WunderBlog Archive » Category 6™

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

Second-Warmest Year in U.S. Weather History, and Among the Wettest

By: Bob Henson 5:33 PM GMT on January 10, 2017

Only 2012 ranks ahead of 2016 for average temperature across the 48 contiguous states, said NOAA’s National Centers for Environmental Information on Monday in its yearly U.S. climate report. The second-place showing follows a third-place ranking in 2015 (see Figure 1), which means that the last five years (2012 - 2016) have produced the three warmest years in U.S. records extending back to 1895. This national-scale warmth is a reflection of global-scale trends consistent with a climate being warmed by human-produced greenhouse gases. It’s virtually certain that 2016 will be certified this month as the warmest year on record globally, which would make it the third such record-setter in a row.

The average 48-state reading of 54.91°F in 2016 was 2.89°F ahead of the 20th-century average and 0.37°F shy of the 2012 record. Geographically, the nation’s warmth in 2016 was astoundingly uniform, with every contiguous U.S. state having at least its seventh warmest year (see Figure 2). Georgia had its warmest year on record, as did Alaska, which isn’t part of the contiguous U.S. database.


Figure 1. Year-by-year average temperature for the 48 contiguous U.S. states from 1895 to 2016. The three warmest years have all occurred since 2012. The current U.S. climate is roughly 1.5°F warmer than it was a century ago, with much of that warming observed since the 1980s. Image credit: NOAA/NCEI.


Figure 2. Statewide rankings for average temperature in 2016 as compared to each calendar year since 1895. Darker shades of orange indicate higher rankings for warmth, with 1 denoting the coldest year on record and 122 the warmest. Image credit: NOAA/NCEI.


Figure 3. Month-by-month rankings for U.S. temperature and precipitation in 2016, including the average temperature, daily maximum and minimum temperature (each calculated locally before being averaged nationally), and precipitation. Higher numbers denote a warmer or wetter placement among the 122 years in the NOAA database, which extends back to 1895. Data credit: NOAA/NCEI.


Warmest nights on record
Sultry summer nights--and mild winter nights--did more than their share to put 2016 near the top of the U.S. temperature heap. Averaged across the nation and year, the daily minimum temperature was the warmest in U.S. history, at 3.09°F above the long-term mean (beating out 2012). The average daily maximum temperature came in at 2.69°F above the 20th-century average, placing third behind 2012 and 1934. Relative to average, lows were warmer than highs for every month in 2016 except February and March, as shown in Figure 3.

The year’s U.S. warmth was well distributed across the calendar, with two noteworthy exceptions evident in Figure 3 above: May and December.

Record highs outdid record lows by an unprecedented ratio
What’s not obvious in the maps and figures above is how seldom U.S. towns and cities set or tied daily record lows in 2016, thanks in large part to the mild nights noted above. The preliminary total of daily record lows for the year was 5188--barely half of the total recorded in any other year since 30-year climatologies became established in the 1920s, according to independent meteorologist Guy Walton, who has compiled and tracked NOAA records data for more than a decade. Meanwhile, there were 29,729 daily record highs, a large but not unusual number for recent years. Juxtaposed, the ratio of daily highs to daily lows was around 5.7 to 1, the largest for any year in the post-1920s database, according to Walton. Overall for the 2010s (defined as 2010 - 2016), we’ve seen more than double the number of daily record highs versus lows, with the ratio of 2.1 to 1 just above the 1.9-to-1 ratio observed in the 2000s.

A wet year overall, but with plenty of variability
Wild spatial and temporal swings were the order of the year in 2016 when it comes to precipitation. Averaged by month, June was the 14th driest on record for the contiguous U.S., while August was the 2nd wettest, as shown in Figure 3. The tendency toward drought east of the Mississippi, and the very moist conditions that prevailed in the upper Midwest (as well as flood-hammered Louisiana), is evident in the state-by-state precipitation map (Figure 5 below). The year as a whole was the 24th wettest on record. Three states had a top-ten driest year--Connecticut, Georgia, and Massachusetts--while Michigan, Minnesota, North Dakota, Wisconsin saw top-ten wet years.

Averaged linearly and nationally, the contiguous U.S. has seen annual precipitation climb from about 29” in the 1890s to about 31” in the 2010s. Of course, that overall rise masks the hugely important swings observed from region to region and year to year.


Figure 4. Year-by-year ranking of average precipitation for the 48 contiguous U.S. states from 1895 to 2016. Image credit: NOAA/NCEI.


Figure 5. Statewide rankings for average precipitation in 2016, as compared to each year since 1895. Darker shades of green indicate higher rankings for moisture, with 1 denoting the driest year on record and 122 the wettest. Image credit: NOAA/NCEI.

A less-crazy December
The parade of midlatitude storms marching across the U.S. in December, a feature characteristic of La Niña winters, led to a fairly unremarkable monthly temperature outcome. It was the 54th coldest and 34th wettest out of the 122 Decembers on record. The La Niña tendency toward cooler-than-average readings toward the northwest and warmer-than-average readings toward the southeast is evident in Figure 6. Florida was the only state with a top-ten temperature result, as it sweated its way through the fourth warmest December on record. Five states--Minnesota, Nevada, North Dakota, South Dakota, and Wyoming--saw a top-ten wettest December (see Figure 7). Moisture has been plentiful across the West apart from the Northern Rockies, and the widespread snowpack now building up (see Figure 8) will be much appreciated by skiers and boarders this winter and by farmers and ranchers next summer.

Jeff Masters and I will have more next week on the natural disasters of 2016, both national and global, as well as how 2016 stacked up in terms of global temperature. We’ll be back with our next post by Wednesday afternoon.

Bob Henson


Figure 6. Statewide rankings for average temperature during December 2016, as compared to each December since 1895. Darker shades of orange indicate higher rankings for warmth, with 1 denoting the coldest December on record and 122 the warmest. Image credit: NOAA/NCEI.


Figure 7. Statewide rankings for average precipitation during December 2016, as compared to each December since 1895. Darker shades of green indicate higher rankings for moisture, with 1 denoting the driest December on record and 122 the wettest. Image credit: NOAA/NCEI.


Figure 8. The amount of water held in snowpack as of January 10, 2017, relative to the average for this date for the period 1981-2010. Image credit: USDA/NRCS and National Water and Climate Center.

Climate Summaries

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

Reader Comments

Thanks for the Update...
Preliminary temperature reanalysis highlights 2016 as the warmest on record in the Arctic.


