WunderBlog Archive » Category 6™

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

Key weather relay satellite survives encounter with ZombieSat

By: Dr. Jeff Masters, 3:55 PM GMT on December 16, 2010

On April 3, 2010, the sun's surface erupted in a magnetic disturbance known as a Coronal Mass Ejection (CME). A chuck of the sun's atmosphere ripped away and hurtled through space towards the Earth, arriving two days later. As Coronal Mass Ejections go, this was a garden-variety one, the kind we see dozens of times per year. However, when the high energy electrons and protons associated with the CME reached Earth's magnetosphere on April 5, an unusually strong solar storm developed, the strongest in three years. While we have no direct proof that this space weather storm was responsible, an Intelsat telecommunications satellite called Galaxy 15, used to relay television programs, suddenly lost contact with ground controllers and began drifting through space. According to scientists at NOAA's Space Weather Prediction Center whom I met with on a site visit this summer, solar storms have probably knocked out at least a dozen satellites in the fifty years humans have been launching them. Usually, these dead satellites pose no threat to other satellites. But the Galaxy 15 satellite has joined the ranks of the undead and become "ZombieSat". Although no television signals are being bounced off of the satellite, its transponders remain active and are spewing out a high volume of noise in the microwave C-band. As ZombieSat drifted uncontrolled through space this year, interference from the satellite threatened to shut down transmissions from a number of communications satellites in its path. In May, SES World Skies was forced to maneuver their AMC-11 satellite out of the way of ZombieSat to avoid its interference. And yesterday, on December 15, ZombieSat made a close pass by the SES-1 communications satellite. This satellite downlinks the NOAAPORT weather data feed, which supplies nearly all of the weather data used by wunderground, the National Weather Service, and many other users. For a ten hour period yesterday, interference from ZombieSat significantly interfered with the NOAAPORT data feed, causing many data transmission errors.


Figure 1. This is a close-up view of the active region observed by Proba-2's SWAP (Sun Watcher using APS detectors and imaging processing) instrument on 3 April 2010. Magnetic loops are visibly glowing--filled with cooling plasma (though cooling is a relative phrase, its temperature still exceeds a million degrees)--as the Sun's magnetic field knits itself together again in the flare's immediate aftermath. The area around the magnetic loops is darkened due to the Sun's surface reacting to the force of the flare. Image credit: European Space Agency.

Fortunately, little or no weather data was permanently lost during ZombieSat's encounter with SES-1. Much of the credit for this goes to NOAA technicians who devised an alternate satellite data transimission scheme to reduce the amount of interference from ZombieSat. Over the past week, the NOAAPORT data has been routed as usual from the National Weather Service in Washington D.C. to the Primary Master Ground Station located in Hauppauge, NY, via terrestrial communication lines. The Hauppauge ground station has been broadcasting the NOAAPORT feed to a "borrowed" satellite, which bounces the signal to the SES Americom Master Ground Station in Hawaii, which is outside the interference "footprint" of ZombieSat. NOAAPORT then is then uplinked to the SES-1 satellite, and then beamed down to Earth to Weather Underground, the NWS, and the other NOAAPORT subscribers. This way, NOAAPORT has been avoiding seeing interference from ZombieSat during the uplink to the SES-1 satellite. However, the signal is still subject to interference during the downlink process, and ZombieSat may still be able to cause trouble for NOAAPORT over the next few days. By Sunday, ZombieSat will be far enough from SES-1 that NOAA can return NOAAPORT back to its original configuration. Kudos go to NOAA for safely managing to keep NOAAPORT functioning during ZombieSat's passage--had they not acted to re-route the NOAAPORT signal, the U.S. could have seen a significant and potentially dangerous loss of weather data. (However, this did not go off without a hitch--technicians experimenting with adjusting power levels for the NOAAPORT feed during testing of the re-routing scheme accidentally knocked NOAAPORT out for several hours a week ago Sunday.)


Figure 2. Data flow diagram of how weather data gets from the National Weather Service (NWS) and NOAA's Satellite and Information Service (NESDIS) through the NOAA Network Control Facility (NCF) onto the NOAAPORT feed that is relayed off of the SES-1 satellite to NOAAPORT receive ground stations. Image credit: NOAA.

How solar storms damage spacecraft
The region of space where most Earth-orbiting satellites lie, 100 - 23,000 miles above the surface, experiences "space weather"--constant bombardment from high energy particles emitted by the sun. Periodically, the sun erupts in a massive magnetic disturbances known as Coronal Mass Ejections (CMEs), when a portion of the sun's atmosphere rips away and hurtles into space. The sun also sends out high-energy particles during solar flares, and when holes open in the sun's outer atmosphere (a coronal "hole"). When these solar particles reach Earth's upper atmosphere, they trigger geomagnetic storms that create the beautiful aurora displays often visible at high latitudes. However, these geomagnetic storms can damage a wide range of electronic systems, including power grids, communications systems, and spacecraft. When high-energy protons and ions hit spacecraft, the ionization tracks left in micro-miniaturized electronics can damage computer memory chips or disrupt circuits. Very energetic electrons can also penetrate deep into satellites bury themselves in insulating materials, such as coaxial cables or electronic boards. A powerful internal electronic discharge like a miniature lightning bolt can occur if the charge grows great enough. Numerous satellite failures have been attributed to this phenomena. Lower energy electrons that cannot penetrate the spacecraft's shielding can also cause problems--if enough electrons accumulate on the surface of the satellite, this "surface charging" can cause a powerful, disruptive discharge. Ionization tracks and discharges due to surface charging can result in the satellite experiencing "phantom commands" that instruct it to perform operations that can cut it off from contact with ground controllers. Such an occurrence is suspected in the sudden loss of communication with the Galaxy 15 spacecraft on April 5.

Damage to spacecraft due to space weather events does not necessarily happen during the peak of the 11-year solar cycle. The most recent sunspot cycle peaked in April 2000, and sunspot numbers steadily decreased through October 2003. In that month, three of the largest sunspot groups in ten years formed on the sun and began launching a series of CMEs and solar flares towards Earth, forcing NOAA's Space Weather Prediction Center to issue over 250 solar storm watches, warnings, and alerts over a 3-week period. NASA reported that 24% of their spacecraft either turned off instruments or took other protective acts during the solar storms. Japan's $640 million ADEOS-2 satellite, designed to collect weather and climate change data, failed during the height of the solar storms, and never recovered. Several other satellites permanently lost sensors, including the X-ray sensor on GOES-8 and the AMSU-A1 instrument on NOAA-17. The CHIPS satellite began tumbling through space when its main computer failed (the satellite was recovered after 27 hours), and Japan's DRTS geostationary communications satellite want into safe mode due to a proton barrage from a solar flare. The satellite was recovered ten days later.


Figure 3. The largest solar flare ever recorded was observed on April 2, 2001. It was rated X-22 on a scale that only goes from one to twenty. The flare was more powerful than the flare that accompanied the worst geomagnetic storm in history, the 1859 Carrington event. Fortunately, the 2001 flare was not aimed at the Earth. Image credit: NASA.

Space weather catastrophes
While damage to satellites is a serious concern from geomagnetic storms, my main concern is the possibility of a 1-in-100 year event taking out 30% of the U.S. power grid for a period of years, resulting in a multi-trillion dollar disaster. The possibilities are explored in my 2009 post, A future Space Weather catastrophe: a disturbing possibility.

Top ten weather events of 2010
I'll be on our Internet radio show, The Daily Downpour today at 4pm EST, 1pm PST, to talk about the top ten weather events of 2010. I'll also be discussion the same subject on NPR's Living on Earth radio show on Friday.

Jeff Masters

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

Quoting Grothar:


Come on atmo, it is just like this statistic:

100% of the on-line survey respondents answered yes when asked whether they had access to a computer.

lmao
Actually I saw JFLORIDA's graphic in the report by Michael Mann I linked to in comment 960. The graph is not inaccurate at all, and is part of a respected article, in a respected publication, by a respected climatologist.
Quoting Grothar:


Come on atmo, it is just like this statistic:

100% of the on-line survey respondents answered yes when asked whether they had access to a computer.




LMAO. You old fox. Keep the "pearls" comin"
Update (Jan 22): Loehle has issued a correction that fixes the more obvious dating and data treatment issues, but does not change the inappropriate data selection, or the calibration and validation issues.
When people say peer reviewed you would think that the actual peer group are in the field.

This is ridiculous.
Quoting DoverWxwatchter:
Actually I saw JFLORIDA's graphic in the report by Michael Mann I linked to in comment 960. The graph is not inaccurate at all, and is part of a respected article, in a respected publication, by a respected climatologist.
So, a global analysis of temps when we have a few points, with poor temporal resolution in the data, gets filled in by guess work and modeling and they publish it?

What journal?
1008. Ossqss
Quoting JFLORIDA:









Howdy JF!

First, let me say that Smartphones suck. I now have no separation or time to myself, but access to pretty much everything including my alarm/video system in realtime is pretty cool....

