alvin wasn't really embedded within the ITCZ. It actually developed and separated while still in the vicinity of the ITCZ and was clearly a tropical cyclone as it was using it's own energy to sustain itself instead of the ITCZ (although the ITCZ also helped for the system to drawn energy upon - it was not fully dependent on it). I recall several Atlantic storms forming in a similar way. The thing is, they usually gain latitude while Alvin did not. This caused Alvin to merge right back into the ITCZ.
00Z NAM is showing a classic-looking outbreak in as soon as 72 hours.


Quoting trumpman84:
This isn't new information and the results aren't surprising.

1) Papers which write dissenting opinions on climate change do not pass the peer review process and, therefore, would not show up in this study. (Also, papers supporting the consensus with questionable research, and unsubstantiated findings and conclusions have passed the peer review process and would show up on this study).


Absolutely false. You have no concept of what the peer review process actually involves. First, papers do not begin with opinions. The begin with a hypothesis. The scientist the tries to disprove the hypothesis through various means, which MUST be published before the paper has any hope of getting passed the editors, let alone be distributed to reviewers. The methodologies outlined in the paper must be reproducible in order for reviewers to check the results in the paper. The data must also be provided to the reviewers.

There are very limited funds when it comes to science, and competition is extremely fierce. Papers do not get rubber stamped or immediately rejected. In fact, it is extremely detrimental to the reviewing scientists if they did. If you think about it for a second, you'll figure out why. Every paper cites one or more other papers. If scientists just started outright rubber stamping papers, then there is a very good likelihood that their paper will end up citing either directly or indirectly. When that happens, and it turns out the rubber-stamped paper was a fraud, then suddenly it is their reputation on the line. Once your reputation in scientific circles becomes tarnished you're pretty much finished.

2) Studies which will/will likely support the consensus are much more likely to receive funding. AGW is a popular and sexy topic right now in politics and science and is, therefore, more likely to get funded than a funding request from a known skeptic on the 'Effect of ocean cycles on Global Temperatures.'


Absolutely false. Grants are not awarded based on popular opinion, but on the merits of the proposed research itself. A board of scientists review the proposals against the existing body of science and determine which proposals are most likely to provide the most useful results (whether the proposed hypothesis holds or not). If there is a very strong body of science supporting a particular theory and you want funding for contrarian research, you better make sure your proposal is very strong (you wouldn't believe the number of nonsense proposals that reviewers throw out, think "Perpetual Motion Research"). This is true in any branch of science, not just climate science.

Also, numerous papers are published by Ph. D students who do not receive grant money.

3) Scientists who identify as 'climate scientists' and, therefore, would write papers about the climate are already convinced that the null hyptothesis is that humans are warming the planet. Therefore, anything they find during their study that does not explicitly refute that assumption is evidence of human induced climate change. Example:

Findings: We observed a 10% reduction in marine life diversiy in this section of ocean over the past 20 years. This section of ocean has also warmed by 1 degree in the same time period.

Conclusion: Human induced climate change has caused a 10% reduction in marine life diversity for the section of ocean studied. Further warming of 2 degrees by the year 2100 could cause an additional 20% reduction in marine life diversity.


Absolutely false. Look into how real scientific research is done. Again, a paper described as you laid out would be lucky to make it through the editors, let alone a peer review. If such nonsense were so easy to pass there would be a lot more than just 4000 papers and almost all of them would be as scientifically useless as Anthony Watt's website.

The scientific method isn't about proving what you think. It's about disproving what you think. If you exhaust all methods to disprove your hypothesis and it still stands AND a group of experts in your field also try and fail to do so, then it can be established as a theory.

If what you say is true, you could just write any sort of BS paper and get it published just by agreeing with the consensus. Good luck with that.

4) If the science supporting global warming is so obvious and so robust, why do we continue to do subsequent studies trying to convince people that there is a scientific consensus?


You really don't understand why scientists do research, do you?

Climate scientists study the climate. Global warming is just ONE SINGLE FACET of climate science. In fact, one could go so far as to say that global warming is simply one result produced from the study of the climate system. Climate research is MUCH larger than just global warming.

Th climate system is comprised of many components. At a high level, you have things like the oceans, the land, orbital dynamics, and the atmosphere. Within those you have things like radiative transfer, thermohaline ciruclations, and carbon cycles. And even within those you have aerosols, atmospheric chemistry, etc. In fact, there is no climate scientist that is an expert in ALL of climate science; they usually specialize in an area of the climate. You can spend a lifetime just studying one part of the climate system.

And from all those studies (the earliest ones goes back to the early 19th century) one byproduct of the research is that higher concentrations of GHG's warm the planet. And from recent research, we know we have been the ones doing it.

Trying to get all the advanced physics, chemistry, and scientific research into a little 5 minute digestable chunk for the masses is not really what scientists are interested in. They do not have the time, money, or a billion dollar PR machine to do so. Nor is it even possible. If you want to know about the science, the results, and what it means, then read the papers or go on summary sites like Real Climate or Skeptical Science. Or you can rely on the experts, which you do every day for numerous other activities.

I am a skeptic and even I know that a majority of those claiming to be climate scientists agree with the consensus. However, as a skeptic. I don't want to take the word of others - I want something I can look at -- that I can understand.


You're making ridiculous demands. You want something you can understand but you don't want to make the effort to actually educate yourself to understand what is already out there. That's like you saying that you think Wiles's proof of Fermat's Last Theorem is false simply because you can't understand the mathematics that went into the 200 page proof.

The data is online. The results are online in one form or another. If you really want to dive into it then you're going to have to pony up for for the journal articles (or go to your local college university where they may have them for free). But no one is going to spoon feed you the results. Again, scientists don't have the time or the funding to put everything into layman's terms. The closest thing you're going to get to that is the IPCC reports.

It's not good enough to say:
-The Earth has warmed
-CO2 has risen
-CO2 causes a greenhouse effect
-Humans burn fossil fuels which emit CO2
Therefore, humans are causing an increase in atmospheric CO2 which is warming and will continue to warm the climate. A warming Earth will lead to a multitude of positive feedbacks which will result in catastrophy.

In my opinion, there are too many logical leaps in that simple statement.


And if it were any Joe Sixpack on the street telling you that, then you'd have a case. But that isn't what's happening. Experts in the field of research are saying this (minus the catastrophe part), backed by huge amounts of peer reviewed research and data.

You can chose not to listen to the experts. People do that all the time. How many people do you know still eat deep fried bacon burgers and smoke 3 packs a day despite knowing the health issues that it will can cause? But not listening to the experts certainly won't magically make them not develop heart disease, lung cancer, etc. Just because you don't like what the experts in a field are saying doesn't mean they are wrong, especially if said experts have a mountain of research to back up what they're telling you.

-What are all the possible reasons the Earth may have warmed?


There are five possible reasons:
1. Change in orbital dynamics. This happens on cycles of many thousands of years. These days we have high precision measurements of axial tilt and orbital positioning. These are not influencing global temperatures. In fact, we should be cooling.

2. Increase in solar output. We have numerous satellites keeping track of solar output.There have been no abnormal increases in solar output over the solar cycles. In fact, it has been a little weaker than normal this cycle.

3. Increase in GHG's. Ever since the days of Fourier it's been known that the only thing keeping our planet from being an ice ball is the greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. And right now we are at the highest CO2 concentration that the planet has had in a few million years. More greenhouse gases, the more and longer the planet can retain heat. The result is obvious.

4. Massive global geological activity. This isn't something we would miss. And really, warming would be the least of our concerns in this case.

5. Some combination of the above. The only one that is currently present is number 3.

Do we even know them all, much less studied them in depth?


Yes. At the simplest level, you can consider the Earth as a blackbody with a layer of heat trapping gases. The Earth itself does not produce an appreciable amount of heat. So in order to warm the planet, the Earth either needs to receive more heat or it needs to trap more heat. Since solar activity is not on some rampant rise, we know it is something that has changed on the planet that is retaining heat. And wouldn't you know there just so happens to be a rather large increase in GHG's in our atmosphere.

Why has CO2 risen?


Fossil fuel combustion. We burn billions of tons of oil and coal, sequestered carbon that hasn't been part of the active carbon cycle for millions of years.

Could there be other reasons?


If global volcanic activity increased by a couple orders of magnitude, then yes. However, CO2 would be the least of our worries.

Can you prove with certainty that humans are responsible for all of the CO2 increase?


Yep. Carbon from the natural cycle has a certain isotopic ratio of radioactive carbon (aka carbon-14). This is the same carbon isotope the use in carbon dating. Carbon that does not come from the natural cycle is depleted of carbon-14 (it's been buried a long time) and is almost entirely made up of carbon-13. Isotopic measurements of the CO2 in show and rather large change in the isotopic ratio. There is A LOT more carbon-13, indicating the source comes from fossil fuels.

Does the CO2 greenhouse effect observed in small scale experience work the same way in a large, complex system such as the Earth?


It would be breaking some pretty serious laws of physics and chemistry if it didn't. The ability for a compound to absorb heat doesn't change just because you put it in a bigger box.

If it does, how can you know for sure what the amplitude of such of an effect is?


Because scientists have been studying it for going on 200 years now. With modern supercomputers, they've managed to nail down a pretty good range of what the response will be.

What are the effects of the diminishing returns of increased CO2 (each doubling produces less warming overall).


Really irrelevant when it comes to global warming. The first doubling (to 560 ppm) is going to cause numerous problems as it is. If there is a second doubling (1020ppm) things are going to get mighty unpleasant. Of course, that doesn't account for the looming positive feedback cycles (melting methane clathrates and permafrost dumping even more GHG's into the atmosphere.

How do we know the effect and direction of all the climate feedbacks?