Mean surface air temperature north of 66N (Arctic Circle) over 1948-2016 (Jan-December). Temperature reanalysis using NCEP/NCAR. Subplot highlights surface air temperature anomalies in 2016 using a 1981-2010 baseline. (Updated 1/3/17)
Image credit: Zachary Labe


Declining December sea ice thickness (map) and volume (bar) from 1979-2016


Trends in sea ice thickness/volume are another important indicator of Arctic climate change. While sea ice thickness observations are sparse, here we utilize the ocean and sea ice model, PIOMAS (Zhang and Rothrock, 2003), to visualize December sea ice thickness and volume from 1979 to 2016. Image credit: Zachary Labe
Thanks Mr. Henson.
Our two days of hard freezes (SW Houston generally) ended a long stretch of mild winter weather stretching back through at least all of last winter. My split leaf got a needed comeuppance. It will be back. The roots are protected.

Looking around and about, seeing grass that got bitten by the cold. Haven't seen grass burned by the cold in a while. The color of the landscape changed over night.

Should be upper 70's this week. Thanks La Nina!
Dr. Henson,

If you have time - see comment 135 from the previous blog. Slight correction may be in order regarding what was posted about OKC.
NSIDC director Mark Serreze:

"We're in a situation now where the data speak for themselves. People who deny that, who say that humans don't have anything to do with it, have their head in the sand. Deny it at your peril.

You can't hide or suppress data. We're in the information age."


From InsideClimate News:

Unrelenting Global Warming Sends Sea Ice to Record Low, As Scientists Feel Heat, Too

Data from NOAA and NASA, operating under a cloud of climate denial from the Trump administration, show the devastating effects of winter warmth.

[...]

"Some of the crazy weather patterns we've seen this winter could be, in part, due to the loss of sea ice," said NSIDC director Mark Serreze. "We've had very unusual weather patterns pumping warmth up into the Arctic...the changes are happening so fast that we can't keep up with them."

[...]

"You're at a situation where, in the past, when everything was ice covered, heat from the ocean can't get to the atmosphere, but when when the ocean is exposed, it can't be colder than 32 degrees Fahrenheit," said Meier. "But the most remarkable thing about this year and last year is not just the internal Arctic warming from the sea, but the heat coming up from south."

According to Serreze and Meier, there's increasing evidence that the continuing loss of sea ice is, at least in part, causing the weather patterns that funnel even more warm air toward the Arctic by shifting the path of the jet stream.

"It's not only the extent. The thickness and volume are even more concerning," said Lars Kaleschke, an oceanographer with the Alfred Wegener Institute of Polar Research in Bremerhaven, Germany.

Recent satellite data show that much of the thicker multi-year ice has vanished from the Arctic. The remaining ice is so thin that it's susceptible to melting and breaks up faster during stormy weather, according to Mats Granskog, a research scientist at the Norwegian Polar Institute who specializes in tracking the age of Arctic ice.

Granskog and other scientists shared observations from recent field research at the recent conference of the American Geophysical Union. As the ice breaks up, water as warm as 40 degrees Fahrenheit can surge up thousands of feet from deep in the ocean, melting even more ice, said Amelie Meyer, an oceanographer at the Norwegian Polar Institute. Within 48 hours, the surface temperature can climb more than 70 degrees Fahrenheit, to above freezing, which increases the moisture in the air tenfold, Meyer said. That moisture and warmth fuel more storms, which intensifies the cycle, they said.

[...]

Click here to read full article.






You know what is going to be fun. All the students returning for classes this upcoming weekend.

Academic Calendar - Office of the Registrar - Oklahoma State University, Stillwater, OK
Main Spring semester begins Tuesday, January 17
If only the air temperature would get cold enough around Florida, we would be having ourselves some ocean effect snow.

I shall stop wishing for the impossible now.
6 Xandra
"We're in a situation now where the data speak for themselves. People who deny that, who say that humans don't have anything to do with it, have their head in the sand. Deny it at your peril.

You can't hide or suppress data. We're in the information age."


I believe that which I have bold text in the quote should read, Deny it at everyone's peril. We all live on the same planet.
Yes, Wisconsin had a very moist year. The mosquitoes were vicious and lasted from April to November. Every get together or BBQ here was harassed by thick mosquitoes and rain was never light. It was always a major dumping rain rather than a light rain. We did have lots of sunny days but when they were wet, they were very wet. Every kid in the neighborhood was covered in mosquito bites.
Quoting 5. daddyjames:

Dr. Henson,

If you have time - see comment 135 from the previous blog. Slight correction may be in order regarding what was posted about OKC.


Thanks, James. I've fixed that post to correct the OKC info and to update the SE VA snow stats, which were indeed more impressive than the initial maps showed.
Quoting 11. BobHenson:



Thanks, James. I've fixed that post to correct the OKC info and to update the SE VA snow stats, which were indeed more impressive than the initial maps showed.


It was one heck of a football game!
From The Independent:

Global warming could see rise in toxic shellfish that can lead to memory loss and potentially kill

Giant blooms of micro-algae that can produce a potent neurotoxin which gets into shellfish are increasing as the water warms, study finds


A satellite image of the US West Coast taken in 2016 shows dark green colours near the continental margin, indicating blooms of phytoplankton, some of which produced toxins Image courtesy of Nasa’s earth observatory

Rising ocean temperatures are leading to a rise in shellfish infected with a potentially deadly toxin, according to new research.

There have been a number of vast blooms of algae — so large they can be seen from space — off the west coast of the US in recent years.

One nasty side effect is that some of them produce a potent neurotoxin called domoic acid, which then accumulates in shellfish, particularly filter feeders like razor clams.

If humans eat shellfish containing enough of the poison it can lead to seizures, memory loss or, on rare occasions, death.

Domoic acid poisoning has also been linked to mass deaths of sea lions, dolphins, whales and other marine mammals.

Read more here.
Quoting 7. daddyjames:



You know what is going to be fun. All the students returning for classes this upcoming weekend.

Academic Calendar - Office of the Registrar - Oklahoma State University, Stillwater, OK
Main Spring semester begins Tuesday, January 17


If you didn't already have enough to deal with:


Wash those hands young man, and make sure your kids do too.
Quote:
... for average global temperature across the 48 contiguous states,
I do hope that the NOAA is aware of the fact that the GLOBE is slightly bigger than the CONUS.
Daniel Swain:
‏@Weather_West

Another very high-impact storm across NorCal today. Widespread hvy rain, flooding,&strong winds. Extreme blizzard Sierra Nev. #CAwx #castorm

Quoting 9. Some1Has2BtheRookie:

6 Xandra
"We're in a situation now where the data speak for themselves. People who deny that, who say that humans don't have anything to do with it, have their head in the sand. Deny it at your peril.