Now, cmon, we now have GISS style representations of historic temps where no sample ( real or Ice core ) is available? How does that happen> > ?

Solstice is gonna be strange this year also. Been a real long time.......... gone >>>

Solstice Lunar Eclipse

Link

Quoting JFLORIDA:
Update (Jan 22): Loehle has issued a correction that fixes the more obvious dating and data treatment issues, but does not change the inappropriate data selection, or the calibration and validation issues.
The ultimate effect of the correction is rather small. but, if you don't like the source of scientific study, you could always bash the author or publication.

EDIT: Oh, you did. Of course.

That seems to work and keep our collective understanding right where someone wants it to be. then we can continue to have these repetitive discussions.
The fall colors have been amazing this December here in the Orlando area. Usually, this degree of sustained chilly temperatures come in January (if that), by which time most of the leaves have gradually fallen already. Over the last few weeks, the deciduous trees have put on a display like areas much further north. It has been really nice to see.
1012. Grothar
Quoting atmoaggie:
So, a global analysis of temps when we have a few points, with poor temporal resolution in the data, gets filled in by guess work and modeling and they publish it?

What journal?


He co-authored two very good paper, one called Nature and I believe the other was Journal of Climate or Journey of Climate, can't remmber much at my age anymore. He is very good, although you would probably not agree.
Quoting Grothar:


He co-authored two very good paper, one called Nature and I believe the other was Journal of Climate or Journey of Climate, can't remmber much at my age anymore. He is very good, although you would probably not agree.
Who? Mann?

Hmmm, maybe I should read about how that global temp map was created even though I know what sort of data exists.
1014. Seastep
Quoting JFLORIDA:
2010: The deadliest year for natural disasters in more than a generation

Earthquakes, heat waves, floods, volcanoes, super typhoons, blizzards, landslides and droughts killed at least a quarter of a million people in 2010 – the deadliest year in more than a generation. More people were killed worldwide by natural disasters this year than have been killed in terrorism attacks in the past 40 years combined.


Quoting DoverWxwatchter:
This being one example.




Sorry, but absolutely repugnant to use Haiti's plight for propaganda.

From the story above:

"Nearly 260,000 people died in natural disasters in 2010 through Nov. 30, compared with 15,000 in 2009..."

Haiti from a similar story (which I assume is based on the same source, but seems that article neglected to mention it):

"The January earthquake that killed well more than 220,000 people in Haiti"

Link

Again, sorry, just disgusting to me.
I post the cited references (that would be the research used and abused from real journals) highlights:

Using data that has significantly worse resolution than that in reconstructions of recent centuries is asking for trouble. The age models tend to have errors in the 100%u2019s of years, and the density of points rarely allows one to reach the modern instrumental period.

For instance, South-Eastern Atlantic ocean sediment data from Farmer et al (2005) (Loehle data series #17) nominally goes up to the present 0 calendar years. This is really 1950 due to the convention that years %u201CBefore Present%u2019 (BP) almost invariably begin then (some recent papers use BP(2000) to indicate a different convention, but that is always specifically pointed out). However, the earliest real date for that core is 1053 BP, with a 2-sigma range of 1303 to 946 BP %u2013 almost 400 years! That makes this data completely unsuitable for reconstructions of the last 2000 years %u2013 which in all fairness, was certainly not the focus of the original paper.

Similar issues arises with data from DeMenocal et al (2000) (Loehle #10) and SSDP-102 (Kim et al , 2004) (Loehle #18). In the the first record, the initial data point nominally comes from 88 BP (i.e. 1862 CE), but the earliest dated sample is around 500 BP. In the second, the initial date is closer to the present (1940), but the age model is constrained by only 3 ages over the whole Holocene (and it%u2019s not clear that any are within the last two millennia. So while both records have more apparent resolution than Farmer et al, their use in a reconstruction of recent paleo-climate is dubious.

Therefore the 100 year spaced pollen reconstruction data from Viau et al (2006) (Loehle #13), are not estimates for the mid-point of each century, but are century averages. Linear interpolation between these points will give a series that actually has a different century-long means.

And so a proxy with a short period calibration to temperature with no validating data cannot be fully trusted to be a temperature proxy. This arises with the Holmgren et al (1999) speleothem grey-scale data (Loehle #11) which is calibrated over a 17 year period to local temperature, but without any %u2018out-of-sample%u2019 validation. The problem in that case is exacerbated by the novelty of the proxy. (As an aside, the version used by Loehle is on an out-of-date age model (see here for an up-to-date version of the source grey-scale data %u2013 convert to temperature using T=8.66948648-G*0.0378378) and is already smoothed with a backwards running mean implying that the record should be shifted back ~20 years).

Equal averaging is simple but, for instance, implies giving equal weight to a century-mean North American continental average (Viau et al, Loehle #13) to a single decadally varying N. American point (Cronin et al, #3)

Of the 18 original records, only 5 are potentially useful for comparing late 20th Century temperatures to medieval times, and they don%u2019t have enough coverage to say anything significant about global trends.
98C Officially back in the Central Pacific.
DATE/TIME LAT LON CLASSIFICATION STORM
20/0030 UTC 20.1N 179.9W T3.0/4.0 98C -- Central Pacific
19/2030 UTC 20.3N 179.4E T3.0/4.0 98C -- West Pacific
19/1430 UTC 21.0N 179.1E T4.5/4.5 98C -- West Pacific
19/0830 UTC 21.4N 179.5E T4.0/4.0 98C -- West Pacific
19/0230 UTC 21.9N 179.1E T3.5/3.5 98C -- West Pacific

1017. Grothar
Quoting HurrMichaelOrl:
The fall colors have been amazing this December here in the Orlando area. Usually, this degree of sustained chilly temperatures come in January (if that), by which time most of the leaves have gradually fallen already. Over the last few weeks, the deciduous trees have put on a display like areas much further north. It has been really nice to see.


Yes, odd, even in South Florida, there has been a change in the leaves. Many people think the cold weather changes the color, but it is actually a chemical process. As the days grow shorter in the Fall, the leaves receive less photosynthesis and beging to change color.
1018. Grothar
Quoting atmoaggie:
Who? Mann?

Hmmm, maybe I should read about how that global temp map was created even though I know what sort of data exists.


Come on now, atmo. You can't know everything. That is my job.
Quoting Seastep:





Sorry, but absolutely repugnant to use Haiti's plight for propaganda.

From the story above:

"Nearly 260,000 people died in natural disasters in 2010 through Nov. 30, compared with 15,000 in 2009..."

Haiti from a similar story (which I assume is based on the same source, but seems that article neglected to mention it):

"The January earthquake that killed well more than 220,000 people in Haiti"

Link

Again, sorry, just disgusting to me.


Its just natural disasters - Im sorry reality upsets you so. They infer warming as related to some - which it is.
Quoting atmoaggie:
So, a global analysis of temps when we have a few points, with poor temporal resolution in the data, gets filled in by guess work and modeling and they publish it?

What journal?


Science, published by the American Association for the Advancement of Science.
Skyepony how strong do you think our depression with an eye really was?
Of the 18 original records, only 5 are potentially useful for comparing late 20th Century temperatures to medieval times, and they don%u2019t have enough coverage to say anything significant about global trends.


So atmo good call. 5 whole useful proxies albeit misapplied.
1023. Seastep
Quoting JFLORIDA:


Its just natural disasters - Im sorry reality upsets you so. They infer warming as related to some - which it is.


What was your point with the link?



Prior temperature reconstructions tend to focus on the global average (or sometimes hemisphere averages). In this study, more than 1000 tree-ring, ice core, coral, sediment and other assorted proxy records spanning both hemispheres were used to construct regional temperature change over the past 1500 years.





a temperature pattern for the last decade using NOAA data. This time, the colour scale matches exactly the colour scale used in the Medieval Warm Period figure.


Thank you for the five data points upholding your beliefs. Certainly it is hard to dispute that level robustness.
At any rate, the graphic JFLORIDA posted was from an article in Science So I think it was entirely proper to post information from a respected source. Unlike the posts with links from that hack Anthony Watts.
Quoting Seastep:


What was your point with the link?


It was a bad year for natural disasters - climate change contributed to some of them and on the whole natural disasters are more controllable and manageable circumstances that need proportionate attention.

1027. Seastep
Quoting JFLORIDA:


It was a bad year for natural disasters - climate change contributed to some of them and on the whole natural disasters are more controllable and manageable circumstances that need proportionate attention.



How many of the 260,000 plus?
1028. Seastep
It is a sad number, and agree that it is even more sad that at least 50% of that could have been avoided.
Quoting Seastep:


How many?


less than 1%, how many terrorist attacks are caused by terrorists 100%
Quoting atmoaggie:
I know it does, up to a point.

Try reading it again?
Quoting DoverWxwatchter:


Science, published by the American Association for the Advancement of Science.


Here is the article (2009)
Snow is shutting down European airports, Scotland is bracing for more.