Fundamentally, physics. These days, the physics is placed inside massively parallel computer models, however it is still just physics.

Since runaway positive feedbacks are necessary for the climate models to reach >1-2 degrees of warming, this is very important.


Incorrect. The models do not require runaway positive feedbacks for temperature increases. The models can accurately recreate the current temperature record without them. In fact, it would be very difficult to create a runaway positive feedback on Earth. We just don't have the conditions to create them (in another billion years or so we will). You can check the IPCC reports on this.

How do we know the known feedbacks will work as expected, even with temperatures higher than current?


Because the Earth doesn't suddenly violate conservation of energy because it wants to. More to the point. People much smarter than you have been studying aspects like this for some time know. Google is your friend.

How many feedbacks are there that we don't know a lot about?


If they exist, they would be few. Most of the lesser known feedbacks would result in additional POSITIVE feedbacks.

What about the feedbacks we don't know anything about?


Like what, for example? Do you think there is some big negative feedback hiding in the mantle of the Earth somewhere? Your creating magical fairies here.

You can prove all day that the Earth has warmed, that CO2 is going up and that humans emit CO2. What I need, to be comfortable with the concept, is more to tie it all together.


Then stop wasting time making posts like this and actually do some research. There are numerous resources online for you to get up to speed with the current science (which you seems to know nothing about or you wouldn't have asked most of your questions). These resources are free. If you want more in depth knowledge, then there are numerous well reviewed text books on the subject. There's nothing hidden or mysterious going on here. Do a few google searches. Do some searches for climate science books on Amazon. Enroll in some physics an math courses so you can understand what you're reading. The questions you are asking are pretty basic and are already answered in the existing literature and research.

You are not going to magically get answers to your questions. You're going to need to put some effort into it. Just like any other field of study you want to ask intelligent questions of.

Xyrus can I copy and save your comment so I can post it (with attribution) the next time that conspiracy theory is posted again.

One of the most brilliant comments I have seen here. Maybe the most brilliant of all.
So I went web surfing on UNC-Asheville's meteorology program and I came back 30 minutes to see political war going on...

POLITICS DO NOT BELONG ON HERE!


Anyway, I'm impressed how UNC-Asheville run their meteorology program. Now I remembered why I enrolled to UNC-Asheville this fall over UNC-Charlotte and NC State (class size is also major factor as well). UNC-Asheville meteorology students were actually in Norman, OK when severe weather developed in North Texas yesterday so they went storm chasing and found an EF-1 tornado near town of Millsap, Texas. WLOS in Asheville ran a story about this today:

http://www.wlos.com/shared/news/features/top-stor ies/stories/wlos_unca-tornado-class-11686.shtml

I'm excited to be in Asheville the next four years of my life learning about the world of meteorology!
What's the story, Kori?

I knew it! All I have to do is greet Kori in advance and he'll stay out of the blog for at least half an hour ;)
Quoting AussieStorm:


I found it slightly strange the NHC named Alvin as he was still embedded in the ITCZ.
No, Alvin was definitely separated, we went through this yesterday.
Quoting Bluestorm5:
So.... NHC is off to a bad start to the season in term of forecasting tropical cyclone's strength the next few days. So much for Alvin becoming a 80 mph Category 1. Alvin really fell apart quickly.
Yes, that was a severely blown forecast. A 48hr forecast for a 90 MPH category 1 will verify as remnant low. That's about as bad as a forecast gets from the NHC.
India Meteorological Department
Tropical Cyclone Advisory #48
WELL MARKED LOW PRESSURE AREA, FORMER MAHASEN (BOB01-2013)
5:30 AM IST May 17 2013
==========================================

At 0:00 AM UTC, The depression over Manipur moved northeastward and weakened further into a well marked low pressure area over Nagaland and neighborhood.

The low is likely to move further northeastward and become more less marked during the next 24 hours.
Quoting Xyrus2000:
My hat goes off to you for taking the time to respond to these goons. Nice post.
Quoting TomTaylor:
Yes, that was a severely blown forecast. A 48hr forecast for a 90 MPH category 1 will verify as remnant low. That's about as bad as a forecast gets from the NHC.

It's not really their fault though. None of the global models nor the SHIPS showed appreciable wind shear like we've seen today.
Quoting TropicalAnalystwx13:

It's not really their fault though. None of the global models nor the SHIPS showed appreciable wind shear like we've seen today.


I wouldn't blame it on wind shear. The influence of the monsoon trough has been Alvin's biggest downfall.
Quoting MississippiWx:


I wouldn't blame it on wind shear. The influence of the monsoon trough has been Alvin's biggest downfall.

The monsoon trough has made Alvin's convection ragged/shaggy, destroyed its developing inner core, and exposed its circulation this morning?
Quoting TomTaylor:
My hat goes off to you for taking the time to respond to these goons. Nice post.


Agreed. I don't even get into the AGW debates that much, but that was an incredible post.
Quoting TropicalAnalystwx13:

The monsoon trough has made Alvin's convection ragged/shaggy, destroyed its developing inner core, and exposed its circulation this morning?


It was embedded within the monsoon trough which gave a lot of competition to Alvin and it wasn't able to focus convection near a center. In fact, you showed the OSCAT pass from earlier. It didn't even have a closed circulation, thanks to the monsoon trough. Shear doesn't open up a low level circulation like that. Interference from a trough does.
Quoting TomTaylor:
No, Alvin was definitely separated, we went through this yesterday.


If it was separated yesterday, then it became embedded again today. Alvin was a separate entity yesterday, but not today.
Quoting TomTaylor:
My hat goes off to you for taking the time to respond to these goons. Nice post.


I will say with all the GW/AGW discussion, I have never seen the "other" side of this debate call people names..do we really have to resort to name calling like this is a sandbox?..Goons??..When did WU became the Sopranos of weather blogs?..
Quoting Xyrus2000:



Peer reviews are over rated, IE in Army Ranger school you can be the meanest, most physical sob and be peered out for being to hard on others. I gets you recycled. The science community in many ways is the same. Einstein's E=MC(squared) was left out of his biography because he new it has flays, but we all learned it as fact in schools.

Link
Quoting TropicalAnalystwx13:

It's not really their fault though. None of the global models nor the SHIPS showed appreciable wind shear like we've seen today.
Well..it kinda is, it's their job after all. And yeah SHIPS didn't show it but when the ECMWF CMC and GFS all show nothing spectacular, you shouldn't forecast much. ECMWF basically had nothing. Even the CMC, which is the most notorious for being overly intense didn't show much more than a minimal TS. GFS did have a strong TS but I don't think I ever saw it show anything near 90MPH.

Overall the global models didn't do that bad with this one. Hurricane models did horrible, however. GFDL and HWRF consistently showing cat 2/3 hurricanes, ridiculousness. They always overdue it. Always.
When the three percent against man driven GW have hoodwinked the masses into thinking it's fifty/fifty; the three percent are winning. The three percent has big business and politicians; the climate scientists have the truth but not the clout or money. Why the hell are the three percent being allowed to mislead so many? And why are the masses so blithering ignorant to the rapidly changing world around them and the truth behind the science? One of the biggest cover ups of all time. Generations from now will blame us for not preparing for what they will be dealing with. Energy companies will go to the ends of the earth to have this truth not discussed on a national level. Best entertained in the world here in America; who has the time to care? We have been divided and conquered in America to the point we fail to operate as a true democracy. GW is a political football; party members rattle off their political leanings talking points on GW and never seek the truth. I don't see how this changes in our life time. We will wait till the consequences start to become undeniable in human toll; and then it will be too late.
Tropical Storm Alvin:

Quoting Xyrus2000:
@268




Quoting ncstorm:


I will say with all the GW/AGW discussion, I have never seen the "other" side of this debate call people names..do we really have to resort to name calling like this is a sandbox?..Goons??..When did WU became the Sopranos of weather blogs?..


And as to your (and many others) constant whining about the smashing that AGW deniers receive on this blog - read Xyrus' comment again. Educate yourself on the science and come up with a legitimate critique, or quit complaining. (hint: if you find one, you should be writing it for peer review, not in the comments section on a blog)


It's not our job to hold your hand while you figure it out. the research is out there, and anyone who wanders into this blog to complain about the topic of the blog ought to be ostracized - we have better things to talk about. if people come in and ask the same tired questions that have been answered hundreds of times, or bring up discredited talking points (hacked emails! scientific conspiracy!), most people are just gonna call them an idiot, rather than write the essay that Xyrus so nicely laid out. Most of us recognize it's not worth the trouble, and yet we still feed the trolls sometimes. but you, you're a smart guy (gal? whatever), and you obviously know some things about tropical weather, so please, keep on with that. but enough with the victim complex. no one cares if Nea (or anyone else) hurts your fee-fees by insulting the intelligence of people who refuse to learn what most of us have already figured out.

Quoting TomTaylor:
ECMWF basically had nothing.
ECMWF is overrated. It's terrible with cyclogenesis (big win for the GFS with Alvin), and arguably as bad at forecasting intensification, although I haven't studied the latter as much, so I could be mistaken here.
Quoting evilpenguinshan:






And as to your (and many others) constant whining about the smashing that AGW deniers receive on this blog - read Xyrus' comment again. Educate yourself on the science and come up with a legitimate critique, or quit complaining. (hint: if you find one, you should be writing it for peer review, not in the comments section on a blog)
It's not our job to hold your hand while you figure it out. the research is out there, and anyone who wanders into this blog to complain about the topic of the blog ought to be ostracized - we have better things to talk about. if people come in and ask the same tired questions that have been answered hundreds of times, or bring up discredited talking points (hacked emails! scientific conspiracy!), most people are just gonna call them an idiot, rather than write the essay that Xyrus so nicely laid out. Most of us recognize it's not worth the trouble, and yet we still feed the trolls sometimes. but you, you're a smart guy (gal? whatever), and you obviously know some things about tropical weather, so please, keep on with that. but enough with the victim complex. no one cares if Nea (or anyone else) hurts your fee-fees by insulting the intelligence of people who refuse to learn what most of us have already figured out.


my fee fees??..LOL..who you Uncle Junior and Nea is Tony??..sometimes you have to laugh at the comments posted here..



yeah. your fee-fees. next time you complain about the Doc blogging about AGW too much, or feel insulted because a member of this blog smacks down a denier troll, or even when you whine about everyone 'getting political' (sorry pal of course it's political, it's a global problem, hence the G in AGW) I'm going to post this gif to remind you that no one cares about your fee-fees.