You can't hide or suppress data. We're in the information age."


I believe that which I have bold text in the quote should read, Deny it at everyone's peril. We all live on the same planet.


Remember there are more than two groups of people.
1. Believe in Global Warming but do nothing to change things (drive their gas powered cars, motorcycles, boats and move on)
2. Believe in Global Warming and due things to help (install solar panel for power, use electric cars, support policies to reduce the use of fossil fuels, etc)
3. People who don't believe in Global Warming or pretend to not believe in Global Warming for whatever reason (political, financial, lack of education, etc)
4. People who just don't care about the subject. A large percentage of these people don't even know what Global Warming really means or its effects on the planet. This is a huge percentage of Americans and people World Wide (the just don't care group).
5.?
6.?
Quoting 17. Sfloridacat5:



Remember there are more than two groups of people.
1. Believe in Global Warming but do nothing to change things (drive their gas powered cars, motorcycles, boats and move on)
2. Believe in Global Warming and due things to help (install solar panel for power, use electric cars, support policies to reduce the use of fossil fuels, etc)
3. People who don't believe in Global Warming or pretend to not believe in Global Warming for whatever reason (political, financial, lack of education, etc)
4. People who just don't care about the subject. A large percentage of these people don't even know what Global Warming really means or its effects on the planet. This is a huge percentage of Americans and people World Wide (they just don't care group).


Doesn't really matter who believe's what - or how many groups there are. Everyone will be affected, regardless. That was S1H2BtR's point.
Quoting 15. EmsiNasklug:

Quote:
... for average global temperature across the 48 contiguous states,
I do hope that the NOAA is aware of the fact that the GLOBE is slightly bigger than the CONUS.



I do hope you aware of the fact that Dr. Masters has done multiple posts on the fact that 2016 was warmest globally since record keeping began, using NOAA's data and posts on the subject as reference material.

Google and site search features are really not that hard to use.
From Mother Jones:

Here Are All the Climate Deniers and Oil Flacks Who Love Trump’s EPA Pick

“This is a frightening moment.”

Scott Pruitt, Oklahoma's attorney general and Donald Trump's pick to lead the Environmental Protection Agency, has been a longtime opponent of federal environmental regulations and a denier of climate change. Not surprisingly, as Pruitt's confirmation hearing approaches, many of his most prominent supporters are on the fringe of leading scientific consensus on climate change, and many are closely aligned with the fossil fuel industry that the EPA is responsible for regulating.

"As far as we can tell there's literally nothing in his record showing any indication of protecting the environment in any way that matters," David Goldston, the director of government affairs at the Natural Resources Defense Council, said on a call with reporters on Wednesday.

[...]

Six Senate Democrats on the Environment and Public Works Committee have demanded more details from Pruitt on his connection to groups such as the Koch-funded Freedom Partners, which donated at least $175,000 to the nonprofit Rule of Law Defense Fund, the organization that Pruitt and other attorneys general used to coordinate lawsuits against the EPA under the Obama administration. The New York Times also found direct coordination between Pruitt's office and the Oklahoma oil and gas company Devon Energy to weaken EPA oversight.

"This is a frightening moment," said Harvard University professor Naomi Oreskes, who's written extensively on fossil fuel interests in politics, in December. "We have seen in the last few weeks how the reins of the federal government are being handed over to the fossil fuel industry."

And now, a new dark-money group has popped up to further counterattacks. Politico acquired a flier from Protecting America Now, a new 501(c)(4) that solicits anonymous contributions anywhere from $25,000 to $500,000 to confront "anti-business, environmentalist extremists." Their website is registered by an Oklahoma public affairs firm that counts oil and utility companies and Sen. Jim Inhofe among its clients. Pruitt's other defenders include prominent climate deniers, a Koch-supported organization, and oil-funded groups and lobbyists.

[...]

Given this list of prominent supporters, environmental advocates fear that the fossil fuel industry has already come to dominate Pruitt and Trump's environmental policy.

"From denying settled climate science to leading the opposition of EPA's Clean Power Plan, Pruitt has sent a loud and clear message to Big Oil and its well-funded mouthpieces that he's their guy," said Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island, who is one of the senators demanding Pruitt's disclosure. "To put a climate denier at the helm of an agency working to keep our environment safe is as dangerous as it gets."

Click here to read full article.


Thanks for the update Mr Henson! Keep that rain coming for California!
Quoting 21. HurricaneHunterJoe:

Thanks for the update Mr Henson! Keep that rain coming for California!


LOL - guess there is no flooding in your neck of the woods? :D
Quoting 16. Xandra:

Daniel Swain:
‏@Weather_West

Another very high-impact storm across NorCal today. Widespread hvy rain, flooding,&strong winds. Extreme blizzard Sierra Nev. #CAwx #castorm




Let it snow.......Let it Snow........let it Snow!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The Trump admin want our FEMA Disability Hero Marcie Roth to resign from FEMA.

This is not acceptable in any way,.

Paul Timmons and myself along with all from Portlight,the Red Cross know how much she means to all the nation.

Her being forced out will leave a position not fillable,by anyone I can think of.

This is Madness.

Marcie Roth,FEMA

Marcie Roth serves as Senior Advisor and Director of the Office of Disability Integration and Coordination, leading the national transformation towards integrating the access and functional needs of people with and without disabilities throughout all aspects of whole community emergency preparedness and disaster response, recovery and mitigation.



Portlight Chairman Paul Timmons along with Marcie Roth at FEMA Headquarters,Washington D.C. July 30th, 2015.

Ms. Roth joined DHS/FEMA in 2009 after serving for over 20 years in senior leadership positions with national and international disability policy organizations. She led national private sector response to the needs of survivors with disabilities during and after Hurricanes Katrina and Rita, and she was commended by the White House for her efforts on behalf of New Yorkers with disabilities in the aftermath of the 2001 terrorist attacks.



DJ - from previous blog - 20 mi E of I-55, 30 N of I-70 in S C IL.

53 w/ pressure dropping again (29.52") No measurable precip from front tail of low, back side tail closing in but doesn't look like much in it at this time. Avg winds back closer to 15 & max gust still at 48.