SHANGHAI (AP) — Power cuts and rationing are hitting parts of central and northern China as winter coal supplies fall short of surging energy requirements due to extreme cold and transport disruptions.


Alot of roads closed in Kern, CA. SAN BERNARDINO, CA had an interesting day as well.

0430 PM FLASH FLOOD 5 NE FONTANA 34.15N 117.40W
12/19/2010 SAN BERNARDINO CA TRAINED SPOTTER

FLASH FLOODING ALONG LYTLE CREEK RUNNING OVER GLEN HELEN
PARKWAY, NEAR INTERSTATE 15 NORTHEAST OF FONTANA. WATER
WAS WITHIN ONE FOOT OF A LEVEE.

I wonder if that's within a foot of topping a levee.
Quoting Grothar:


Yes, odd, even in South Florida, there has been a change in the leaves. Many people think the cold weather changes the color, but it is actually a chemical process. As the days grow shorter in the Fall, the leaves receive less photosynthesis and beging to change color.


The maples are in full color here. Fall finally arrived. Timing is very much the sun. The brilliant color may have been helped a little by the drought & dry air. Yellows this year have been exceptional.
Moscow alone recorded 15,859 deaths more than normal in July and August (to say nothing of those outside Moscow) and that the Pakistan floods killed thousands more. To say that less than 1% of the 260,000 deaths from natural disasters this year was from climate change is just flat wrong.
Quoting DoverWxwatchter:
Moscow alone recorded 15,859 deaths more than normal in July and August (to say nothing of those outside Moscow) and that the Pakistan floods killed thousands more. To say that less than 1% of the 260,000 deaths from natural disasters this year was from climate change is just flat wrong.
One flood isn't climate. One heat wave isn't climate. One year isn't climate.

30 years is barely climate...and that's debatable.
Both events were so far beyond anything in historical accounts that it is illogical to assume they were natural.

And as for the 260,000 figure. We don't even know what the death toll in Russia was because figures have not been released outside from outside Moscow. I strongly suspect that excess deaths outside Moscow were not zero.
Quoting DoverWxwatchter:
Skyepony how strong do you think our depression with an eye really was?


In case you missed, this is NOT 98C anymore. This has been Omeka for around 18 hours on the ATCF site. Peak strength was 60 mph per ATCF, probably more like 90.
Quoting VAbeachhurricanes:


less than 1%, how many terrorist attacks are caused by terrorists 100%


Did you know that some places in Pakistan had over 16 feet of rain? In five days. Such an event is obviously so unprecedented that it just can't be written off as "natural variation". Yeah, so people build homes where they shouldn't, but the magnitude of the rain needs to be considered. Same for the heat wave in Russia, or any other event that is so extreme it just boggles the mind (4-5 STD away from the mean, like the Arctic Oscillation right now). I also laugh when they call a flood (or other event) a 100 or 500 year flood - when the previous record occurred not long ago. For example, look at this (not the only one either):

Historical Crests for Pawtuxet River at Cranston

(1) 20.79 ft on 03/31/2010
(2) 14.98 ft on 03/15/2010
(3) 14.50 ft on 06/07/1982
(4) 13.68 ft on 10/15/2005
(5) 13.26 ft on 01/26/1979
(6) 13.11 ft on 04/25/1983
(7) 12.57 ft on 06/08/2006
(8) 12.40 ft on 04/17/2007
(9) 11.88 ft on 03/25/2010
(10) 11.86 ft on 03/31/2001

(Oh, and those are not directly related because the river went down below flood stage after the first one, look at the other recent years as well)
I love how some people that want to stop climate change, want the most money spent on research on how we can change the climate... lol just shows how much of it is really about money and power
1039. Seastep
Quoting DoverWxwatchter:
Moscow alone recorded 15,859 deaths more than normal in July and August (to say nothing of those outside Moscow) and that the Pakistan floods killed thousands more. To say that less than 1% of the 260,000 deaths from natural disasters this year was from climate change is just flat wrong.


You're just going to have to trust me on this, but you do not want to compare cold vs. warm deaths.

And, to boot, without fossil fuels, the numbers would be staggering.
Quoting DoverWxwatchter:
Both events were so far beyond anything in historical accounts that it is illogical to assume they were natural.

And as for the 260,000 figure. We don't even know what the death toll in Russia was because figures have not been released outside from outside Moscow. I strongly suspect that excess deaths outside Moscow were not zero.


Just because it hasn't happened before while humans were there, does not mean it never happened.
Quoting DoverWxwatchter:
Skyepony how strong do you think our depression with an eye really was?


Earlier today it looked like a solid cat 1 for a short time. It's been sheared some since. Probably over the warmest water it will see right now.

Disappointed no models were run on it today like they did yesterday. With not even declaring it a tropical depression we aren't getting all the info from CIMSS & all. I suppose it barely classifies at warm core. We've had warmer cored noreasters parked over the gulf stream.
Quoting Seastep:


You're just going to have to trust me on this, but you do not want to compare cold vs. warm deaths.

And, to boot, without fossil fuels, the numbers would be staggering.


Oh?

Heat: A Major Killer

Heat is the number one weather-related killer in the United States. The National Weather Service statistical data shows that heat causes more fatalities per year than floods, lightning, tornadoes and hurricanes combined. Based on the 10-year average from 2000 to 2009, excessive heat claims an average of 162 lives a year. By contrast, hurricanes killed 117; floods 65; tornadoes, 62; and lightning, 48.




Even if you combine winter weather and cold, that is still less than heat (and it can be argued that since lightning is associated with warmer weather, that could be combined with heat)!

Oh yeah, so in far northern latitudes, more people die from cold than heat - but the U.S. is hardly the warmest part of the globe. And just think of the relative difficulty of staying cool as compared to staying warm - after all, you can only take off so many clothes (not to mention that may not be appropriate).
Quoting VAbeachhurricanes:


Just because it hasn't happened before while humans were there, does not mean it never happened.


I wonder why humans evolved during the last several hundred thousand years (and civilization and agriculture during the unusually stable climate of the Holocene) and not during the PETM or some other warm period? Hmmm...
1044. Seastep
History of mankind, Michael.

Wood is a fossil fuel.

Take away A/C and take away heat. No comparison. Not even close.
Oh, and those who think that we can just grow crops further north as it warms are wrong - ever see the kind of soil they have up north? Not exactly what farmers think of as good for crops (without adding lots and lots of fertilizers, never mind that boreal forest soil is acidic and usually rocky as well, plus the sunlight problem during half the year; too long of a day could be problematic as well).
Quoting Seastep:
History of mankind, Michael.

Wood is a fossil fuel.

Take away A/C and take away heat. No comparison. Not even close.


No further comment after that absurd "wood is a fossil fuel" remark - obviously, you need to go back and study basic science again if you don't even know what "fossil" means.
1048. Seastep
Quoting MichaelSTL:


No further comment after that absurd "wood is a fossil fuel" remark - obviously, you need to go back and study basic science again if you don't even know what "fossil" means.


Alright. Bedtime.

It's all fossil fuel in context. Fossil fuel = carbon based fuel.

Or, would you rather us replace current fossil fuels with burning wood?

After all, it's not a fossil fuel, right?

That wouldn't work out so well.
Quoting Grothar:


Yes, odd, even in South Florida, there has been a change in the leaves. Many people think the cold weather changes the color, but it is actually a chemical process. As the days grow shorter in the Fall, the leaves receive less photosynthesis and beging to change color.
Now this is interesting. Our almond trees here usually change and shed in March, when we start to see somewhat of a warming trend. I notice a lot of almonds have already gone to red... I'm wondering if we are actually going to get a no-leaf period, no matter how brief, this year...
Aren't there more fatalities because there are more people on the earth than ever before? The number will go higher as long as the population increases and is in exposed areas prone to natural disasters.
Quoting Seastep:
History of mankind, Michael.

Wood is a fossil fuel.

Take away A/C and take away heat. No comparison. Not even close.
You need to look up the definition of "fossil".
Wood is not a fossil fuel. Period.

And wood when burned only releases carbon that it obtained when it was alive.

Fossil fuels such as coal, petroleum and natural gas when consumed release carbon that has been stored deep in the earth away from the biosphere and ADDS carbon to the environment, as the rise in atmospheric CO2 and fall in ocean PH show.

Calling wood a 'fossil fuel'

Wow. Just WOW!
Skyepony and cybrteddy--thanks for your responses. I had been aware earlier today that it had been named but forgot.
Quoting Seastep:


Alright. Bedtime.

It's all fossil fuel in context. Fossil fuel = carbon based fuel.

Or, would you rather us replace current fossil fuels with burning wood?

After all, it's not a fossil fuel, right?

That wouldn't work out so well.


Heck, by that definition I'M a fossil fuel. (which is just silly) Grothar on the other hand....hmmm.
I just had a weird dream..