I'm going to bed. like I said, not worth the effort.

Quoting ncstorm:


my fee fees??..LOL..who you Uncle Junior and Nea is Tony??..sometimes you have to laugh at the comments posted here..





292. JRRP
nice wave south CV


Quoting evilpenguinshan:
yeah. your fee-fees. next time you complain about the Doc blogging about AGW too much, or feel insulted because a member of this blog smacks down a denier troll, or even when you whine about everyone 'getting political' (sorry pal of course it's political, it's a global problem, hence the G in AGW) I'm going to post this gif to remind you that no one cares about your fee-fees.



I'm going to bed. like I said, not worth the effort.





you got to come better than that..LOL..goodnight..get your rest so that you can get up to fight the war of denialism tomorrow..right??..and not once did I complain about the doc and his blog..but nice try..

Hey Guys this is a link to the Radar in Cayman covering the NW carib. They may update this website in the near future

Link
I know I'm late (work...) and everyone's asleep, but here's a late night blog on Alvin.
ncstorm, wow the gloves have really come off tonight. This is good stuff, very funny between you two. Why do you know better than the 97% of climate scientists who disagree with you? Have you ever really looked at the ridiculously overwhelming scientific evidence? Or are you basing you beliefs on political leanings? This subject is not even being debated anymore in the scientific community. It is considered a dead debate. It's been proven. Why are you right, what are your credentials of scientific knowledge that would offset what almost 100% of climate scientists know?
I seriously don't understand how human-induced global warming can still be denied. It's literally right up there with other accepted scientific theories like evolution and gravity.

I learned a long time ago not to underestimate the willful ignorance and inherent logical fallacies that humans are capable of, however. Not that I am exempt from such either.
Yup Kori, so true. I'm out, have a good one. Look forward to your Cane prognosis during the season. Hope your well.
Quoting KoritheMan:

ECMWF is overrated. It's terrible with cyclogenesis (big win for the GFS with Alvin), and arguably as bad at forecasting intensification, although I haven't studied the latter as much, so I could be mistaken here.
But the Cmc wins the prize as it did best with Alvin.
Quoting Civicane49:

Would ex-Alvin and company, become part of the energy that shifts eastward and develops into the low pressure system in the Western Caribbean later this month?

Or does it develop from a completely different system?
Good very early morning guys just letting you know Cayman Radar is now up on the website below I'll be posting a blog later this morning on it

It's still in testing and it will be fully operational at a later time I'll let you know when it's out

Link
Quoting KoritheMan:
I seriously don't understand how human-induced global warming can still be denied. It's literally right up there with other accepted scientific theories like evolution and gravity.

I learned a long time ago not to underestimate the willful ignorance and inherent logical fallacies that humans are capable of, however. Not that I am exempt from such either.
Actually, believe it or not, gravity and evolution (like AGW) are both the work of the devil, Kori. Both are false and should be completely ignored :)
Quoting KoritheMan:

ECMWF is overrated. It's terrible with cyclogenesis (big win for the GFS with Alvin), and arguably as bad at forecasting intensification, although I haven't studied the latter as much, so I could be mistaken here.
It's a poor model for sniffing out threats, yes. ECMWF is usually the last to catch on to a storm. Intensity-wise its usually on the lower end of the spectrum as well. I have noticed that if a storm has already formed, sometimes the ECMWF will go nuts and blow it up, however. We saw this with Sandy and in general it seems to occur with tropical storms in the subtropics/near the mid-latitudes. Could be that it overdoes ventilation from the polar jet cause usually you don't see the ECMWF bomb out a storm in the deep tropics.
Quoting EricSFL:

Would ex-Alvin and company, become part of the energy that shifts eastward and develops into the low pressure system in the Western Caribbean later this month?

Or does it develop from a completely different system?

maybe maybe not it is still a bit early to say maybe in about 72-96 hours time maybe we know better
Look at the N Leewards and Virgin Islands.



This time, I really hope to see the rain.

Quoting EricSFL:

Would ex-Alvin and company, become part of the energy that shifts eastward and develops into the low pressure system in the Western Caribbean later this month?

Or does it develop from a completely different system?


Some of that energy in the eastern Pacific would help contribute more convective (wetter) activity and lower pressures across the western Atlantic later this month through early June as the upward MJO pulse will move in this area. Although it remains highly uncertain that a tropical cyclone will form there during this time, it is still worth watching for a potential development. We also need to watch tropical waves coming off of Africa that can develop into tropical cyclones.

interestingly enough the 00Z NAVGEM show development in the W Caribbean through interaction with the up coming tropical wave and the monsoon trough
Quoting TomTaylor:
Actually, believe it or not, gravity and evolution (like AGW) are both the work of the devil, Kori. Both are false and should be completely ignored :)
It's a poor model for sniffing out threats, yes. ECMWF is usually the last to catch on to a storm. Intensity-wise its usually on the lower end of the spectrum as well. I have noticed that if a storm has already formed, sometimes the ECMWF will go nuts and blow it up, however. We saw this with Sandy and in general it seems to occur with tropical storms in the subtropics/near the mid-latitudes. Could be that it overdoes ventilation from the polar jet cause usually you don't see the ECMWF bomb out a storm in the deep tropics.


It bombs out Gulf of Mexico storms every year, though that is still north of 20N.
Quoting Civicane49:


Some of that energy in the eastern Pacific would help contribute more convective (wetter) activity and lower pressures across the western Atlantic later this month through early June as the upward MJO pulse will move in this area. Although it remains highly uncertain that a tropical cyclone will form there during this time, it is still worth watching for a potential development. We also need to watch tropical waves coming off of Africa that can develop into tropical cyclones.


Thanks for your response.
Ryan Maue‏@RyanMaue3 h
Everything in place Sun-Tues for strong low to occlude & loop around, widespread severe outbreak looks likely. Link
Alvin is now gone. Not surprised to see this given the fact that the center has been lacking a closed circulation. Regeneration is highly unlikely.

BULLETIN
POST-TROPICAL CYCLONE ALVIN ADVISORY NUMBER 8
NWS NATIONAL HURRICANE CENTER MIAMI FL EP012013
200 AM PDT FRI MAY 17 2013

...ALVIN WEAKENS INTO A TROUGH...
...THIS IS THE LAST ADVISORY...


SUMMARY OF 200 AM PDT...0900 UTC...INFORMATION
----------------------------------------------
LOCATION...10.3N 112.0W
ABOUT 790 MI...1275 KM SW OF MANZANILLO MEXICO
MAXIMUM SUSTAINED WINDS...35 MPH...55 KM/H
PRESENT MOVEMENT...WNW OR 285 DEGREES AT 13 MPH...20 KM/H
MINIMUM CENTRAL PRESSURE...1007 MB...29.74 INCHES
POST-TROPICAL CYCLONE ALVIN DISCUSSION NUMBER 8
NWS NATIONAL HURRICANE CENTER MIAMI FL EP012013
200 AM PDT FRI MAY 17 2013

ASCAT AND OSCAT DATA SHOW THAT ALVIN LACKS A CLOSED CIRCULATION IN
ITS WESTERN SEMICIRCLE. THE LATEST SATELLITE IMAGES ALSO INDICATE
THAT THE SYSTEM HAS BECOME ELONGATED WITHOUT A WELL-DEFINED CENTER
AND FURTHER EMBEDDED WITHIN THE ITCZ. THEREFORE...ALVIN IS NO
LONGER A TROPICAL CYCLONE...AND THIS IS THE LAST ADVISORY.
ALTHOUGH THE REMNANTS WILL BE OVER WARM WATER FOR THE NEXT COUPLE
OF DAYS...THE GLOBAL MODELS GENERALLY SHOW PERSISTENT WESTERLY
SHEAR...WHICH WILL LIKELY INHIBIT ANY REGENERATION ATTEMPTS.

FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ON THIS SYSTEM PLEASE SEE HIGH
SEAS FORECASTS ISSUED BY THE NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE...UNDER
AWIPS HEADER NFDHSFEPI AND WMO HEADER FZPN01 KWBC.