4th warmest year for IL even though we never had any miserably hot summer days, fortunately. Pretty warm spring & fall, I know one month this fall was 2nd warmest.
Quoting 22. daddyjames:



LOL - guess there is no flooding in your neck of the woods? :D


All in all it's not too bad. No flooding at my place in Soo Cal. It seems to be working out well.....snow level back down=less flooding...... it is nowhere near the 2005 level of flooding : ) 5-10 more feet of SNOW will be great! and more rain at low elevation will be great! It was the high snow level on last storm that melted the snow and caused what flooding we have had.......keep it at 4,000-6,000 feet and Cali will be fine. I hear 2 more colder storms coming this week..............bring it on! I do pray for folks that have flooding issues. We gotta look at the big picture out here in California. : )
Blog hanging up again?
Brian Brettschneider:
‏@Climatologist49

Welcome to mid-winter everyone. Today is the annual midpoint for normal temperatures. You're welcome.




Area Forecast Discussion
National Weather Service San Diego CA
1030 AM PST Tue Jan 10 2017

.SYNOPSIS...
Isolated showers are possible for northern areas today, with more
widespread precipiation expected at times Wednesday and Thursday
as two storms move across the region. Snow levels will be high
with the first storm, then lower to near 4500 ft with the second
storm. Gusty west winds in the mountains and adjacent deserts
later today through early Thursday. Highs will lower to 5-15 deg F
below normal by Thursday. Weak ridging aloft and weak to moderate
offshore flow will create dry and warmer weather late this weekend
into early next week.
We are not going to win the public over with the climate change argument. We need to take a different approach. Air pollution and health is the way to go and still achieve the reduction of CO2. People need to understand that without regulations and environmental laws we will be living like this:
... for average global temperature across the 48 contiguous states,
I do hope that the NOAA is aware of the fact that the GLOBE is slightly bigger than the CONUS.
Quoting 19. Xyrus2000:

I do hope you aware of the fact that Dr. Masters has done multiple posts on the fact that 2016 was warmest globally since record keeping began, using NOAA's data and posts on the subject as reference material.


Don't get nervous, I'm just playing the words: Temperatures in the CONUS are not "global"!

no big deal just 1.5 billion people having a campfire......
Quoting 30. washingaway:

We are not going to win the public over with the climate change argument. We need to take a different approach. Air pollution and health is the way to go and still achieve the reduction of CO2. People need to understand that without regulations and environmental laws we will be living like this:

Brian Brettschneider:
@Climatologist49

Have seen many people note that 2016 was the second warmest year for the U.S. When Alaska is included, 2016 was the warmest year on record.


wu's rapidfire has caused my web page to lockup with script error ... wondering if it will be fixed or is rapidfire history?
There is no Climate Change argument.

There are the facts of Science to support all of it.

All dat Political BS is the stubborn Human idiocy that will Kill Millions.

It matters not what any single, nor group believes, as CO2's ability to absorb long wave radiation cares not one iota as to the Human belief.





There is a climate change argument. Just because one side is wrong or lying doesn't mean there is no argument.
Quoting 35. Patrap:

It matters not what any single, nor group believes, as CO2's ability to absorb long wave radiation cares not one iota as to the Human belief.

But it does matter, that's why we are having the discussion. There is a group in power. How does that not matter?
From Mashable:

A pair of merging stars may create a bright light in the night sky in 2022


Another red nova, V838 Monocerotis. IMAGE: HUBBLE/STSCI

If one prediction is correct, in 2022 (give or take a year), two stars merging and exploding 1,800 light-years from Earth will become an incredibly bright light in the constellation Cygnus, rivaling the brightness of some of the most luminous stars in the sky.

"It’s a one-in-a-million chance that you can predict an explosion," astronomer Larry Molnar, one of the scientists behind the prediction, said in a statement.

"It’s never been done before."

Read more here.
thats incredible...............
amazing how much is to be discovered

Quoting 40. Xandra:

From Mashable:

A pair of merging stars may create a bright light in the night sky in 2022


Another red nova, V838 Monocerotis. IMAGE: HUBBLE/STSCI

If one prediction is correct, in 2022 (give or take a year), two stars merging and exploding 1,800 light-years from Earth will become an incredibly bright light in the constellation Cygnus, rivaling the brightness of some of the most luminous stars in the sky.

"It’s a one-in-a-million chance that you can predict an explosion," astronomer Larry Molnar, one of the scientists behind the prediction, said in a statement.

"It’s never been done before."

Read more here.

Your missinig the Point.

As to the Incoming Admin,

They are deniers, and they dont want anything to ruin their Bubbled World View.

The warming does and will continue to do so regardless of argument.

Any sentient Human with a werking synapse can find the facts on AGW.

Note my comment # 24,as that is the Admin incoming mindset.

Its archaic,and Fascist in every sense of the werd.





With climate change, they will always say there has always been change in the climate. They cannot do that with air pollution, because everyone can see it, and see that it is clearly man made.
From EcoWatch:



Sting: 'Dear Leaders, Please Do Something Quick, Time Is Up, the Planet's Sick'

[...]

But it was when the song One Fine Day came on and I listened to these words that I realized Sting had entered new territory on this album:

Apologists say, The weather's just a cycle we can't change.
Scientists say, We've pushed those cycles way beyond.
Dear leaders, please do something quick,
Time is up, the planet's sick...

I nearly missed my turn while driving as I listened—Sting wrote a song about climate change! After listening to the song twice, I stopped the CD to read the liner notes about this piece:

Lately I've begun to pray that those who regard climate change as a hoax, a hoax perpetuated for the express purpose of hobbling our economies and the profit margins of energy corporations, are correct! Perhaps it is in fact a deliberate hoax and we can all just carry on with our rapacious and profligate behavior in regards to the finite resources of this planet without a thought for future generations and the depleted world they're likely to inherit. I sincerely and passionately hope that the skeptics are right and that the majority of scientists in the related fields of research are full of baloney, and for that ... perhaps we'll all be grateful ... one fine day!

That kind of response is one I've given in one form or another to so many people who have argued that climate change either isn't real or is not caused by humans. To hear the bitter irony of his words woven into a song that will be heard by thousands, perhaps million, was a much-needed balm for this weary climate activist's soul.

[...]

Click here to read full article.
Quoting 42. Patrap:

Your missinig the Point.

As to the Incoming Admin,

They are deniers, and they dont want anything to ruin their Bubbled World View.

The warming does and will continue to do so regardless of argument.

Any sentient Human with a werking synapse can find the facts on AGW.

Note my comment @ 24,as that is the Admin incoming mindset.

Its archaic,and Fascist in every sense of the werd.







I did get your point, and you know i agree with you on the incoming Admin. But I'm making a valid point as well.
Quoting 31. EmsiNasklug:

... for average global temperature across the 48 contiguous states,
I do hope that the NOAA is aware of the fact that the GLOBE is slightly bigger than the CONUS.