In my dream, everyone on this blog who is a strong proponent of the AGW hypothesis convinced all those here who are strong opponents of the same hypothesis to change their minds.

Amazingly, all those who were previously opponents of the AGW belief system became proponents of it.

But wait, there's more!

What also happened in the same dream, incredibly I might add, was that all of those who were previously proponents of the AGW belief were likewise convinced by the previous opponents of it to change their minds! And incredibly.. they did!

So now what happened was that the previous opponents of the AGW philosophy were now proponents of it and the former proponents of the AGW stance were now opponents of it. Mind boggling, I know.

But wait, there's still more!

What happened next was truly bizarre and positively stunning. One would have had to have had the same dream to really appreciate it or even to understand it all. But here is what happened next..

The previous opponents of the AGW hypothesis, who were now the proponents of AGW started trying to convince the previous proponents, who were now, of course, opponents of the AGW hypothesis, the change their minds and become proponents again.

And the previous proponents of the AGW paradigm, who were now, of course, opponents of the AGW paradigm were now trying to convince their opponents, who were now AGW proponents, to change their minds.. again, and become opponents of AGW.. all over again!!

And this went on and the debate dragged on and on and then.. and then...

And then the dream ended and I woke up and had to face reality again. The reality was that no one had changed their minds, no one had changed their stance and no one had changed their philosophies or their beliefs at all, in spite of all the countless hours of back and forth arguing, debating, and occasional insults tossed back and forth.

And so it went. And so it goes..
Quoting MichaelSTL:


I wonder why humans evolved during the last several hundred thousand years (and civilization and agriculture during the unusually stable climate of the Holocene) and not during the PETM or some other warm period? Hmmm...


what? that doesn't even make sense against my argument...
Quoting Grothar:


Yes, odd, even in South Florida, there has been a change in the leaves. Many people think the cold weather changes the color, but it is actually a chemical process. As the days grow shorter in the Fall, the leaves receive less photosynthesis and beging to change color.


That is true but cold weather does influence the process as well.

This year, we have had several very sharp cold snaps and this has made the colors here in West Central Florida unusually vivid.

We have southern red maples, hickories, turkey oak, post oak, water oak, laurel oak, carolina ash, sweetgum, bald cypress and one or two other native trees that are all at peak color right now. Additionally, there are some non-native ornamentals that are also displaying vivid color.

Still, the bulk of the deciduous trees in our sandy soil are live oaks and they do not develop any color or lose their leaves until around the middle of March, normally. Too bad they are not on the same schedule as the other deciduous varieties, as it would look like New Hampshire in October around here.
Wow - holy climate wunderdream, now thats sad.
Cheer up - I keep having this wundernightmare where people post 30 pages arguing they think a storm may have wobbled west or not, post every possible color permutation of the same freaking graphic - then make five pages of totally unfunny jokes about a shower curtain.

Oh wait sorry that actually happens.
Quoting calusakat:
Quoting McBill:

Again, the term "revenue-neutral" seems to be beyond your grasp. I getting that your a guy not susceptible to rational argument - which make for a rather tiresome discussion.

Give Colonel Klink my best wishes for the holidays.


Perhaps you could do yourself a favor and stop reading The AGW Revised Laws of Physics Handbook for a moment and go online to Amazon and get a simple book on economics and something on the order of Business Management for Dummies

Right now, your comments are nonsensical to say the very least. Maybe you should just stay with weather discussions and avoid economic discussions...at least until you have read up on how business and money works in the real world.

And, of course, stop reading from the AGW Talking Points for Dummieswhen talking about how governments spend our money and supposedly give it back to us. That only happens in FantasyLand.

In the real world it is called by its real name...'Wealth re-distribution' by governmental decree.







And what's your solution? Do nothing and then at the last minute throw billions away on some star wars type technology? Not to mention the direct hits economically by crop loss, water rising, storms, etc..

There's only two choices: 1) you don't believe it is happening, in which case argue the science not the economics or 2) you believe it is happening, in which find a solution.

You have yet to answer a science question except to throw mud at the data and at the people involved. Questioning the data is a valid technique but you haven't really done that, you've just tried to find a bad apple to justify throwing out the barrel. Questioning the people behind AGW is possibly valid but you haven't made that case. All of us on here know many people who don't fit into your characterization of scientists as frauds. Trying to paint the intellectuals of the world as part of conspiracy against the common man just doesn't hold up. Put two scientists in an elevator and they will debate which floor to go to first, much less agree on a secret plot to take over the world.

You have yet to state anything economically that makes sense. I personally have no opinion about cap and trade since I, like you, don't trust the powers that be to be honest. I've worked in the corporate world and I know how slick we were. However, there are thousands of solutions that a intelligent and motivated society could implement if there wasn't this disinformation campaign swaying the popular opinion.

There is also the fact that most countries in the world are very concerned about global warming including the BRIC nations. China and India especially have head starts since they can build green infrastructure much more easily that we can. Economically, the US is already giving China billions each month in trade surplus,... and you want to increase that?

In short, you haven't answered the science, you haven't proposed a solution to the problem, all you've done is characterize people you disagree with in a bad light. I can't imagine you are playing to the members of the blog since even the ones who doubt AGW aren't into hack cliches instead of evidence. I believe you are into winning your argument instead of searching for the truth.

Please, favor us with your model that explains the melting ice at the North Pole. And explain your solution.
Quoting JFLORIDA:
Cheer up - I keep having this wundernightmare where people post 30 pages arguing they think a storm may have wobbled west or not, post every possible color permutation of the same freaking graphic - then make five pages of totally unfunny jokes about a shower curtain.

Oh wait sorry that actually happens.


Well said. The absurd knows no bounds.
Central Pacific Hurricane Center
Tropical Cyclone Advisory #1
TROPICAL CYCLONE OMEKA (CP012010)
11:00 PM HST December 20 2010
=====================================

At 9:00 AM UTC, Tropical Storm Omeka (997 hPa) located at 20.9N 178.2W or about 440 NM south of Midway Island has sustained winds of 45 knots with gusts of 55 knots. The cyclone is reported as moving northeast at 12 knots.

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

Forecast and Intensity
=======================
12 HRS: 22.0N 176.5W - 40 knots (Tropical Storm)
24 HRS: 24.9N 175.0W - 35 knots (Tropical Storm)
48 HRS: 33.4N 174.8W - 20 knots (Low Pressure Area)

The Next Tropical Cyclone Advisory From Central Pacific National Hurricane Center will be issued at around 15:00 PM UTC..
1064. bappit
Quoting JFLORIDA:
When people say peer reviewed you would think that the actual peer group are in the field.

This is ridiculous.

Written by flakes, reviewed by flakes.
1065. bappit
Quoting MichaelSTL:


Did you know that some places in Pakistan had over 16 feet of rain? In five days. Such an event is obviously so unprecedented that it just can't be written off as "natural variation".

A glib assertion.
1066. bappit
Quoting FLWaterFront:
I just had a weird dream..

In my dream, everyone on this blog who is a strong proponent of the AGW hypothesis convinced all those here who are strong opponents of the same hypothesis to change their minds.

Amazingly, all those who were previously opponents of the AGW belief system became proponents of it.

But wait, there's more!

What also happened in the same dream, incredibly I might add, was that all of those who were previously proponents of the AGW belief were likewise convinced by the previous opponents of it to change their minds! And incredibly.. they did!

So now what happened was that the previous opponents of the AGW philosophy were now proponents of it and the former proponents of the AGW stance were now opponents of it. Mind boggling, I know.

But wait, there's still more!

What happened next was truly bizarre and positively stunning. One would have had to have had the same dream to really appreciate it or even to understand it all. But here is what happened next..

The previous opponents of the AGW hypothesis, who were now the proponents of AGW started trying to convince the previous proponents, who were now, of course, opponents of the AGW hypothesis, the change their minds and become proponents again.

And the previous proponents of the AGW paradigm, who were now, of course, opponents of the AGW paradigm were now trying to convince their opponents, who were now AGW proponents, to change their minds.. again, and become opponents of AGW.. all over again!!

And this went on and the debate dragged on and on and then.. and then...

And then the dream ended and I woke up and had to face reality again. The reality was that no one had changed their minds, no one had changed their stance and no one had changed their philosophies or their beliefs at all, in spite of all the countless hours of back and forth arguing, debating, and occasional insults tossed back and forth.

And so it went. And so it goes..

I had a weird dream. (That's why I'm awake and posting.) Everybody on this blog started to double space their posts and shorten the lines. Some posts scrolled for several minutes. Then, because of the repetitive nature of their arguments, the page seemed to start scrolling backwards when it was really going forwards--optical delusion of course.
I had a dream Omeka was a hurricane, that makes your mornings very confusing. Latest start to a season ever only 3 weeks after it "officially" ended.