FORECAST POSITIONS AND MAX WINDS

INIT 17/0900Z 10.3N 112.0W 30 KT 35 MPH
12H 17/1800Z...DISSIPATED

$$
FORECASTER BLAKE
M FLARE IN PROGRESS
Quoting Luisport:
M FLARE IN PROGRESS
M3.2
Although SPC is going with a Slight Risk categorical for Sunday, the wording is quite strong, and I'd expect an upgrade to Moderate on the Day 2 outlook tomorrow:

...SRN AND CNTRL PLAINS...
AN UPPER-LEVEL LOW IS FORECAST TO DEVELOP ACROSS THE NRN PLAINS
SUNDAY AS A NEGATIVELY-TILTED UPPER-LEVEL TROUGH MOVES EWD INTO THE
SRN AND CNTRL PLAINS. AT THE SFC...A COLD FRONT IS FORECAST TO MOVE
SEWD INTO THE SRN AND CNTRL PLAINS WITH DEWPOINTS AHEAD OF THE FRONT
IN THE MID TO UPPER 60S F. THIS SHOULD RESULT IN MODERATE TO STRONG
DESTABILIZATION BY LATE SUNDAY AFTERNOON FROM ERN KS SSWWD INTO
ECNTRL OK. IN SPITE OF THE INSTABILITY...A STRONG CAPPING INVERSION
SHOULD HOLD BACK CONVECTIVE INITIATION UNTIL LATE AFTERNOON. MODEL
FORECASTS SUGGEST STORMS WILL INITIATE ALONG THE FRONT BY 00Z/MON
WITH AN MCS ORGANIZING AND MOVING ESEWD ACROSS THE REGION. STRONG
INSTABILITY COMBINED WITH IMPRESSIVE DEEP LAYER SHEAR PROFILES WILL
CREATE CONDITIONS FAVORABLE FOR SEVERE THUNDERSTORMS. THERE EXISTS
THE POSSIBILITY FOR WIDESPREAD SEVERE WEATHER INCLUDING A
SIGNIFICANT SEVERE WEATHER EVENT.


FORECAST SOUNDINGS AT 00Z/MON FROM KANSAS CITY SSWWD TO TULSA AND
OKLAHOMA CITY SHOW MLCAPE VALUES OF 2500 TO 3500 J/KG WITH 0-6 KM
SHEAR IN THE 45 TO 55 KT RANGE. A MID-LEVEL JET IS FORECAST TO MOVE
THROUGH THE BASE OF THE UPPER-LEVEL TROUGH HELPING TO INCREASE DEEP
LAYER SHEAR PROFILES AS THE EVENT UNFOLDS. THIS ALONG WITH STEEP
MID-LEVEL LAPSE RATES SHOULD BE IDEAL FOR INTENSE SUPERCELL
DEVELOPMENT.
LARGE HAIL INCLUDING HAILSTONES OF GREATER THAN 2
INCHES IN DIAMETER WILL BE POSSIBLE WITH THE MORE DOMINANT
SUPERCELLS. IN ADDITION...A LOW-LEVEL JET IS FORECAST TO INTENSIFY
EARLY SUNDAY EVENING WHICH SHOULD CREATE LOW-LEVEL SHEAR PROFILES
FAVORABLE FOR TORNADOES. A FEW STRONG TORNADOES MAY ALSO OCCUR
ESPECIALLY IF SUPERCELLS CAN REMAIN DISCRETE EARLY SUNDAY EVENING.
A
WIND DAMAGE THREAT MAY ALSO DEVELOP AND COULD BECOME ENHANCED IF A
LINEAR MCS ORGANIZES.

...NRN PLAINS/UPPER MS VALLEY/MID-MO VALLEY...
AN UPPER-LEVEL LOW IS FORECAST TO DEVELOP ACROSS THE NRN PLAINS ON
SUNDAY AS SOUTH TO SOUTHWEST FLOW REMAINS IN PLACE ACROSS THE MID-MO
VALLEY AND UPPER MS VALLEY. AT THE SFC...A LOW IS FORECAST TO MOVE
SLOWLY ACROSS THE NRN PLAINS WITH A TROUGH EXTENDING SWD INTO THE
MID-MO VALLEY. THE SFC TROUGH SHOULD BE THE FOCUS FOR CONVECTIVE
DEVELOPMENT SUNDAY AFTERNOON. THE MODELS SUGGEST SEVERAL
THUNDERSTORM CLUSTERS OR AN MCS WILL DEVELOP AND MOVE NEWD ACROSS
THE REGION. A MODERATELY UNSTABLE AIRMASS IS FORECAST ALONG WITH
STRONG DEEP LAYER SHEAR PROFILES SUGGESTING THAT WIDESPREAD SEVERE
THUNDERSTORM DEVELOPMENT WILL BE POSSIBLE SUNDAY AFTERNOON AND
EVENING.


FORECAST SOUNDINGS AT OMAHA AND DES MOINES AT 21Z/SUN SHOW MLCAPE
VALUES IN THE 2000 TO 3000 J/KG RANGE WITH 40 TO 50 KT OF DEEP LAYER
SHEAR. THIS COMBINED WITH STEEP LAPSE RATES SHOULD SUPPORT
SUPERCELLS WITH LARGE HAIL. HAILSTONES OF GREATER THAN 2 INCHES WILL
BE POSSIBLE IN THE MID-MO VALLEY WHERE THE STRONGEST INSTABILITY IS
FORECAST. A FEW TORNADOES MAY ALSO OCCUR WITH THE MORE DOMINANT
SUPERCELLS.
THE SEVERE THREAT SHOULD BE MORE ISOLATED ACROSS ERN
PARTS OF THE NRN PLAINS AND IN THE UPPER MS VALLEY WHERE INSTABILITY
IS FORECAST TO BE WEAKER THAN IN AREAS TO THE SOUTH.
Quoting Luisport:
M3.2
Good Morning Folks..The Coffee is perked for when you get here!..
THIS HAZARDOUS WEATHER OUTLOOK IS FOR CENTRAL MISSISSIPPI.

.DAY ONE...TONIGHT AND FRIDAY

A FEW STRONG TO SEVERE STORMS ARE POSSIBLE FRIDAY AFTERNOON AND
EVENING AS AN UPPER LEVEL DISTURBANCE MOVES ACROSS THE NORTHERN
PART OF THE AREA. HAIL AND DAMAGING WINDS WILL BE POSSIBLE FROM
THE STRONGER STORMS. IN ADDITION...LOCALLY HEAVY RAINFALL COULD
DEVELOP FRIDAY NIGHT AS STORMS MAY PERSIST AND MOVE OVER
PREVIOUSLY IMPACTED AREAS.
Quoting evilpenguinshan:






And as to your (and many others) constant whining about the smashing that AGW deniers receive on this blog - read Xyrus' comment again. Educate yourself on the science and come up with a legitimate critique, or quit complaining. (hint: if you find one, you should be writing it for peer review, not in the comments section on a blog)


It's not our job to hold your hand while you figure it out. the research is out there, and anyone who wanders into this blog to complain about the topic of the blog ought to be ostracized - we have better things to talk about. if people come in and ask the same tired questions that have been answered hundreds of times, or bring up discredited talking points (hacked emails! scientific conspiracy!), most people are just gonna call them an idiot, rather than write the essay that Xyrus so nicely laid out. Most of us recognize it's not worth the trouble, and yet we still feed the trolls sometimes. but you, you're a smart guy (gal? whatever), and you obviously know some things about tropical weather, so please, keep on with that. but enough with the victim complex. no one cares if Nea (or anyone else) hurts your fee-fees by insulting the intelligence of people who refuse to learn what most of us have already figured out.



The true story is one side gets banned real quick if they say half of the bashing that you and others do.
Good morning. The weekend will be in part with good weather on Saturday and more rainy on Sunday. Next week looks very rainy in most of the Caribbean.

AREA FORECAST DISCUSSION...DELAYED
NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE SAN JUAN PR
558 AM AST FRI MAY 17 2013

.SYNOPSIS...BASE OF MID TO UPPER LEVEL TROUGH NOW ACROSS THE
NORTHERN LEEWARDS...AND EXTENDS INTO THE SOUTHEASTERN CARIBBEAN...
WITH WEAK UPPER RIDGE EXTENDING ACROSS THE MONA PASSAGE WITH ANOTHER
THIS WILL NOW PLACE THE REGION ON THE CONVERGENT SIDE OF THE UPPER
TROUGH AND SHOULD THEREFORE LIMITED WIDESPREAD CONVECTIVE DEVELOPMENT
TODAY. AT LOW LEVELS...SURFACE HIGH PRESSURE CENTERED ACROSS THE NORTH
CENTRAL ATLANTIC WILL SPREAD AND REESTABLISH ITSELF NORTH OF THE
REGION BY SATURDAY THEN GRADUALLY TIGHTEN THE LOCAL PRESSURE GRADIENT
ACROSS THE NORTH EAST CARIBBEAN. THIS WILL ALLOW FOR AN INCREASE IN
THE EASTERLY TRADE WINDS OVER THE WEEKEND AND INTO EARLY NEXT WEEK.

&&

.DISCUSSION...UPPER TROUGH WILL CONTINUE SHIFT EASTWARDS ACROSS THE
NORTHEAST CARIBBEAN WHILE WEAKENING. LOOKING FOR INCREASING SUBSIDENCE
CAP LATER THIS EVENING AND THROUGH SATURDAY. HOWEVER...THE PERSISTENT
AND GRADUALLY INCREASING EASTERLY TRADES WILL BRING SHALLOW PATCHES
OF LOW TO MID LEVEL MOISTURE ACROSS THE AREA FROM TIME TO TIME.
THEREFORE...EXPECT SUFFICIENT LOW LEVEL MOISTURE CONVERGENCE AND
DIURNAL EFFECTS TO ALLOW FOR AFTERNOON CONVECTIVE DEVELOPMENT IN
SOME AREAS ESPECIALLY ACROSS PARTS OF THE INTERIOR AND WEST SECTIONS
OF PUERTO RICO.