Don't get nervous, I'm just playing the words: Temperatures in the CONUS are not "global"!




Sorry, it just came off sounding like something the typical denier trolls would say. :P
Quoting 34. Invisabull:

wu's rapidfire has caused my web page to lockup with script error ... wondering if it will be fixed or is rapidfire history?


That would be best addressed here: help@wunderground.com
It's not just the snow depth in the Sierra Nevada Mountain Range in California but the water content in the snow! Im hearing good things about high water content of the snow. Kinda like having your cake and eating it to. Keep it up!

Just for those who do not know, the Sierra Nevada Mountain Range has quite a few high elevation mountains in it. 120 mountains over 13,000 feet! Almost like the Rocky Mountain chain. Link below

Link
Blizzard Warning
URGENT - WINTER WEATHER MESSAGE
NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE RENO NV
954 AM PST TUE JAN 10 2017

CAZ072-NVZ002-111300-
/O.CON.KREV.BZ.W.0001.000000T0000Z-170111T1800Z/
/O.CON.KREV.WS.W.0004.170111T1800Z-170112T1200Z/
GREATER LAKE TAHOE AREA-
INCLUDING THE CITIES OF SOUTH LAKE TAHOE, TRUCKEE, STATELINE,
AND INCLINE VILLAGE
954 AM PST TUE JAN 10 2017

...BLIZZARD WARNING REMAINS IN EFFECT UNTIL 10 AM PST WEDNESDAY...
...WINTER STORM WARNING REMAINS IN EFFECT FROM 10 AM WEDNESDAY TO
4 AM PST THURSDAY...

* TIMING: DANGEROUS BLIZZARD CONDITIONS UNTIL WEDNESDAY MORNING.
HEAVY SNOW WILL PERSIST WITH LIGHTER WINDS WEDNESDAY AND
WEDNESDAY NIGHT.

* TOTAL SNOW ACCUMULATIONS: 5 TO 10 FEET ABOVE 7000 FEET WITH 3
TO 7 FEET AT LAKE TAHOE LEVEL.

* WINDS: SOUTHWEST 20 TO 30 MPH WITH GUSTS TO 60 MPH. SIERRA
RIDGE GUSTS OVER 100 MPH.

* SNOW LEVELS: MAY BRIEFLY RISE ABOVE 6000 FEET THIS AFTERNOON.

* IMPACTS: DANGEROUS LIFE THREATENING BLIZZARD CONDITIONS FOR
TRAVEL AND OUTDOOR ACTIVITIES. STAY HOME AND DO NOT ATTEMPT TO
TRAVEL UNTIL THE STORM PASSES. AVALANCHE DANGER IS HIGH.

PRECAUTIONARY/PREPAREDNESS ACTIONS...

THIS IS A LIFE THREATENING SITUATION. DO NOT ATTEMPT TO TRAVEL!
ROAD CREWS AND FIRST RESPONDERS MAY NOT BE ABLE TO RESCUE YOU.
STAY INDOORS UNTIL THE SNOW AND WIND SUBSIDE. EVEN A SHORT WALK
COULD BE DEADLY IF YOU BECOME DISORIENTED.

&&

$$
URGENT - WINTER WEATHER MESSAGE
NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE RENO NV
954 AM PST TUE JAN 10 2017

CAZ073-111300-
/O.CON.KREV.BZ.W.0001.000000T0000Z-170111T1800Z/
/O.CON.KREV.WS.W.0004.170111T1800Z-170112T1200Z/
MONO COUNTY-
INCLUDING THE CITIES OF BRIDGEPORT AND MAMMOTH LAKES
954 AM PST TUE JAN 10 2017

...BLIZZARD WARNING REMAINS IN EFFECT UNTIL 10 AM PST WEDNESDAY...
...WINTER STORM WARNING REMAINS IN EFFECT FROM 10 AM WEDNESDAY TO
4 AM PST THURSDAY...

* TIMING: DANGEROUS BLIZZARD CONDITIONS UNTIL WEDNESDAY MORNING.
HEAVY SNOW WILL CONTINUE WEDNESDAY AND WEDNESDAY NIGHT WITH
LIGHTER WINDS.

* SNOW ACCUMULATIONS THROUGH THURSDAY MORNING: 3 TO 7 FEET ALONG
THE SIERRA CREST WITH 1 TO 3 FEET FOR COMMUNITIES ALONG HIGHWAY
395.

* WINDS: SOUTHWEST 20 TO 30 MPH WITH GUSTS TO 60 MPH. SIERRA
RIDGE GUSTS OVER 100 MPH.

* SNOW LEVELS: MAY BRIEFLY RISE TO 6500 FEET THIS AFTERNOON.

* IMPACTS: DANGEROUS LIFE THREATENING BLIZZARD CONDITIONS FOR
TRAVEL AND OUTDOOR ACTIVITIES. STAY HOME AND DO NOT ATTEMPT TO
TRAVEL UNTIL THE STORM PASSES. AVALANCHE DANGER IS HIGH.

PRECAUTIONARY/PREPAREDNESS ACTIONS...

THIS IS A LIFE THREATENING SITUATION. DO NOT ATTEMPT TO TRAVEL!
ROAD CREWS AND FIRST RESPONDERS MAY NOT BE ABLE TO RESCUE YOU.
STAY INDOORS UNTIL THE SNOW AND WIND SUBSIDE. EVEN A SHORT WALK
COULD BE DEADLY IF YOU BECOME DISORIENTED.

Flood Warning
Flood Warning
National Weather Service San Francisco CA
1129 AM PST TUE JAN 10 2017

CAC053-087-111915-
/O.NEW.KMTR.FA.W.0005.170110T1929Z-170111T1915Z/
/00000.0.ER.000000T0000Z.000000T0000Z.000000T0000 Z.OO/
Santa Cruz CA-Monterey CA-
1129 AM PST TUE JAN 10 2017

The National Weather Service in The San Francisco Bay Area has issued
a

* Flood Warning for Small Streams in...
Southeastern Santa Cruz County in northern California...
Northwestern Monterey County in central California...

* Until 1115 AM PST Wednesday

* Emergency management and public works officials in Santa Cruz and
Monterey Counties have reported excessive build-up and ponding of
local runoff, as well as local flooding of small creeks and lakes.
Pinto Lake is currently backwatered, while College Lake, Kelly
Lake, Drew Lake, and Lake Tynan are all full, spilling, and/or
flooding. Recent storms have sent Salsipuedes Creek above it`s
banks, and there are reports of flooding on Coward Creek.