Good Morning, I didnt think is was to be this cool this morning. Happy Holidays to all
1069. IKE
PRELIMINARY EXTENDED FORECAST DISCUSSION
NWS HYDROMETEOROLOGICAL PREDICTION CENTER CAMP SPRINGS MD
400 AM EST MON DEC 20 2010

VALID 12Z FRI DEC 24 2010 - 12Z MON DEC 27 2010


...WINTER STORM STILL INDICATED FOR THE EASTERN UNITED STATES
CHRISTMAS WEEKEND...


USED THE 00Z/20 ECMWF FOR THE PRELIMINARY FRONTS AND PRESSURES FOR
DAYS 3 THROUGH 7. THIS RUN OF THE DETERMINISTIC ECMWF HAS GOOD
SUPPORT FROM THE LATEST UKMET WITH THE TIMING AND TRACK OF THE
SIGNIFICANT SYNOPTIC WAVE CROSSING THE EASTERN STATES DURING THE
PERIOD. THE TRACK IS ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE GUIDANCE...BUT IS
WITHIN THE ENVELOPE OF REMARKABLY WELL CLUSTERED DETERMINISTIC
MODELS AND ENSEMBLE MEMBERS FROM THE GEFS AND ECENS. THE
SUPPRESSED TRACK IS MORE LIKELY GIVEN THE DICEY CHANCE THAT
SHORTWAVE ENERGY IN THE SPLIT FLOW WILL PHASE AT JUST THE RIGHT
TIME AND TRAVERSE MOST OF THE NATION AS SUCH. THE ECMWF HAS
REASONABLE SUPPORT FROM ITS ENSEMBLES FOR THE HANDLING OF THE FLOW
COMING INTO THE WEST COAST AS WELL UNDER THE BLOCK DOWNSTREAM.


CISCO


1070. IKE
My low this morning...so far...33.6.

I'm at 34.2 right now.
Quoting bappit:

Written by flakes, reviewed by flakes.


Your contribution is also noted.
bappit since you stand in critical review I would like to see some position of excellence in your posts.

As a person accused of being a "flake" perhaps I should have been paying more attention to your demonstrated continuity and excellence. Especially in climate as you are indirectly claiming expertise above others there. Also in climate as you have chosen to make one liners as your sole contribution.

Lets see how intelligent you are.

You seem to have a lot of courage when addressing individuals here and, not unfortunately, directly addressing the issues.

From the direction of your attacks I take it you disagree with the climate posts - please post your specific and referenced arguments.

Thank you.



Prior temperature reconstructions tend to focus on the global average (or sometimes hemisphere averages). In this study, more than 1000 tree-ring, ice core, coral, sediment and other assorted proxy records spanning both hemispheres were used to construct regional temperature change over the past 1500 years.





a temperature pattern for the last decade using NOAA data. This time, the colour scale matches exactly the colour scale used in the Medieval Warm Period figure.


Here is the specific post I posted on the subject for reference. I dont appreciate biased ignorance from anyone.
1074. IKE
Wife: Hey honey how did your day go?

Hubby: Fine baby. I defended GW on a blog all day. I showed their azzes.

Wife: Did you....(1)take out the garbage...(2)sweep off the back porch...(3)feed and bath the kids?

Hubby: Nah sweetie...didn't have a chance to get any of that accomplished today.

Wife: Vows to not pay the internet bill in January, leading to a disconnect.

...............................................

GW:(
You know most of you disrespect others rather fragrantly and the things they feel important, and then expect to be take seriously with the most base and ignorant, non informative posts imaginable.

So let me just reiterate: Be man or woman enough to be specific, other than that its garbage and spam.

Climate is technical discussion I come here for - Temperature is not.

Grow up and realize a whole world exists around you. Some of you are almost out of time.

BTW

glib


a : marked by ease and informality : nonchalant b : showing little forethought or preparation : offhand c : lacking depth and substance : superficial
2
archaic : smooth, slippery
3
: marked by ease and fluency in speaking or writing often to the point of being insincere or deceitful
Quoting IKE:
Wife: Hey honey how did your day go?

Hubby: Fine baby. I defended GW on a blog all day. I showed their azzes.

Wife: Did you....(1)take out the garbage...(2)sweep off the back porch...(3)feed and bath the kids?

Hubby: Nah sweetie...didn't have a chance to get any of that accomplished today.

Wife: Vows to not pay the internet bill in January, leading to a disconnect.

...............................................

GW:(


Hey Ike,.............NICE!!! O-yeah, have to burn the trash pile today.
1078. IKE
Quoting severstorm:


Hey Ike,.............NICE!!!


Just my opimion...for what it's worth...I don't see much, if any, mention of GW on the news...or their websites...lately.

Looks to have been put on the back-burner...for now.
Quoting IKE:
Wife: Hey honey how did your day go?

Hubby: Fine baby. I defended GW on a blog all day. I showed their azzes.

Wife: Did you....(1)take out the garbage...(2)sweep off the back porch...(3)feed and bath the kids?

Hubby: Nah sweetie...didn't have a chance to get any of that accomplished today.

Wife: Vows to not pay the internet bill in January, leading to a disconnect.

...............................................

GW:(


Great post Ike!
Quoting severstorm:


Hey Ike,.............NICE!!! O-yeah, have to burn the trash pile today.


Really specifically how so ?

Quoting GeoffreyWPB:


Great post Ike!


Tell me why?

Quoting IKE:


Just my opimion...for what it's worth...I don't see much, if any, mention of GW on the news...or their websites...lately.

Looks to have been put on the back-burner...for now.

Ike, you downcasted all the cat 5 this year and it worked, lets see if you can downcast GW and maybe it will go away.
Quoting JFLORIDA:


Tell me why?



No.
The denial stooges and their facilitators with their folksy truisms really is just getting old - parroting NWS posts all day does no one any good.

Certainly you are free to do so but then harassing others for posting climate info reprehensible. None of you obviously bothered to read back - you came here an expected to get points disparaging others.

None of you have any info or insight I cant get or beyond a populist perspective.


As Dr Masters discuses climate quite often, and climate change you coming here to disrespect those disusing it rather obvious.

Like I said at least some of you could give insight into your beliefs - but I guess you are even too ignorant for that.

I ban ignorant spammers from my blog.
Football - and you have the arrogance to disrespect legitimate posts.

Global warming is nothing more than left political propoganda, motivated primarilary by $$. Afterall, didn't Al Gore play a small role in spearheading GW? I remember clear as day all the talk about the coming of the next ice age and ensuing global cooling in the wake of the harsh winters of the 1970's and 1980's. This seems no different.

Give it 15 years and this will all go away until something even more trendy comes to the surface.
Quoting cat5hurricane:
Global warming is nothing more than left political propoganda, motivated primarilary by $$. Afterall, didn't Al Gore play a small role in spearheading GW? I remember clear as day all the talk about the coming of the next ice age and ensuing global cooling in the wake of the harsh winters of the 1970's and 1980's. This seems no different.

Give it 15 years and this will all go away until something even more trendy comes to the surface.


Yes I recall that being said for the last 20 years.

Care to actually make a specific argument as GW is fact - in all scientific circles?

I think the problem is people let ignorant political opinion replace scientific reason.

Most of you demonstrate that beautifully - not a single technical post on climate just disparaging generally all discussion of it.

The CIA used to call that tactic "poisoning the well", in the end using unethical argument to make a point will come back to haunt you. Certainly within all existing moral constructs and religious persuasions it is explicitly prohibited.
Why does the movie Groundhog Day come to mind?
1091. IKE
Quoting JFLORIDA:
Football - and you have the arrogance to disrespect legitimate posts.



The game was one for the ages...an epic failure. The punter may be on the edge of a bridge this morning, threatening to jump. Still the best sport in the USA.

I believe GW exists...but this constant jabbing back and forth...for hours...days....weeks...months...years.

Just copy and paste your thoughts over and over again and save yourself a lot of time.
48 here in Lake Worth.


2010 Storms
All Active Year


Atlantic

East Pacific

Central Pacific
01C.OMEKA

West Pacific

Indian Ocean

Southern Hemisphere
Poisoning the well (or attempting to poison the well) is a logical fallacy where adverse information about a target is pre-emptively presented to an audience, with the intention of discrediting or ridiculing everything that the target person is about to say. Poisoning the well can be a special case of argumentum ad hominem, and the term was first used with this sense by John Henry Newman in his work Apologia Pro Vita Sua.