INTO THE WEEKEND...LOOKING FOR A GRADUAL DRYING TREND ACROSS THE
REGION AT LEAST UNTIL SATURDAY. THIS WILL BE FOLLOWED BY INCREASING
MOISTURE AND PWAT VALUES SUNDAY INTO THE EARLY PART OF NEXT WEEK...AS
ANOTHER SHORT WAVE TROUGH WILL APPROACH THE REGION FROM THE WEST
WHILE AN EASTERLY PERTURBATION IS FORECAST TO BRING AN INCREASE IN
TRADE WIND MOISTURE TO THE ISLANDS AND SURROUNDING WATERS. FOR NOW
BASED ON LATEST MODEL GUIDANCE...EXPECT BETTER CHANCE FOR ENHANCEMENT
OF EARLY MORNING AND AFTERNOON CONVECTION DURING THAT PERIOD. UNTIL
THEN...STILL EXPECT AFTERNOON SHOWERS TO DEVELOP WITH MAINLY ISOLATED
THUNDERSTORMS EACH DAY...ESPECIALLY IN ISOLATED AREAS OVER THE INTERIOR
SECTIONS OF PUERTO RICO...THEN DECREASING BY EARLY EVENING HOURS.

&&

.AVIATION...MOSTLY VFR CONDITIONS ARE EXPECTED AT ALL TAF SITES UNTIL
AROUND 17/16Z. MVFR OR EVEN IFR CONDITIONS ARE LIKELY BETWEEN
17/18Z-21Z ALONG THE CORDILLERA CENTRAL AND AROUND TJMZ IN AREAS OF
+SHRA/TSRA. MOUNTAINS WILL BE OBSCURED OVER WESTERN INTERIOR OF PR.
ELSEWHERE...VFR CONDITIONS ARE EXPECTED. TJSJ 17/00Z SOUNDING
INDICATED AN EASTERLY WIND FLOW UP TO 10 KNOTS ALL THE WAY FROM THE
SURFACE TO 20K FEET...BECOMING WESTERLY AND STRONGER ALOFT.

&&

.MARINE...SMALL CRAFT SHOULD EXERCISE CAUTION MAINLY ACROSS THE LOCAL
OFFSHORE WATERS...AS SEAS ARE EXPECTED TO REACH 6 FEET THROUGH THE
WEEKEND WITH INCREASING TRADE WINDS.

&&

.PRELIMINARY POINT TEMPS/POPS...
SJU 86 76 87 77 / 10 0 20 20
STT 86 76 88 78 / 10 10 20 30
Mornin' gang!

Evening Aussie!

Get stickers and logo's on my boat today.. almost back in the water!!!

Some interesting stuff about solar energy and the threat it poses to a very powerful lobby. There are a couple of curse words in this article. They weren't needed so I miss the point of using them.. the ef word once, poopstorm once, so beware if those terms somehow have power over you.

Solar panels could destroy U.S. utilities, according to U.S. utilities

By David Roberts



Solar power and other distributed renewable energy technologies could lay waste to U.S. power utilities and burn the utility business model, which has remained virtually unchanged for a century, to the ground.

That is not wild-eyed hippie talk. It is the assessment of the utilities themselves.

/quote

The pdf being referred too can be found here;

Disruptive Challenges: Financial Implications and Strategic Responses to a Changing Retail Electric Business


Another interesting one;


Exxon revolutionizes energy by delivering it straight to your face

By Ted Alvarez

We blab a lot about distributed energy, but ExxonMobil’s doing something about it. Its patented delivery system — now undergoing beta testing in Mayflower, Ark. — puts energy in your lawn, on water, on birds, and in your pants so you’ll never have to go without. Check it:



Good morning. Here's the SPC's Day 3 outlook (Sunday). Upgrade to moderate risk seems likely.



DAY 3 CONVECTIVE OUTLOOK
NWS STORM PREDICTION CENTER NORMAN OK
0228 AM CDT FRI MAY 17 2013

VALID 191200Z - 201200Z

...THERE IS A SLGT RISK OF SVR TSTMS ACROSS PARTS OF GREAT
PLAINS...UPPER MS VALLEY AND MID-MO VALLEY...

...SRN AND CNTRL PLAINS...
AN UPPER-LEVEL LOW IS FORECAST TO DEVELOP ACROSS THE NRN PLAINS
SUNDAY AS A NEGATIVELY-TILTED UPPER-LEVEL TROUGH MOVES EWD INTO THE
SRN AND CNTRL PLAINS. AT THE SFC...A COLD FRONT IS FORECAST TO MOVE
SEWD INTO THE SRN AND CNTRL PLAINS WITH DEWPOINTS AHEAD OF THE FRONT
IN THE MID TO UPPER 60S F. THIS SHOULD RESULT IN MODERATE TO STRONG
DESTABILIZATION BY LATE SUNDAY AFTERNOON FROM ERN KS SSWWD INTO
ECNTRL OK. IN SPITE OF THE INSTABILITY...A STRONG CAPPING INVERSION
SHOULD HOLD BACK CONVECTIVE INITIATION UNTIL LATE AFTERNOON. MODEL
FORECASTS SUGGEST STORMS WILL INITIATE ALONG THE FRONT BY 00Z/MON
WITH AN MCS ORGANIZING AND MOVING ESEWD ACROSS THE REGION. STRONG
INSTABILITY COMBINED WITH IMPRESSIVE DEEP LAYER SHEAR PROFILES WILL
CREATE CONDITIONS FAVORABLE FOR SEVERE THUNDERSTORMS. THERE EXISTS
THE POSSIBILITY FOR WIDESPREAD SEVERE WEATHER INCLUDING A
SIGNIFICANT SEVERE WEATHER EVENT.


FORECAST SOUNDINGS AT 00Z/MON FROM KANSAS CITY SSWWD TO TULSA AND
OKLAHOMA CITY SHOW MLCAPE VALUES OF 2500 TO 3500 J/KG WITH 0-6 KM
SHEAR IN THE 45 TO 55 KT RANGE. A MID-LEVEL JET IS FORECAST TO MOVE
THROUGH THE BASE OF THE UPPER-LEVEL TROUGH HELPING TO INCREASE DEEP
LAYER SHEAR PROFILES AS THE EVENT UNFOLDS. THIS ALONG WITH STEEP
MID-LEVEL LAPSE RATES SHOULD BE IDEAL FOR INTENSE SUPERCELL
DEVELOPMENT
. LARGE HAIL INCLUDING HAILSTONES OF GREATER THAN 2
INCHES IN DIAMETER WILL BE POSSIBLE WITH THE MORE DOMINANT
SUPERCELLS. IN ADDITION...A LOW-LEVEL JET IS FORECAST TO INTENSIFY
EARLY SUNDAY EVENING WHICH SHOULD CREATE LOW-LEVEL SHEAR PROFILES
FAVORABLE FOR TORNADOES. A FEW STRONG TORNADOES MAY ALSO OCCUR
ESPECIALLY IF SUPERCELLS CAN REMAIN DISCRETE EARLY SUNDAY EVENING
. A
WIND DAMAGE THREAT MAY ALSO DEVELOP AND COULD BECOME ENHANCED IF A
LINEAR MCS ORGANIZES.

...NRN PLAINS/UPPER MS VALLEY/MID-MO VALLEY...
AN UPPER-LEVEL LOW IS FORECAST TO DEVELOP ACROSS THE NRN PLAINS ON
SUNDAY AS SOUTH TO SOUTHWEST FLOW REMAINS IN PLACE ACROSS THE MID-MO
VALLEY AND UPPER MS VALLEY. AT THE SFC...A LOW IS FORECAST TO MOVE
SLOWLY ACROSS THE NRN PLAINS WITH A TROUGH EXTENDING SWD INTO THE
MID-MO VALLEY. THE SFC TROUGH SHOULD BE THE FOCUS FOR CONVECTIVE
DEVELOPMENT SUNDAY AFTERNOON. THE MODELS SUGGEST SEVERAL
THUNDERSTORM CLUSTERS OR AN MCS WILL DEVELOP AND MOVE NEWD ACROSS
THE REGION. A MODERATELY UNSTABLE AIRMASS IS FORECAST ALONG WITH
STRONG DEEP LAYER SHEAR PROFILES SUGGESTING THAT WIDESPREAD SEVERE
THUNDERSTORM DEVELOPMENT WILL BE POSSIBLE SUNDAY AFTERNOON AND
EVENING.

FORECAST SOUNDINGS AT OMAHA AND DES MOINES AT 21Z/SUN SHOW MLCAPE
VALUES IN THE 2000 TO 3000 J/KG RANGE WITH 40 TO 50 KT OF DEEP LAYER
SHEAR. THIS COMBINED WITH STEEP LAPSE RATES SHOULD SUPPORT
SUPERCELLS WITH LARGE HAIL. HAILSTONES OF GREATER THAN 2 INCHES WILL
BE POSSIBLE IN THE MID-MO VALLEY WHERE THE STRONGEST INSTABILITY IS
FORECAST. A FEW TORNADOES MAY ALSO OCCUR WITH THE MORE DOMINANT
SUPERCELLS. THE SEVERE THREAT SHOULD BE MORE ISOLATED ACROSS ERN
PARTS OF THE NRN PLAINS AND IN THE UPPER MS VALLEY WHERE INSTABILITY
IS FORECAST TO BE WEAKER THAN IN AREAS TO THE SOUTH.

..BROYLES.. 05/17/2013
Good morning, everyone. Evening Aussie. A warm 71 degrees already with a humidity of 90%. Feels like temp is 76 degrees.

Today is Field Day for the kids. At least the weather is cooperating and it's not raining. We start off the day with a military dog demonstration, always neat to watch the dogs work. The soldiers man all the stations and games. Its a fun day. And it's my last day! I leave tomorrow for Louisville, KY for my dog show. So this is my last making breakfast until Wednesday, 29 May. And then it will be later as I'll be on summer vacation. Well, I hope I can sleep in a little later!

Breakfast's on the sideboard: Steak and eggs, toast, bran and blueberry muffins, yogurt, fresh fruit and orange juice. Enjoy!
Good morning everybody!

Not a surprise to see that Alvin is no longer being classified as a tropical cyclone.