* Renewed rainfall patterns today and tonight are expected to
enhance local ponding and flooding, which is expected to impact
local areas through and following the storm until drainage occurs.
Because of the low lying topography, drainage is expected to be
slow.

* The forecast for the Pajaro River at Chittenden does not indicate
flooding on the main stem through the area, although water levels
will rise within the levees in response to storm runoff.

* Some locations that will experience flooding include...
Interlaken, Amesti, Johnston Corner, Pinto Lake, College Lake,
Kelly Lake, Lake Tynan, and the Hughes-Casserly-Green Valley
drainage basins.
NWS Sacramento:
‏@NWSSacramento

Damaging flooding forecast @ Wilton overnite. @SacramentoOES will be announcing voluntary evacuations shortly! #CAStorm #CAFlood

Winter Storm Warning
URGENT - WINTER WEATHER MESSAGE
NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE RENO NV
954 AM PST TUE JAN 10 2017

CAZ071-111300-
/O.CON.KREV.WS.W.0003.000000T0000Z-170112T1200Z/
LASSEN-EASTERN PLUMAS-EASTERN SIERRA COUNTIES-
INCLUDING THE CITIES OF PORTOLA AND SUSANVILLE
954 AM PST TUE JAN 10 2017

...WINTER STORM WARNING REMAINS IN EFFECT UNTIL 4 AM PST
THURSDAY...

* TIMING: HEAVY SNOW WILL CONTINUE THROUGH WEDNESDAY NIGHT.

* SNOW ACCUMULATIONS THROUGH THURSDAY MORNING: 2 TO 4 FEET ALONG
HIGHWAY 89 WITH 1 TO 2 FEET EAST TO HIGHWAY 395. UP TO 12 INCHES
ALONG AND EAST OF HIGHWAY 395.

* WINDS: SOUTH TO SOUTHWEST 15 TO 25 MPH WITH GUSTS TO 45 MPH.
GUSTS TO 65 MPH ALONG HIGHWAY 395 THIS AFTERNOON AND EVENING.

* SNOW LEVELS: RISING TO 5500 FEET THIS AFTERNOON THEN FALLING TO
THE VALLEY FLOORS THIS EVENING.

* IMPACTS: DANGEROUS CONDITIONS FOR TRAVEL AND OUTDOOR ACTIVITIES.
WHITEOUT CONDITIONS ARE POSSIBLE OVER MOUNTAIN PASSES AND AREAS
ALONG HIGHWAY 395.
I would like to see a tv commercial campaign that shows the air and water pollution that threatens all of us. Nobody wants the water coming out of their faucets catching on fire. Nobody wants oil in their waters. Nobody wants to breath air as it is in China. This, I believe, is the best approach to get the public on the right side. Not even Pensacoladoug would try to defend water that catches fire. But, then again, I could be wrong.
From Yale Climate Connections:

A Young Scientist's View

Scientist Sarah Myhre says climate change has made her think about her moral responsibility to the people of the future.


Image graphic: Created by David McCarthy

Myhre: "My place of deep happiness is being outside amidst mountains and oceans and animals and places where I feel the most connected to the natural world. And coming to terms with the kind of change that's in front of us. I mean we're talking about changing the entire planet forever. And there are major emotional and existential crises that I think scientists and citizens are grappling with."

That's Sarah Myhre of the University of Washington. She studies how global warming affects marine ecosystems. Her work has serious implications, so she's unable to put it away when she goes home. For example, she often considers what the world will be like when her son grows up.

Myhre: "And all of those emotions, all that commitment to my son's life in the future ... it all informs the kind of professional that I want to be."

Keeping the serious consequences of climate change top of mind can be emotionally taxing, but Myhre says it's helped her grow personally and professionally.

Myhre: "It's really shifted my thinking from the world being about me and my life and my career ... to thinking about people in the future and the suffering that is possible, and my moral responsibility to those people and to my family."
Quoting 43. washingaway:

With climate change, they will always say there has always been change in the climate. They cannot do that with air pollution, because everyone can see it, and see that it is clearly man made.


Well they can, and they have. The definition of pollution, technically, is artificial. We generally define it as something produced by humans that has a negative impact on the environment. Carbon dioxide has been determined to be a pollutant in Supreme Court rulings which paves the way for regulation.
Massachusetts v. Environmental Protection Agency, 549 U.S. 497 (2007)
American Electric Power Company v. Connecticut, 564 U.S. 410 (2011)
Utility Air Regulatory Group v. Environmental Protection Agency, 573 U.S. (2014)

So, we don't even need an argument, or a discussion about that. However, attempts will be made to effective destroy the EPA's ability to regulate it.
It's hard to get people to agree that something is a pollutant, if they perceive that it does not cause any harm and potentially would be beneficial. Which is the very argument that one side has effectively (erroneously) waged for the past several decades.

Edit: Fixed the links (I think).
Reno radar showing all that snow piling up in the Sierra's, the blue colors getting darker to indicate heavier snow rates.

Daniel Swain:
‏@Weather_West

#Meteorology moment: spectacular "#FujiwharaEffect" over Pacific today, w/two circulations rotating around common center. #CAwx #CAstorm

Quoting 53. washingaway:

I would like to see a tv commercial campaign that shows the air and water pollution that threatens all of us. Nobody wants the water coming out of their faucets catching on fire. Nobody wants oil in their waters. Nobody wants to breath air as it is in China. This, I believe, is the best approach to get the public on the right side. Not even Pensacoladoug would try to defend water that catches fire. But, then again, I could be wrong.


But those are different issues - how do you effectively show a colorless gas that does nothing but (maybe) warm the earth? I know its not maybe, illustrating the "doubt" that has been sown.

You can argue against coal and oil burning - yes that has visible effects. But then you would have others that would counter against nuclear power for the "same" reasons.

I'm not against you, at all. This tactic has been addressed by those that fundamentally oppose "climate change" for whatever their motivation may be.
From Climate Prediction Center 6-10 and 8-14 day forecasts. Maybe a little break from the rain and snow for California especially Soo Cal but then both are forecast above average precip in the 8-14 days out.