The origin of the term lies in the ancient practice of pouring poison into sources of fresh water before an invading army in order to diminish the invading army's strength. In general usage, poisoning the well is the provision of any information that may produce a biased result. For example, if a woman tells her friend, "I think I might buy this beautiful dress", then asks how it looks, she has "poisoned the well", as her previous comment could affect her friend's response.
Current Central/Eastern Pacific Tropical Systems


Tropical Storm 01C (Omeka) Warning #01
Issued


WTPN51 PGTW 201000
WARNING ATCP MIL 01C NEP 101220103400

2010122006 01C OMEKA 001 01 065 07 SATL 060
T000 205N 1787W 045 R034 045 NE QD 045 SE QD 045 SW QD 045 NW QD
T012 220N 1765W 040
T024 249N 1750W 035
T036 287N 1744W 030
T048 334N 1748W 020
AMP
NNNN
SUBJ: TROPICAL STORM 01C (OMEKA) WARNING NR 001
1. TROPICAL STORM 01C (OMEKA) WARNING NR 001
01 ACTIVE TROPICAL CYCLONE IN EASTPAC
MAX SUSTAINED WINDS BASED ON ONE-MINUTE AVERAGE
WIND RADII VALID OVER OPEN WATER ONLY
---
WARNING POSITION:
200600Z --- NEAR 20.5N 178.7W
MOVEMENT PAST SIX HOURS - 065 DEGREES AT 07 KTS
POSITION ACCURATE TO WITHIN 060 NM
POSITION BASED ON CENTER LOCATED BY SATELLITE
PRESENT WIND DISTRIBUTION:
MAX SUSTAINED WINDS - 045 KT, GUSTS 055 KT
WIND RADII VALID OVER OPEN WATER ONLY
RADIUS OF 034 KT WINDS - 045 NM NORTHEAST QUADRANT
045 NM SOUTHEAST QUADRANT
045 NM SOUTHWEST QUADRANT
045 NM NORTHWEST QUADRANT
REPEAT POSIT: 20.5N 178.7W
---
FORECASTS:
12 HRS, VALID AT:
201800Z --- 22.0N 176.5W
MAX SUSTAINED WINDS - 040 KT, GUSTS 050 KT
WIND RADII VALID OVER OPEN WATER ONLY
VECTOR TO 24 HR POSIT: 025 DEG/ 16 KTS
---
24 HRS, VALID AT:
210600Z --- 24.9N 175.0W
MAX SUSTAINED WINDS - 035 KT, GUSTS 045 KT
WIND RADII VALID OVER OPEN WATER ONLY
VECTOR TO 36 HR POSIT: 010 DEG/ 19 KTS
---
36 HRS, VALID AT:
211800Z --- 28.7N 174.4W
MAX SUSTAINED WINDS - 030 KT, GUSTS 040 KT
WIND RADII VALID OVER OPEN WATER ONLY
VECTOR TO 48 HR POSIT: 355 DEG/ 24 KTS
---
EXTENDED OUTLOOK:
48 HRS, VALID AT:
220600Z --- 33.4N 174.8W
MAX SUSTAINED WINDS - 020 KT, GUSTS 030 KT
WIND RADII VALID OVER OPEN WATER ONLY
---
REMARKS:
201000Z POSITION NEAR 21.0N 178.0W.
MAXIMUM SIGNIFICANT WAVE HEIGHT AT 200600Z IS 18 FEET.
NEXT WARNINGS AT 201600Z, 202200Z, 210400Z AND 211000Z.
//
BT
#0001
NNNN
0110121712 264N1777W 30
0110121718 250N1780W 30
0110121800 242N1785W 30
0110121806 238N1786W 30
0110121812 236N1787W 30
0110121818 230N1798W 30
0110121900 222N1794E 30
0110121906 216N1791E 30
0110121912 201N1799W 30
0110121918 201N1798W 30
0110122000 202N1794W 45
0110122006 205N1787W 45

TPPZ01 PGTW 201154

A. TROPICAL STORM 01C (OMEKA)

B. 20/1130Z

C. 20.9N

D. 177.5W

E. SIX/GOES11

F. T2.5/3.0/W0.5/24HRS STT: D0.5/06HRS

G. IR/EIR

H. REMARKS: 47A/PBO PTLY XPSD LLCC/ANMTN. CNVCTN WRAP OF .40 ON
LOG10 SPIRAL YIELDS A DT OF 2.5. PT AND MET AGREE. DBO DT.

I. ADDITIONAL POSITIONS:
20/0643Z 20.6N 178.6W SSMS
20/0756Z 20.5N 178.1W SSMS
20/0918Z 20.5N 177.7W MMHS


UEHARA
01C/TS/O

1088 with reference to the Global cooling myth and other non arguments presented here.

Dont think you are going to get away posting that complete anti science position with everyone.
JF ya ever here of the saying
you can lead the horse to water but you will never make him/her drink

that applies to GW/AGW
Quoting JFLORIDA:


Yes I recall that being said for the last 20 years.

Care to actually make a specific argument as GW is fact - in all scientific circles?

I think the problem is people let ignorant political opinion replace scientific reason.

Most of you demonstrate that beautifully - not a single technical post on climate just disparaging generally all discussion of it.

The CIA used to call that tactic "poisoning the well", in the end using unethical argument to make a point will come back to haunt you. Certainly within all existing moral constructs and religious persuasions it is explicitly prohibited.

Nah...the floor is all yours, JFlorida. You're supposedly one of the few that is convinced it's occurring. Therefore, knock yourself out.

Also, while you're deep within the archives of the psychological warfare glossary, you should lay out the term "brainwashing" and what it means to everyone to help back your pro GW arguement. Only if you want to though.
Quoting JFLORIDA:

1088 with reference to the Global cooling myth and other non arguments presented here.

Dont think you are going to get away posting that complete anti science position with everyone.

Don't have to.
1103. tkeith
New Orleans lost it's oldest and most respected Meteorologist Sunday. Nash Roberts died at the age of 92.
hey cat5 ya pony
Yea keep - ive thought about it a lot. And then some.

But you know, some horses would rather die than drink I think. You shouldn't waste time leading them water and waiting while 100 behind them die of thirst.

People think they can make a few unconformable and shut down all discussion.

I feel now if they have a valid point they need to make it - or be pushed to making it.

Im pulling out the stops on climate discussion on the main blog and on this site where I can. I am going to be technically ruthless until I am banned or reasonable discussion occurs.

If you have a reasonable angle to add to the discussion then do so. right?! Considering the history of this issue there is nothign wrong with demanding at least that. If you dont then let others reason it out. None of us are so proficient at climate science to blow it all off anyway.
Quoting KEEPEROFTHEGATE:
hey cat5 ya pony

LOL
The argument behind 1101 for instance is Pure Conspiracy.

It has no scientific basis whatsoever. Its invalid. Its the ultimate anti science argument. And people here are so conditioned to it as to accept it as a valid argument form on climate without question.

The line needs to be redrawn. Thats unproven and invalid and those accepting it as valid are doing so for purely political reasons.

Its important to realize too that those who triangulate a "middle ground" between climate science and invalid argument are basically just as bad as the anti science crowd. They are giving a kind of validity to the known invalid.

If not immoral its amoral to accept and project such an unreasoned and untrue argument.
i believe something is happening and i agree with your stance on the subject but to convince the masses well thats a bigger problem than GW in itself
1109. IKE
Quoting KEEPEROFTHEGATE:
i believe something is happening and i agree with your stance on the subject but to convince the masses well thats a bigger problem than GW in itself


Ditto those thoughts.

And if that's where the planet is headed...along with all of the other problems...then, I'm not sure I want to be around to see that anyway.

Hope everyone has a Merry Christmas and a Happy 2011. May all of your dreams come true.
Well give it a think - I am always updating my positions to be more truthful also.

"Argument is meant to reveal the truth, not to create it." - Edward De Bono
Quoting JFLORIDA:
The argument behind 1101 for instance is Pure Conspiracy.

It has no scientific basis whatsoever. Its invalid. Its the ultimate anti science argument. And people here are so conditioned to it as to accept it as a valid argument form on climate without question.

The line needs to be redrawn. Thats unproven and invalid and those accepting it as valid are doing so for purely political reasons.

Its important to realize too that those who triangulate a "middle ground" between climate science and invalid argument are basically just as bad as the anti science crowd. They are giving a kind of validity to the known invalid.

If not immoral its amoral to accept and project such an unreasoned and untrue argument.

If you're going to lead the way to try to convince the anti GW believers on this blog (myself included) & in this country, then best of luck to you.

You got your work cut out for you. I must say you do if fact do your research diligiently and well, and you have a good handle on the topic.
1112. scott39
Looks like it will be windy and cold on the N Gulf Coast for Christmas day. I remember the days leading up to Christmas in the early 80's. Coldest I can recall. Single digits and pipes busting all over the neighborhood.
Quoting IKE:


Ditto those thoughts.

And if that's where the planet is headed...along with all of the other problems...then, I'm not sure I want to be around to see that anyway.

Hope everyone has a Merry Christmas and a Happy 2011. May all of your dreams come true.

Ike - Merry Christmas to you too.
Quoting scott39:
Looks like it will be windy and cold on the N Gulf Coast for Christmas day. I remember the days leading up to Christmas in the early 80's. Coldest I can recall. Single digits and pipes busting all over the neighborhood.
Quoting scott39:
Looks like it will be windy and cold on the N Gulf Coast for Christmas day. I remember the days leading up to Christmas in the early 80's. Coldest I can recall. Single digits and pipes busting all over the neighborhood.

I sure hope this isn't the start to global cooling! Just kidding.