With Alvin gone, we can keep most of our attention on the upcoming severe weather outbreak. Sunday in particular looks very significant. I expect a moderate risk by tomorrow morning.
Quoting Tribucanes:
When the three percent against man driven GW have hoodwinked the masses into thinking it's fifty/fifty; the three percent are winning. The three percent has big business and politicians; the climate scientists have the truth but not the clout or money. Why the hell are the three percent being allowed to mislead so many? And why are the masses so blithering ignorant to the rapidly changing world around them and the truth behind the science? One of the biggest cover ups of all time. Generations from now will blame us for not preparing for what they will be dealing with. Energy companies will go to the ends of the earth to have this truth not discussed on a national level. Best entertained in the world here in America; who has the time to care? We have been divided and conquered in America to the point we fail to operate as a true democracy. GW is a political football; party members rattle off their political leanings talking points on GW and never seek the truth. I don't see how this changes in our life time. We will wait till the consequences start to become undeniable in human toll; and then it will be too late.




If it's such settled science with AGW, why continue more studies concerning AGW with tax dollars? Give that money to the NHC/NWS to help predict weather events.
Quoting allahgore:




If it's such settled science with AGW, why continue more studies concerning AGW with tax dollars? Give that money to the NHC/NWS to help predict weather events.


Forewarned is forearmed is why. Apart from causing misery to millions of people, AGW will have huge costs to the taxpayer. Crop failures, due to drought, damage to property due to windstorms, floods and wildfires, forest dieback, spread of tropical diseases northwards, and other weather related illnesses, to name a few.

Much of what is to come will take us by surprise, but other factors, such as sea level rise, are more predictable. Scientists need to get as good a handle as possible on future developments, however imperfect that handle may be.
Hamweather's model still shows alvin coming back as a TS...

Lets hope the GFS is right here, We need rain where that model forcasts the remnants to be..


Advisory

Date

Name

Position

Moving

Speed

Pressure

Winds



(PDT)

Lat

Lon

mph (kts)

in (mb)

mph (kts)





8

2:00 AM FRI MAY 17

Post-tropical Cyclone Alvin

10.3N

112W

WNW

13 (11)

29.74 (1007)

35 (30)





7

8:00 PM THU MAY 16

Tropical Storm Alvin

9.8N

110.8W

WNW

14 (12)

29.71 (1006)

40 (35)





6

2:00 PM THU MAY 16

Tropical Storm Alvin

9.5N

109.1W

WNW

12 (10)

29.68 (1005)

45 (39)





5

8:00 AM THU MAY 16

Tropical Storm Alvin

9.4N

107.7W

WNW

9 (8)

29.62 (1003)

50 (43)





4

2:00 AM THU MAY 16

Tropical Storm Alvin

9.1N

106.9W

WNW

10 (9)

29.62 (1003)

50 (43)





3

8:00 PM WED MAY 15

Tropical Storm Alvin

9N

105.9W

WNW

12 (10)

29.65 (1004)

45 (39)





2

2:00 PM WED MAY 15

Tropical Storm Alvin

8.7N

105.1W

WNW

13 (11)

29.68 (1005)

40 (35)





1

8:00 AM WED MAY 15

Tropical Depression One-e

8.2N

103.6W

W

12 (10)

29.71 (1006)

35 (30)
Rainy Season is about to get underway here across FL. Tampa may actually see several inches of rain next week.

192hr GFS precip accum



Orlando
Everyone have a great Friday. Aussie, have a great Saturday.
is that 96.1% rounded off to 97%? i dont buy it
Here some Global Warming talk for you Miami "Heat" will win another championship this year. I don't see anybody stopping them.
Hello folks! Happy Friday

Quoting islander101010:
is that 96.1% rounded off to 97%? i dont buy it
No, it's 97.1% rounded down to 97%. And that's the thing about science: just as with, say, the earth's spherical nature, it's true whether or not anyone chooses to "buy" it.
!!!:)
Tuesday Chance of rain 70%
Quoting StormTrackerScott:
Here some Global Warming talk for you Miami "Heat" will win another championship this year. I don't see anybody stopping them.

Is it a 97.1% concensus?
Quoting FtMyersgal:
Hello folks! Happy Friday


Happy Friday to you too, FMG!
Special Statement
Statement as of 7:57 AM EDT on May 17, 2013

... A significant weather advisory is in effect for northeastern
Broward County... southeastern Palm Beach County... for the development
of funnel clouds...

* until 830 am EDT

* at 747 am EDT... Doppler radar detected a shower likely producing a
waterspout just offshore Lighthouse Point... and moving north at 10
mph. Waterspouts have been reported for over an hour with this
shower off the Broward County coast... and the shower and possible
waterspout is slowly approaching the coast.

* The storm will affect...
Lighthouse Point...
Deerfield Beach...
Boca Raton...
and surrounding communities.

This activity is developing in an environment favorable for the
formation of funnel clouds... and waterspouts can briefly move
onshore. Stay tuned to NOAA Weather Radio and local media for
additional updates and possible warnings.

Residents in these areas should remain on the alert for additional
statements and possible warnings.

Lat... Lon 2640 8006 2637 8006 2621 8008 2620 8009
2620 8011 2639 8011 2645 8006 2644 8005
time... Mot... loc 1154z 161deg 10kt 2627 8007
CMC has pushed the timeframe back for our next named storm (it was too progressive anyways) to next weekend. It remains consistent on something with the MJO though (EPAC).

This just gives you an idea of how active it will become over FL next week as 2.0 to 2.5" PWAT's surge in from the C & Eastern Caribbean.





Very light wind shear around FL as well. Tropical mischief?

Here's the GFS same time frame.




GFS shows very light windshear over FL as well.
If any development occurs next week then it will have to occur around FL as the shear will be very light but the Caribbean the shear will be very high so we can essentially rule out any chance of development there.
US National Weather Service Shreveport Louisiana

A storm survey team will be analyzing damage from yesterday's severe thunderstorms. They will be looking for possible tornado damage from Waskom, TX through south Shreveport and points farther to the southeast such as Frierson, Stonewall and Martin, LA. Stay tuned for information as the survey crew relays information back to our office. We will be posting preliminary data to our website as it becomes available.
While we're on the subject of climate change, here's my "re-calibrated" calculation of the anthropogenic signal since 1861.

Alvin is dissipating.





Humidity is back after a few days of low humidity.
Quoting FunnelVortex:
Alvin is dissipating.







Alvin got absorbed into the ITCZ and went POOF.
Alvin has fallen short of expectations. Shear killed him. He was never able to get away from the ITCZ.
Don't know about you Guys but I'm beginning to get a little dry up in my neck of the woods. I can use a healthy .5" of rainfall here. And at this point it doesn't look like we are going to get it. :-(
Quoting SouthernIllinois:
Don't know about you Guys but I'm beginning to get a little dry up in my neck of the woods. I can use a healthy .5" of rainfall here. And at this point it doesn't look like we are going to get it. :-(


Hang in there as early next week looks active for you.

Expect severe weather as these storms roll through your area come next Tuesday.
Quoting SouthernIllinois:
Alvin has fallen short of expectations. Shear killed him. He was never able to get away from the ITCZ.


That is what is to be expected of the first TS of the season.
359. VR46L
Good Morning Folks !
360. VR46L
Quoting SouthernIllinois:
Alvin has fallen short of expectations. Shear killed him. He was never able to get away from the ITCZ.


Thats for sure .. I am convinced from the imagery that I looked at that he never got away from the ITCZ ....Even the NHC alluded to it yesterday...
Quoting StormTrackerScott:


Hang in there as early next week looks active for you.

Expect severe weather as these storms roll through your area come next Tuesday.

That's good to know. I can use the rain but can easily do without the severe weather. But I guess living in my region at this time of year it is almost inevitable. Almost like you can't have one without the other.
Quoting VR46L:
Good Morning Folks !

Morning, VR!
Quoting FunnelVortex:


That is what is to be expected of the first TS of the season.

Very true.
Severe weather warnings with these cells south of Dallas.
Quoting SouthernIllinois:
Alvin has fallen short of expectations. Shear killed him. He was never able to get away from the ITCZ.
Shear didn`t kill him joining the Itcz did.
Quoting VR46L:


Thats for sure .. I am convinced from the imagery that I looked at that he never got away from the ITCZ ....Even the NHC alluded to it yesterday...

Nope. He never attained enough robust spin to get his circulation going. Oh well. It's only the 17th of May. Plenty to go I'm sure!
Sincerely hoping for a NON repeat of last year with the drought!!
Quoting allancalderini:
Shear didn`t kill him joining the Itcz did.

Yep.
369. VR46L
Quoting SouthernIllinois:

Morning, VR!


Hiya SI ... see you are saying its a little dry in your neck of the woods .. the GFS seem to be quite consistent on rain for most areas next week !
Quoting VR46L:


Hiya SI ... see you are saying its a little dry in your neck of the woods .. the GFS seem to be quite consistent on rain for most areas next week !

Next week--yes! But it was also hinting on and off this week that we'd at least see a half an inch perhaps up to an inch. And that never happened--at least not yet. We'll see what transpires this afternoon. I'm not feeling too great about it though....

:-(
Quoting StormTrackerScott:
Humidity is back after a few days of low humidity.


It was a nice treat while it lasted. Back to normal humidities for this time of year... sigh
372. VR46L
GFS 144 HRS

Quoting VR46L:
GFS 144 HRS


That would be a nice scenario.
Quoting FtMyersgal:


It was a nice treat while it lasted. Back to normal humidities for this time of year... sigh

You don't sound too thrilled. LOL. :P
375. VR46L
Quoting SouthernIllinois:

Next week--yes! But it was also hinting on and off this week that we'd at least see a half an inch perhaps up to an inch. And that never happened--at least not yet. We'll see what transpires this afternoon. I'm not feeling too great about it though....