6-10 DAY OUTLOOK TABLE
OUTLOOK FOR JAN 16 - 20 2017

STATE TEMP PCPN STATE TEMP PCPN STATE TEMP PCPN
WASHINGTON A A OREGON N A NRN CALIF A A
SRN CALIF A N IDAHO N A NEVADA N A
W MONTANA A A E MONTANA A B WYOMING A B
UTAH N N ARIZONA N N COLORADO A N
NEW MEXICO A N N DAKOTA A B S DAKOTA A B
NEBRASKA A A KANSAS A A OKLAHOMA A A
N TEXAS A A S TEXAS A A W TEXAS A A
MINNESOTA A N IOWA A A MISSOURI A A
ARKANSAS A A LOUISIANA A A WISCONSIN A A
ILLINOIS A A MISSISSIPPI A A MICHIGAN A A
INDIANA A A OHIO A A KENTUCKY A A
TENNESSEE A A ALABAMA A A NEW YORK A A
VERMONT A A NEW HAMP A A MAINE A A
MASS A A CONN A A RHODE IS A A
PENN A A NEW JERSEY A A W VIRGINIA A A
MARYLAND A A DELAWARE A A VIRGINIA A A
N CAROLINA A A S CAROLINA A A GEORGIA A A
FL PNHDL A A FL PENIN A A AK N SLOPE B A
AK ALEUTIAN B B AK WESTERN B B AK INT BSN B A
AK S INT B B AK SO COAST B B AK PNHDL N A



8-14 DAY OUTLOOK TABLE
OUTLOOK FOR JAN 18 - 24 2017

STATE TEMP PCPN STATE TEMP PCPN STATE TEMP PCPN
WASHINGTON N A OREGON N A NRN CALIF N A
SRN CALIF A A IDAHO N A NEVADA N A
W MONTANA A A E MONTANA A A WYOMING A A
UTAH A A ARIZONA A N COLORADO A A
NEW MEXICO A B N DAKOTA A A S DAKOTA A A
NEBRASKA A A KANSAS A B OKLAHOMA A B
N TEXAS A B S TEXAS A B W TEXAS A B
MINNESOTA A A IOWA A A MISSOURI A N
ARKANSAS A B LOUISIANA A B WISCONSIN A A
ILLINOIS A A MISSISSIPPI A N MICHIGAN A A
INDIANA A A OHIO A A KENTUCKY A A
TENNESSEE A A ALABAMA A A NEW YORK A A
VERMONT A A NEW HAMP A A MAINE A A
MASS A A CONN A A RHODE IS A A
PENN A A NEW JERSEY A A W VIRGINIA A A
MARYLAND A A DELAWARE A A VIRGINIA A A
N CAROLINA A A S CAROLINA A A GEORGIA A A
FL PNHDL A A FL PENIN A A AK N SLOPE B N
AK ALEUTIAN B N AK WESTERN B B AK INT BSN B B
AK S INT B B AK SO COAST B B AK PNHDL N N

LEGEND
TEMPS WITH RESPECT TO NORMAL PCPN WITH RESPECT TO MEDIAN
A - ABOVE N - NEAR NORMAL A - ABOVE N - NEAR MEDIAN
B - BELOW B - BELOW
Quoting 48. HurricaneHunterJoe:

It's not just the snow depth in the Sierra Nevada Mountain Range in California but the water content in the snow! Im hearing good things about high water content of the snow. Kinda like having your cake and eating it to. Keep it up!

Definitely high water content. Typically, it initially deposits at 10:1 to 15:1, but settles down quickly, further compressing the snow below it. From here on out to the end of the snow season, the snow water equivalency in the snowpack will compress from 3:1 to 2:1. Classic Sierra Cement.
Snow depth and density
Quoting 46. Xyrus2000:

Sorry, it just came off sounding like something the typical denier trolls would say. :P


But hey, it's me - Emsi!
I'll have to make more use of the ;) etc ...
What's the goal here? Is it to convince the deniers that they are wrong? Or, is it to reduce greenhouse gasses? I say reduce greenhouse gasses. Pollution is the way to go, because it's much harder for them to defend it, or should I say deny it.
Quoting 63. washingaway:

What's the goal here? Is it to convince the deniers that they are wrong? Or, is it to reduce greenhouse gasses? I say reduce greenhouse gasses. Pollution is the way to go, because it's much harder for them to defend it, or should I say deny it.



And this group knows how to play the game. Given that the Supreme Court has already decided that the EPA can regulate CO2 and other greenhouse gases, they understand that legally they cannot overturn it. So, instead, they just employ other methods to delay, weaken, or outright suspend any regulations. Hence, those that have been placed in positions of power within those agencies that have the authority to issue regulations.

You live in Florida. Think of it as the "Rick Scott" method of addressing climate change, but on a much grander scale.


Edit: that is a better quote to address my answer to.
Quoting 58. daddyjames:



But those are different issues - how do you effectively show a colorless gas that does nothing but (maybe) warm the earth? I know its not maybe, illustrating the "doubt" that has been sown.

You can argue against coal and oil burning - yes that has visible effects. But then you would have others that would counter against nuclear power for the "same" reasons.

I'm not against you, at all. This tactic has been addressed by those that fundamentally oppose "climate change" for whatever their motivation may be.

Well, what's causing colorless gas?
Quoting 65. washingaway:


Well, what's causing colorless gas?


Combustion.
Unfortunately, the same basic chemistry that allows us, and everything else that is alive, to live.
That is why it is so challenging to convince people that this can "harm" us.
Especially since it is a trace gas.
Quoting 64. daddyjames:



And this group knows how to play the game. Given that the Supreme Court has already decided that the EPA can regulate CO2 and other greenhouse gases, they understand that legally they cannot overturn it. So, instead, they just employ other methods to delay, weaken, or outright suspend any regulations. Hence, those that have been placed in positions of power within those agencies that have the authority to issue regulations.

You live in Florida. Think of it as the "Rick Scott" method of addressing climate change, but on a much grander scale.


I'm not sure what you're saying. Should we just give up then? There is power in numbers. And I live in Louisiana.
Quoting 57. Xandra:

Daniel Swain:
‏@Weather_West

#Meteorology moment: spectacular "#FujiwharaEffect" over Pacific today, w/two circulations rotating around common center. #CAwx #CAstorm



That does look pretty d**n cool
Quoting 66. daddyjames:



Combustion.
Unfortunately, the same basic chemistry that allows us, and everything else that is alive, to live.
That is why it is so challenging to convince people that this can "harm" us.
Especially since it is a trace gas.

Fossil fuel combustion, right? The same thing that is causing air pollution, right?