Yeah, we're shivering on the Carolina coast too. Unseasonable for sure.
1116. scott39
I think all the HOT AIR TALK about Global Warming is causing the ice to melt faster, and will destroy the Earth in 200 Billion years instead of 300 Billion! Thanks Alot!
Quoting FatPenguin:


The use of "sheeple" is very telling.

Remind me again how CO2 is NOT a heat trapping gas? I've forgotten.

Until CO2 defies the laws of nature and doesn't trap heat, then AGW is a valid theory. There is no argument. The ONLY way to disprove AGW is to prove CO2 has zero effect on the climate. It's really that simple.


Wow they really don't teach like they used and you are living proof.

There are three types of people on this earth.

Wolves, Sheeple and Sheep Dogs.

Sheeple are like you, sans any ability or interest in the real truth. If CNN or MSNBC says it...it has got to be true. Don't ask question. Sit in front of that TV and 'pass me another beer, dear'. Not that you drink beer, necessarily...but sheeple all the same.

The we have people like atmoaggie and pensacoladoug, to name only two who try their darnedest to education the sheeple so that they, the sheeple, might be able to, one day, think for themselves.

Finally there are the Wolves. They are the movers and shakers who devise the constructs, (dressing up as sheeple) which they then use to convince the sheeple to do as they, the wolves say.

One great construct is the AGW Talking Points booklet. Nevermind that the laws of physics and mathematics are being subverted, that data is being altered, if NOAA and NASA say it, AGW sheeple swallow it hook line and sinker.

Ridiculing and slandering anyone who has the temerity to dispute any part of the AGW construct, along the way.

Yes, Virginia, AGW is a lie.


Global warming denier Roy Spencer's satellite data claims that the global temperature is currently warmer than a year ago - during an El Nino. See for yourself (channel 5 in particular, although not as close to the surface; some of the layers high up are cooler but others are even warmer like channel 10).

Just an interesting observation, since La Nina is supposed to lower global temperatures (also, the current La Nina has lagged behind in SSTs, despite a very high SOI and a near-record low MEI, albeit weaker than a few months ago; the recent El Nino by contrast was stronger according to SST data than the SOI or MEI).
1119. RIDGES
Wikileaks is at it again, except they are calling it Santaleaks instead!


Shouts & MurmursSantaleaksby Ben Greenman
December 20, 2010 .

An analysis of more than a hundred thousand documents recently leaked by a disgruntled elf has revealed several surprising facts about the North Pole’s most famous citizen.

· Santa and several top elves colluded to circumvent a ban on Chinese-made toys, despite pressure from the North Pole community to deliver only toys made locally.

· Santa has, over the years, acted to undermine potential successors, privately disparaging one of his nephews as “lazy,” another as “not really committed to the whole Christmas thing,” and yet another as “incapable of growing a beard of the appropriate size, if you know what I mean.”

· Senior North Pole officials were astonished when an elf in Santa’s cabinet proposed halting a long-standing program monitoring pouting and crying. “For years, we’ve been telling people that they’d better not do this,” one said in a confidential cable, “and now we’re removing all restrictions? What’s next? Decriminalizing the failure to watch out?”

· After Santa suffered a serious hip injury, in the late seventies, the Prime Minister of Norway offered him access to several chimneys to conduct entrance and egress exercises.

· A reported mixup in 2004 that brought eleven-year-old Jack Keller, of Seattle, a book of math games instead of a football was not accidental: Santa was sending a message.

· During home visits last Christmas, Santa spied on the C.E.O.s of several Fortune 500 companies, and collected personal data including but not limited to credit-card and frequent-flier numbers.

· The song “I Saw Mommy Kissing Santa Claus” has more basis in truth than was previously thought; elves worried for years about Santa’s philandering, which began to decrease only recently, after Mrs. Claus discovered an illicit text message from an Arizona school-board member.

· Santa doesn’t enjoy going to certain St. Louis suburbs. “They just give me the creeps,” he told one top elf.

· Most cookies left out for Santa end up being fed to the reindeer.

· In 2007, Santa suppressed the delivery of gifts to more than a thousand residents of Los Angeles as a result of his displeasure with the movie “Fred Claus.”

· Just this year, Santa accepted a payment of twelve million dollars to keep Charlie Sheen on the “nice” list.

· A potential environmental disaster was kept secret by the North Pole in 2008, after a large bag filled with painted blocks from Vietnam fell from Santa’s sleigh into the Anglezarke reservoir, in Lancashire, raising fears of lead contamination. Elves with scuba gear and flashlights were sent in to retrieve the blocks under cover of night.

· Contrary to popular belief, Santa cannot really tell when you’re sleeping or when you’re awake, but he will fly into a rage if his ability to do so is questioned.



Merry Christmas everyone!
Quoting MichaelSTL:
Global warming denier Roy Spencer's satellite data claims that the global temperature is currently warmer than a year ago - during an El Nino. See for yourself (channel 5 in particular, although not as close to the surface; some of the layers high up are cooler but others are even warmer like channel 10).

Just an interesting observation, since La Nina is supposed to lower global temperatures (also, the current La Nina has lagged behind in SSTs, despite a very high SOI and a near-record low MEI, albeit weaker than a few months ago; the recent El Nino by contrast was stronger according to SST data than the SOI or MEI).

Question for you, MichaelSTL: Were you one of the many who believed the next ice age was upon us following the harsh winters of the 1970's and 1980's?
Also, for all of the cold weather, Arctic ice is indeed melting faster, but because all of the cold air is being dumped out of the Arctic:



Also:

Why Europe's severe cold winter weather may continue

US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) data shows that the NAO has been in its so called negative phase for 14 consecutive months up to and including November 2010. It is almost certain to be negative for December making an unprecedented 15 month run. Previously the longest continuous periods were for nine month across the northern hemisphere winter of 1968-69 and for six months across the winter of 1962-63.


There's that magic word again, used a lot this year to describe weather patterns: "unprecedented".
1122. scott39
Quoting MichaelSTL:
Also, for all of the cold weather, Arctic ice is indeed melting faster, but because all of the cold air is being dumped out of the Arctic:



Also:


Why Europe's severe cold winter weather may continue

US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) data shows that the NAO has been in its so called negative phase for 14 consecutive months up to and including November 2010. It is almost certain to be negative for December making an unprecedented 15 month run. Previously the longest continuous periods were for nine month across the northern hemisphere winter of 1968-69 and for six months across the winter of 1962-63.


There's that magic word again, used a lot this year to describe weather patterns: "unprecedented".
How long do you think we have?
Anthony Watts flunked out of Purdue.
Watts up with that?
1124. scott39
I wonder if GW had anything to do with Blockbuster having a meltdown in 2010? Dont bother renewing your membership.
Quoting scott39:
I wonder if GW had anything to do with Blockbuster having a meltdown in 2010? Dont bother renewing your membership.

LOL
Quoting cat5hurricane:

Question for you, MichaelSTL: Were you one of the many who believed the next ice age was upon us following the harsh winters of the 1970's and 1980's?


I wasn't even ALIVE back then!

In any case, all of that nonsense about an ice age in the 1970s is just that - pure media bull**** - just like all of the nonsense you see today. And 30 years from now, we will surely have to put up with claims like "Scientists were predicting an ice age in 2010!!!".

Every now and again, the myth that “we shouldn’t believe global warming predictions now, because in the 1970’s they were predicting an ice age and/or cooling” surfaces. Recently, George Will mentioned it in his column (see Will-full ignorance) and the egregious Crichton manages to say “in the 1970’s all the climate scientists believed an ice age was coming” (see Michael Crichton’s State of Confusion ). You can find it in various other places too [here, mildly here, etc]. But its not an argument used by respectable and knowledgeable skeptics, because it crumbles under analysis. That doesn’t stop it repeatedly cropping up in newsgroups though.


here is the latest example, no doubt will be quoted by eniers 30 years from now (though I doubt there will be anybody questioning the science by then):

Coldest Winter in 1000 Years Cometh – not.

This claim circulates in the internet and in many mainstream media as well: Scientists have allegedly predicted the coldest winter in 1,000 years for Europe. What is behind it? Nothing – no scientist has predicted anything like it. A Polish tabloid made up the story. An interesting lesson about today´s media.


(yes, many of those articles specifically say that an ice age will begin)
Quoting MichaelSTL:
Also, for all of the cold weather, Arctic ice is indeed melting faster, but because all of the cold air is being dumped out of the Arctic:



Also:


Why Europe's severe cold winter weather may continue

US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) data shows that the NAO has been in its so called negative phase for 14 consecutive months up to and including November 2010. It is almost certain to be negative for December making an unprecedented 15 month run. Previously the longest continuous periods were for nine month across the northern hemisphere winter of 1968-69 and for six months across the winter of 1962-63.


There's that magic word again, used a lot this year to describe weather patterns: "unprecedented".