:-(


Hang in there ... you seem to be out of drought at the moment!



Quoting VR46L:


Hang in there ... you seem to be out of drought at the moment!




Yep. Thanks! Right now sitting pretty. I'm not too worried. Not yet, anyway. Just a tad concerned. :D
Moisture stream.

Quoting SouthernIllinois:

You don't sound too thrilled. LOL. :P


Na, just was spoiled with the unusually low humidities for May. You get used to it when you live in South Florida
reports of 1.25" hail falling in texas right now, Cell S0 is responsible.

Gulf stream east of FL is really heating up fast this year. Sea surface temps at Melbourne are at 77 right now.

Good morning.70 degrees outside and humid suppose to get in its upper 80's to near 90.
I see people were at the same old same old phase yesterday on the blog.Glad I avoided.Cant wait for the first invest to track in the alantic.Still not buying early development.


Might see a waterspout here today...
... Significant weather advisory for...
Freestone County

At 816 am CDT... National Weather Service meteorologists detected
strong thunderstorms along a line extending from 15 miles southwest
of Corsicana to 10 miles northwest of Fairfield... moving southeast at
25 mph.

Cities in the path of these storms include Fairfield... Teague...
Wortham and Fairfield Lake State Park.

Penny-sized hail and wind gusts to 40 mph can be expected from these
storms.

If these storms intensify... a severe weather warning may be needed.

Lat... Lon 3141 9624 3179 9650 3191 9627 3189 9603
3186 9600 3188 9597 3185 9599 3179 9599
3177 9588 3174 9587 3170 9588 3170 9583
3167 9580 3169 9579 3162 9579
time... Mot... loc 1316z 311deg 23kt 3187 9656 3179 9628





816 am CDT Fri may 17 2013

... Significant weather advisory for...
Freestone County

At 816 am CDT... National Weather Service meteorologists detected
strong thunderstorms along a line extending from 15 miles southwest
of Corsicana to 10 miles northwest of Fairfield... moving southeast at
25 mph.

Cities in the path of these storms include Fairfield... Teague...
Wortham and Fairfield Lake State Park.

Penny-sized hail and wind gusts to 40 mph can be expected from these
storms.

If these storms intensify... a severe weather warning may be needed.

Lat... Lon 3141 9624 3179 9650 3191 9627 3189 9603
3186 9600 3188 9597 3185 9599 3179 9599
3177 9588 3174 9587 3170 9588 3170 9583
3167 9580 3169 9579 3162 9579
time... Mot... loc 1316z 311deg 23kt 3187 9656 3179 9628




Those storms are going to cross interstate 45 in ~20 minutes.
Quoting FtMyersgal:


Na, just was spoiled with the unusually low humidities for May. You get used to it when you live in South Florida

When you lived in a climate like that, I guess you have to be! Our humidity can be quite oppressive, too; but it really doesn't start getting really uncomfortable until mid July onward to the beginning of September.
Alright. This is looking MUCH MORE promising. *fingers crossed* :D

A half an inch would make me very happy.
Quoting SouthernIllinois:
Alright. This is looking MUCH MORE promising. *fingers crossed* :D



*storm misses illinois and goes to maryland.* :D
Wow, Big Joe on another rant this morning on his Twitter account. While I don't always agree with some of his concepts and forecasts, he does bring up some valid points.

Link
Big Joe. Big Joe. Ahhhhhhh. What more can I say. :P
... A Severe Thunderstorm Warning remains in effect until 830 am CDT
for southwestern Navarro County...

At 759 am CDT... National Weather Service meteorologists detected a
severe thunderstorm capable of producing quarter size hail. This
storm was located over west central Navarro County... moving southeast
at 25 mph. A second storm south of Oak Valley was also capable of
producing quarter sized hail... also moving southeast.

The severe thunderstorm will be near...
rural southern Navarro County at 810 am CDT

Lat... Lon 3197 9677 3205 9681 3209 9674 3197 9639
3180 9652 3181 9661
time... Mot... loc 1259z 302deg 21kt 3196 9665



Quoting Torito:


*storm misses illinois and goes to maryland.* :D

Nooooooooo!!!! :P
Quoting SouthernIllinois:

Nooooooooo!!!! :P


Lawl it looks like it is going to hit the SE edge of Illinois and head towards maryland.
I see Alvin didn't live up to his cartoon namesake. (Thankfully...)

Happy Friday everyone. Enjoy the upcoming weekend.
Quoting washingtonian115:
Good morning.70 degrees outside and humid suppose to get in its upper 80's to near 90.
I see people were at the same old same old phase yesterday on the blog.Glad I avoided.Cant wait for the first invest to track in the alantic.Still not buying early development.

Wash ~ That's quite a departure from your usually bright, happy avatars. Kind of dark and spooky!!
Storm getting stronger...

Quoting Chucktown:
Wow, Big Joe on another rant this morning on his Twitter account. While I don't always agree with some of his concepts and forecasts, he does bring up some valid points.

Link




This map he shows all the time always intrigues me. Some of you guys who are more educated on the topic of AGW can help me out, I'm sure. Believe me, this isn't a loaded question. It's an honest one. With the CO2 levels increasing like this chart shows, why are the temps not moving in tandem? Does this go hand in hand with the last picture in the image in that warming could have slowed due to heat going into the oceans? I think I've read where more data needs to be collected on the validity of the heat going into the oceans, thus slowing the warming of the globe, but that it's a fairly sound theory.

Quoting SouthernIllinois:

Wash ~ That's quite a departure from your usually bright, happy avatars. Kind of dark and spooky!!
This one is special :).
Quoting Xyrus2000:


Absolutely false. You have no concept of what the peer review process actually involves. First, papers do not begin with opinions. The begin with a hypothesis.

You are not going to magically get answers to your questions. You're going to need to put some effort into it. Just like any other field of study you want to ask intelligent questions of.



Outstanding post, xyrus2000. One of the best I've ever seen. I've been "debating" with many over the last 10+ years who haven't a clue as to what they speak of, but could if they spent 1/100 of the time they spend refuting accepted science by actually looking at the science. Instead, they hear talking points and regurgitate those. In the 25 years since Hansen spoke before Congress there have only been a handful of legitimate counter arguments and they haven't come close to the level of certainty that AGW has.

And for me, the most unbelievable element of the debate is that if you have an OUNCE of logic you would look at this statement, CO2 IS A HEAT-TRAPPING GAS. WE HAVE BEEN PUMPING MORE CO2 INTO THE ATMOSPHERE FOR 200+ YEARS, and you would think, "Oh, maybe there is a correlation to rising temperatures."

The inability to least keep an open mind on the discussion reeks of prejudicial judgment tainted by ideology with zero scientific critical analysis.

Again, thank you for posting your response. It was thorough and spectacular.
402. viman
Quoting CaribBoy:
Look at the N Leewards and Virgin Islands.



This time, I really hope to see the rain.


I hope so for sure, I need to see the cistern overflow become I can be happy!!
Quoting Chucktown:
Wow, Big Joe on another rant this morning on his Twitter account. While I don't always agree with some of his concepts and forecasts, he does bring up some valid points.

Link


Wow, an actual climate scientist would rip his "twittler logic" to shreds.
Quoting Chucktown:
Wow, Big Joe on another rant this morning on his Twitter account. While I don't always agree with some of his concepts and forecasts, he does bring up some valid points.

Link
I read today's batch of Twitter rants and have to say that, IMO, Bastardi "brings up valid points" in much the same way that a child does at Christmas just after an older sibling has told him that Santa Claus isn't real; there's always a lot of shouting and screaming and kicking the floor until the truth finally settles in. When one has built a life--and, in Bastardi's case--an entire career off of one ideological but illogical belief, it's understandably difficult to accept the truth that everything you thought is, in fact, utterly and completely wrong. But Joe's a reasonably smart guy; he'll eventually figure it out.

I hope...
Quoting FatPenguin:
Wow, an actual climate scientist would rip his "twittler logic" to shreds.
I don't think it would take a climate scientist; anyone who's taken a 9th-grade physics class would be able to do the ripping...
Quoting Neapolitan:
Joe's a reasonably smart guy; he'll eventually figure it out.

I hope...

Wouldn't bet on it.
Quoting Neapolitan:
I don't think it would take a climate scientist; anyone who's taken a 9th-grade physics class would be able to do the ripping...

9th-grade? You kidding?! That's giving him a bit more credit than what he's worth...
Rain trying to make it's way into Southern Illinois and extreme southwest Kentucky. At least the dew points and precipitable water values are there to support the moisture.
Quoting washingtonian115:
This one is special :).


It's like My Little Pony vs. Godzilla....
Quoting Dakster:


It's like My Little Pony vs. Godzilla....

Like the avi, Dak. :-)
Quoting FatPenguin:


Outstanding post, xyrus2000. One of the best I've ever seen. I've been "debating" with many over the last 10+ years who haven't a clue as to what they speak of, but could if they spent 1/100 of the time they spend refuting accepted science by actually looking at the science. Instead, they hear talking points and regurgitate those. In the 25 years since Hansen spoke before Congress there have only been a handful of legitimate counter arguments and they haven't come close to the level of certainty that AGW has.

And for me, the most unbelievable element of the debate is that if you have an OUNCE of logic you would look at this statement, CO2 IS A HEAT-TRAPPING GAS. WE HAVE BEEN PUMPING MORE CO2 INTO THE ATMOSPHERE FOR 200+ YEARS, and you would think, "Oh, maybe there is a correlation to rising temperatures."

The inability to least keep an open mind on the discussion reeks of prejudicial judgment tainted by ideology with zero scientific critical analysis.

Again, thank you for posting your response. It was thorough and spectacular.
Had to look back to see what post you were talking about. Glad I did. Fantastic post and I am amazed he took the time type it.
The MDR continues its downward swing today:

getting reports from tentants of shaking feeling on higher floors plants moving

it appears there has been a earthquake of 4.8 on the r scale in the toronto area
So Sunday-Monday seems like a good chance for a decent sized tornado outbreak. SPC mention the possibility for strong tornadoes. The combined population this will be affecting is 30,446,734. A large area will be affected twice.

Quoting KEEPEROFTHEGATE:
getting reports from tentants of shaking feeling on higher floors plants moving

it appears there has been a earthquake of 4.8 on the r scale in the toronto area
This is what the USGS has so far. M5.0 - 25km NNE of Shawville, Canada.
5.0
25km NNE of Shawville, Canada
2013-05-17 09:43:22-04:00
USGS says it was a very shallow (3.1 miles) 5.0:

quake

ectonic Summary

Earthquakes in the Western Quebec Seismic Zone

People in the large Western Quebec seismic zone have felt small earthquakes and suffered damage from larger ones for three centuries. The two largest damaging earthquakes occurred in 1935 (magnitude 6.1) at the northwestern end of the seismic zone, and in 1732 (magnitude 6.2) 450 km (280 mi) away at the southeastern end of the zone where it caused significant damage in Montreal. Earthquakes cause damage in the zone about once a decade. Smaller earthquakes are felt three or four times a year.

Earthquakes east of the Rocky Mountains, although less frequent than in the west, are typically felt over a much broader region. East of the Rockies, an earthquake can be felt over an area as much as ten times larger than a similar magnitude earthquake on the west coast. A magnitude 4.0 eastern earthquake typically can be felt at many places as far as 100 km (60 mi) from where it occurred, and it infrequently causes damage near its source. A magnitude 5.5 eastern earthquake usually can be felt as far as 500 km (300 mi) from where it occurred, and sometimes causes damage as far away as 40 km (25 mi).

Faults

Earthquakes everywhere occur on faults within bedrock, usually miles deep. Most of the bedrock in the Western Quebec seismic zone was formed as several generations of mountains rose and were eroded down again over the last billion or so years.

At well-studied plate boundaries like the San Andreas fault system in California, often scientists can determine the name of the specific fault that is responsible for an earthquake. In contrast, east of the Rocky Mountains this is rarely the case. The Western Quebec seismic zone is far from the nearest plate boundaries, which are in the center of the Atlantic Ocean and in the Caribbean Sea. The seismic zone is laced with known faults but numerous smaller or deeply buried faults remain undetected. Even the known faults are poorly located at earthquake depths. Accordingly, few, if any, earthquakes in the seismic zone can be linked to named faults. It is difficult to determine if a known fault is still active and could slip and cause an earthquake. As in most other areas east of the Rockies, the best guide to earthquake hazards in the Western Quebec seismic zone is the earthquakes themselves.


Source
i hate the new format on the usgs can't get a map or nothing
So man is causing Global Warming. What Dr. Masters doesn't say is what percentage or is it implied that we are causing 100% of it?
Quoting StormTrackerScott:
Gulf stream east of FL is really heating up fast this year. Sea surface temps at Melbourne are at 77 right now.

Gulf is very cool for this time of year tho.. Caribbean seems about normal.
Quoting luvtogolf:
So man is causing Global Warming. What Dr. Masters doesn't say is what percentage or is it implied that we are causing 100% of it?
This particular study didn't cover attribution percentages, but other recent studies have suggested that we're responsible for between (roughly) 75% and 120% of observed warming over the past couple of decades.
Quoting Neapolitan:
This particular study didn't cover attribution percentages, but other recent studies have suggested that we're responsible for between (roughly) 75% and 120% of observed warming over the past couple of decades.


ok, thx.
Quoting Neapolitan:
This particular study didn't cover attribution percentages, but other recent studies have suggested that we're responsible for between (roughly) 75% and 120% of observed warming over the past couple of decades.


How in the world can you be 120% responsible for something....
Quoting SouthernIllinois:

Like the avi, Dak. :-)


It's all about the U



Dang, an earthquake .. I did not know you were susceptible to those there Keeper...
Quoting indianrivguy:


It's all about the U



Dang, an earthquake .. I did not know you were susceptible to those there Keeper...


Easy to win when you pay your players
Keep...the end is near son...lol
Quoting KEEPEROFTHEGATE:
getting reports from tentants of shaking feeling on higher floors plants moving

it appears there has been a earthquake of 4.8 on the r scale in the toronto area


That would do it alright.....
Warned cell

Quoting VAbeachhurricanes:


How in the world can you be 120% responsible for something....

If the combination of all natural factors favors a 0.2C/century cooling rate, yet the observation is 1.0C/century warming rate, the "something-other-than-all-natural-factors" contribution is 120% of the warming rate.

(1.0 - -0.2)/1.0 = 120%
first thing i though was a problem with the building and maybe foundation issue or something then reports started to flood in my misses called i was out in the building on 7th floor i felt it
it was weird
stongest one yet for me
The American Sweetgum.

JeffMasters has created a new entry.
Shucks! Moisture already POOF in Kentucky on it's way over the Ohio River into extreme Southern Illinois.

Quoting rattlesnake76:
You need to keep politics out of weather. Seriously this climate-change blog really sucks. Keep weather politics out of here. This used to be a pure weather page, now you are frothing at the mouth like Al Gore Jeff Masters. Did you do this on your own or did it occur when you sold your soul to the weather channel? All this hot air is going to heat up the atmosphere and cause super typhoons.

Dr. Master's has been addressing the important issue of climate change now LONG BEFORE he sold the company to The Weather Channel. Secondly, the science of climate change is not a political matter. It's a relevant topic that impacts us all. It's very important this issue get discussed. My opinion, anyway.
Time to turn the page...
Quoting KEEPEROFTHEGATE:
i hate the new format on the usgs can't get a map or nothing


Makes me wish they had a legacy site that was still being updated.
Quoting KoritheMan:
I seriously don't understand how human-induced global warming can still be denied. It's literally right up there with other accepted scientific theories like evolution and gravity.

I learned a long time ago not to underestimate the willful ignorance and inherent logical fallacies that humans are capable of, however. Not that I am exempt from such either.


If the plant never warmed before the arrival of humans, then you'd be spot-on.

But it has. Amazing that the planet can somehow find a way to warm itself before the arrival of man.
Quoting oracle28:


If the plant never warmed before the arrival of humans, then you'd be spot-on.

But it has. Amazing that the planet can somehow find a way to warm itself before the arrival of man.

The global climate warms/cools when something changes the equilibrium and forces it to warm or cool. Over very long term, geologic scale time periods, natural factors like orbital changes, continent movements, volcanism, and CO2 weathering (to name a few) have contributing to a changing climate. Today, the dominant factor is human activities which are changing atmospheric chemistry, and thus, climate, at a rate faster than almost all previous natural changes.

The fact that climate has changed before, or hasn't changed before, is completely irrelevant to what is causing the change now.
Quoting ScottLincoln:

The fact that climate has changed before, or hasn't changed before, is completely irrelevant to what is causing the change now.


Because you say so?
Quoting Neapolitan:
This particular study didn't cover attribution percentages, but other recent studies have suggested that we're responsible for between (roughly) 75% and 120% of observed warming over the past couple of decades.


120% *snicker*
Quoting oracle28:


Because you say so?

No, because that's how it is.
It's just as irrelevant as someone arguing that lung cancer happened 100 years ago, so second-hand smoke couldn't be causing it today. That argument only works if there is one, and only one, cause for something to happen. That is rarely true in real life. Not because I say so, because science says so.

To reiterate, the global climate warms/cools when something changes the equilibrium and forces it to warm or cool. This can be natural factors or changes to the environment by humans. The dominant factor in the modern warming is human activities.
water temps out on Suwannee Sound on thurs., 5/16/13, while we were trawling out there was 23.4C, ~74F. time to shuck the waders!
Quoting viman:

I hope so for sure, I need to see the cistern overflow become I can be happy!!
Your statement doesn't make sense.
Of the 11,944 papers reviewed:
66.4% of abstracts expressed no position on AGW
32.6% endorsed AGW
0.7% rejected AGW
0.3% were uncertain about the cause of global warming.
(figures from actual Environmental Research Letters release http://www.iop.org/news/13/may/page_60200.html).

How does 32% Yes, .7% No, and 66% Neither
magically turn into a reported 97% yes?
447. Cadno
I'm sorry but at one time the "scientists of the day" believed with little opposition that the earth was center of the universe.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-225 67023 shows no real warming for the past 15 years. My problem is the science is not science but consensus. Consensus is not science...it's voting for class president.
Although the heading says....Study: 97% Agreement on Manmade Global Warming...virtually NOWHERE in the article does the phrase global warming appear ...Shining the light of truth on lies and wishful thinking....
Apparently man who created God in his own image is all powerful and can now cause the climate to change. GEE WHIZ..how long has there been climate change going on anyway????
Quoting ScottLincoln:

The global climate warms/cools when something changes the equilibrium and forces it to warm or cool. Over very long term, geologic scale time periods, natural factors like orbital changes, continent movements, volcanism, and CO2 weathering (to name a few) have contributing to a changing climate. Today, the dominant factor is human activities which are changing atmospheric chemistry, and thus, climate, at a rate faster than almost all previous natural changes.

The fact that climate has changed before, or hasn't changed before, is completely irrelevant to what is causing the change now.


What is going to happen now we have passed the 11 peak in solar activity and have not seen the predicted warming. Do we need to start being concerned about global cooling, again?