Well if the believers don't master tailoring the data to their likings, why not then take it a step further by drawing inclusive, premature statements that a particular data sample is exclusively behind the idea that the entire earth is permanently warming? Convenient. Not convincing.
Quoting MichaelSTL:


I wasn't even ALIVE back then!

In any case, all of that nonsense about an ice age in the 1970s is just that - pure media bull**** - just like all of the nonsense you see today. And 30 years from now, we will surely have to put up with claims like "Scientists were predicting an ice age in 2010!!!".


Every now and again, the myth that “we shouldn’t believe global warming predictions now, because in the 1970’s they were predicting an ice age and/or cooling” surfaces. Recently, George Will mentioned it in his column (see Will-full ignorance) and the egregious Crichton manages to say “in the 1970’s all the climate scientists believed an ice age was coming” (see Michael Crichton’s State of Confusion ). You can find it in various other places too [here, mildly here, etc]. But its not an argument used by respectable and knowledgeable skeptics, because it crumbles under analysis. That doesn’t stop it repeatedly cropping up in newsgroups though.


here is the latest example, no doubt will be quoted by eniers 30 years from now (though I doubt there will be anybody questioning the science by then):


Coldest Winter in 1000 Years Cometh – not.

This claim circulates in the internet and in many mainstream media as well: Scientists have allegedly predicted the coldest winter in 1,000 years for Europe. What is behind it? Nothing – no scientist has predicted anything like it. A Polish tabloid made up the story. An interesting lesson about today´s media.


(yes, many of those articles specifically say that an ice age will begin)

As I said before, this is nothing more than a pattern. Give it 15 years before something else trendy and innovative captures the imagination of the interested minds.

I will say that like JFlorida, you as well seem to have a very good handle on this topic and do your diligent research. That must be said at least.
Quoting scott39:
How long do you think we have?


Arctic ice?

Well, several years ago they expected it to become ice-free in the summer by about 2100, but currently it looks more like 2030. If you look at just ice extent, that is, because ice volume has been declining at a much faster rate (the ice at minimum extent this year was very thin and spread out with low concentration, which demonstrates the importance of wind patterns in determining ice extent; 2007 had a pattern that highly compacted the ice):



Monthly average Arctic Ice Volume for Sept 2010 was 4,000 km^3, the lowest over the 1979-2010 period, 78% below the 1979 maximum and 9,400 km^3 or 70% below its mean for the 1979-2009 period.


Also, we will now get better estimates of ice volume (among other things) thanks to Cryosat-2.
Quoting cat5hurricane:

As I said before, this is nothing more than a pattern. Give it 15 years before something else trendy and innovative captures the imagination of the interested minds.

I will say that like JFlorida, you as well seem to have a very good handle on this topic and do your diligent research. That must be said at least.


15 years... you lost that bet already...

The global warming hypothesis originated in 1896 when Svante Arrhenius, a Swedish chemist, developed the theory that carbon dioxide emissions from the burning of fossil fuels would cause global temperatures to rise by trapping excess heat in the earth’s atmosphere.


2010-1896 = 114 years. Yes, global warming is more than a century old now! "Only" 99 years longer than your 15 years! And even older if you go back to the first measurements of infrared absorption by gasses like water vapor and CO2, albeit before any connection was made between burning fossil fuels and atmospheric CO2 levels and subsequent warming.
Quoting MichaelSTL:


15 years... you lost that bet already...

The global warming hypothesis originated in 1896 when Svante Arrhenius, a Swedish chemist, developed the theory that carbon dioxide emissions from the burning of fossil fuels would cause global temperatures to rise by trapping excess heat in the earth’s atmosphere.


2010-1896 = 114 years. Yes, global warming is more than a century old now! "Only" 99 years longer than your 15 years! And even older if you go back to the first measurements of infrared absorption by gasses like water vapor and CO2, albeit before any connection was made between burning fossil fuels and atmospheric CO2 levels and subsequent warming.


So...the day the theory was proposed, that was the day global warming began?

I think you misinterpreted the AGW Talking Points on that particular theory and its effects.

Maybe you have misprints in your copy as well?


I wonder how many global warming deniers live in China (probably a lot less than in the U.S., even considering the population):

China Leading Global Race to Make Clean Energy

Of course, China is just (IMO) using renewable energy to supplement their endless appetite for energy; they are ramping up coal demand so fast (10% a year) that they are increasingly importing it (from countries that don't want it).
1133. bappit
Quoting calusakat:


So...the day the theory was proposed, that was the day global warming began?

I think you misinterpreted the AGW Talking Points on that particular theory and its effects.

Maybe you have misprints in your copy as well?



Do you have any better ideas to contribute? Apparently not.
1134. bappit
Quoting cat5hurricane:
Global warming is nothing more than left political propoganda, motivated primarilary by $$. Afterall, didn't Al Gore play a small role in spearheading GW? I remember clear as day all the talk about the coming of the next ice age and ensuing global cooling in the wake of the harsh winters of the 1970's and 1980's. This seems no different.

Give it 15 years and this will all go away until something even more trendy comes to the surface.

Have any proof for your assertions? Please, no anecdotes or hearsay.
1135. bappit
Quoting VAbeachhurricanes:
I love how some people that want to stop climate change, want the most money spent on research on how we can change the climate... lol just shows how much of it is really about money and power

Facts please. Opportunists are inevitable--something to do with having a free society. Prove that that is all the global warming research amounts to.
Quoting bappit:

Do you have any better ideas to contribute? Apparently not.
calusakat has nothing to contribute other than defamation, a broken record, and blows to his/her own credibility per post. but other blowhards who think they've nailed the coffin must love the stuff!
I see there have been a few on this morning complaining again about the ongoing back-and-forth between those aligned with the science behind the AGW theory and those who support contrarian conspiracy theories and the like. It's just my opinion, but as this is, after all, a weather site, discussions about global warming--often intitiated by one of Dr. Masters' own posts--are at least as relevant as, say, page after page of embedded 70s/80s rock videos, discussions about NFL and college football, or marathon TV/movie trivia sessions.

As to charges that the GW conversations here are pointless as nobody will likely change their mind based on what they read here, I'd have to say those charges are probably true. But while I can't speak for others, I can tell you this: changing anyone's mind isn't my goal. I usually only post AGW scientific facts in response to those who post some debunked piece of junk data, or some outright lie that's been repeatedly and heavily crticized by scientists. And I do that not to sway opinion of the theory; frankly, the theory is solid and no baseless bits of crackpot denialism will cause anyone with intellectual honesty to dismiss it as some have. No, I do it simply so casual visitors to this site don't arrive here and get the impression that pseudo-scientific mumbo-jumbo is the law of the land. IOW, I'm doing my part to keep alive the flame of truth, and I plan to keep at it as long as the site is up and I'm still allowed to post.

This last paragraph is a repost of mine from last night: it's important--vitally important--for people to go outside their comfort zone in their personal pursuit of scientific truth. If you're a person who only watches Fox, try tuning your television to MSNBC or CNN every so often. If you normally visit only WattsUpWithThat.com or GlobalWarmingHoax.com or AlGoreLied.com, try also spending a little time on wesbites that provide actual unbiased information such as the myriad NOAA/NASA climate science websites, or those of various universities. If you generally spend time talking only to those whose views on science or politics agree with yours, try participating in free conversations with those whose opinions differ from yours. Open your mind; expand your intellectual horizons; familiarize yourself with information that makes you uncomfortable; challenge others; challenge yourself. You'll be a better person for it, and the world will be a better place.

;-)
1138. bappit
Quoting JFLORIDA:
bappit since you stand in critical review I would like to see some position of excellence in your posts.

As a person accused of being a "flake" perhaps I should have been paying more attention to your demonstrated continuity and excellence. Especially in climate as you are indirectly claiming expertise above others there. Also in climate as you have chosen to make one liners as your sole contribution.

Lets see how intelligent you are.

You seem to have a lot of courage when addressing individuals here and, not unfortunately, directly addressing the issues.

From the direction of your attacks I take it you disagree with the climate posts - please post your specific and referenced arguments.

Thank you.

You misapprehend my post. I am referring to bogus "peer reviewed" articles. I thought I was agreeing with you.
1139. bappit
I do think that posts made in good faith are always worthwhile. I'm optimistic in that area despite being a general pessimist. I also think that a lot of people visit the blog who never post, and they can be informed despite the posts of trolls.
smart man nea,amongst a sea of pompassness(new word?)...
1141. hydrus
Quoting stillwaiting:
smart man nea,amongst a sea of pompassness(new word?)...
--excessive self-esteem or exaggerated dignity; pretentious:
Officials full of pompassness who enjoy giving orders. 2. Full of high-sounding phrases; ...:)
1143. hcubed
Quoting JFLORIDA:
Poisoning the well (or attempting to poison the well) is a logical fallacy where adverse information about a target is pre-emptively presented to an audience, with the intention of discrediting or ridiculing everything that the target person is about to say.


Sounds like what they use when discussing Watts, doesn't it?