The earth IS warming ...this has been occurring since the last era of the frozen dihydrogen monoxide age, climate change IS normal and has been going on for 4.5 billion years..As for so-called man-made global warming, that concept must be separated from Mother Natures normal cyclical astronomically caused warming & cooling...
HAHA Look at the two deniers that contradict each other. #71, #70
Do you think one will try to correct the other?
Ok the bots have been activated... As incoherent as the beta version of Google Translate.
Quoting 70. jmacgarland:

Any temperature record keeping before the late 70's is inaccurate. Records prior were from land based readings which are inaccurate. The fact that even today we still use temp. readings from Airports is insane. Airports are by far warmer because of the tarmac. We are going to see global temperatures drop over the next 30 years. When that happens, I hope to hear from all the Global Warming Doomsday people.


Berkley Earth Surface Temperatures - Summary of Findings.

Richard Muller was very much a skeptic of the surface temperature readings and so he set up a team of scientists to study the reliability of the data and the UHI effect. The Koch brothers partially funded this study. Anthony Watts claimed that he would stand behind what the study would reveal. Anthony Watts lied.
Quoting 71. EARTHMANRAY:


The earth IS warming ...this has been occurring since the last era of the frozen dihydrogen monoxide age, climate change IS normal and has been going on for 4.5 billion years..As for so-called man-made global warming, that concept must be separated from Mother Natures normal cyclical astronomically caused warming & cooling...

You see y'all. The above comment proves I'm right. "Climate change IS normal." Hey EARTHMANRAY, how do feel about air and water pollution? I guess Mother Nature will take of it. If so, just how much can she handle?
Quoting 71. EARTHMANRAY:


The earth IS warming ...this has been occurring since the last era of the frozen dihydrogen monoxide age, climate change IS normal and has been going on for 4.5 billion years..As for so-called man-made global warming, that concept must be separated from Mother Natures normal cyclical astronomically caused warming & cooling...


Do you want to know what else is normal? It is quite normal for the global climate to warm when greenhouse gases are added to the atmosphere. Do you want normal? That is normal.
Quoting 67. washingaway:


I'm not sure what you're saying. Should we just give up then? There is power in numbers. And I live in Louisiana.


No. Present the evidence but with confidence. Disengage from it emotionally. If you don't, you'll go the Eric Holthaus way.
(I had to take a two year hiatus from WU before I was able to do that. But I really had to, given where I live, otherwise it would not be good :D).

Be open to converse - not inundate someone with facts. Believe it or not, "not really caring" about whether you change the other person's opinion allows you to engage in a conversation with a greater number of people.

Listen to them. Many have simply been fed misinformation.

Ignore those that act snarky and try to bait you with outrageous statements or get emotional. They are not truly interested. Engaging them simply feeds into their beliefs reinforcing them.
If I get a kid like that (in my classes) I simply state that, if they really want to seriously discuss it, I would be happy to sit down with them and do so, and that, regardless of what they "believe", it is something that is happening, and will continue to happen, so at least they should understand what is happening.

Some are interested. Others not. It is what it is.

Is it effective? I don't know. But at least we have respect for one another and fully understand the postion each takes. And that is a good beginning.
Quoting 70. jmacgarland:

Any temperature record keeping before the late 70's is inaccurate. Records prior were from land based readings which are inaccurate. The fact that even today we still use temp. readings from Airports is insane. Airports are by far warmer because of the tarmac. We are going to see global temperatures drop over the next 30 years. When that happens, I hope to hear from all the Global Warming Doomsday people.


LOL - it has been what - 30? 40? maybe even 50 years? Keep on waiting buddy.
Quoting 69. washingaway:


Fossil fuel combustion, right? The same thing that is causing air pollution, right?


Same exact chemistry. Yup. enzymatically controlled of course.
Mankind is so arrogant. First he created global warming by fixing the world, then he's going to fix the world from it. All the while considering himself the one who should sit in the high and mighty throne and tell the universe and nature what it should and shouldn't do, which is even more crazy, nature made man not the other way around. Man going to tell nature what's bad for it? Ha ha. That's funny.
I think y'all are missing my point. Getting people to come together over pollution will be easier than with climate change. Wind and solar power reduces pollution. Electric cars reduces pollution etc.. These are the same solutions to climate change. So the question is, which argument brings more people together? Climate change or pollution?
I see TWC finally send some reporters to CA.
From Grist:

FRIENDS WITH BENEFITS



ExxonMobil could reap as much as $1 trillion under Trump, report says. The Center for American Progress, a liberal think tank, released a report Tuesday morning that adds up the many ways in which the incoming Trump administration could enrich the world’s largest oil company.

The report comes a day before Rex Tillerson, Exxon’s former CEO, starts his nomination hearing to be President-elect Trump’s secretary of state.

In that role, Tillerson could do a lot for his former employer. The oil giant has massive holdings in foreign oil reserves and remains one of the biggest investors in the Canadian tar sands, with rights worth around $277 billion at current prices.

As it happens, the State Department is responsible for approving the fossil fuel infrastructure that could bring Canadian tar sands oil to the U.S. market. Remember the Keystone XL pipeline? It could come back from the dead and get approved by Tillerson.

Tillerson could also undo sanctions on Russia that have blocked Exxon’s projects there, including a deal with Rosneft, the Russian state oil company, worth roughly $500 billion.

And then there are the Trump administration’s domestic plans to lift every restriction on extracting oil from public lands and offshore. The CAP report also figures that Trump’s Department of Justice is unlikely to investigate Exxon’s effort to mislead the public about climate change. Tally all the benefits and you get nearly $1 trillion.

So who was the biggest winner of the November election? According to the CAP report, ExxonMobil.
The Carolinas were probably on pace to be above-average for rainfall, but after Matthew it was fairly dry the rest of the year.
Deeeeeep Derp.
Derpcon Level 4
I would also like to remind everyone, that when it comes to pollution it's not only the burning of fossil fuels, it's also the extraction of fossil fuels. Just one more reason why pollution is an important approach.
Quoting 82. washingaway:

Electric cars reduces pollution etc..


Electric cars move the pollution to the generating stations, the power still needs to be produced somewhere.
Quoting 82. washingaway:

I think y'all are missing my point. Getting people to come together over pollution will be easier than with climate change. Wind and solar power reduces pollution. Electric cars reduces pollution etc.. These are the same solutions to climate change. So the question is, which argument brings more people together? Climate change or pollution?


Counter-arguement: wind and solar are eyesores. They will never provide enough energy to fulfill our needs. They are not competitive price-wise.
Quoting 88. MahFL:



Electric cars move the pollution to the generating stations, the power still needs to be produced somewhere.

Not when the generating stations are wind, solar, hydro, etc.
Quoting 89. daddyjames:



Counter-arguement: wind and solar are eyesores. They will never provide enough energy to fulfill our needs. They are not competative price-wise.


Also electric cars depend on...well electricity obviously. But how much electricity is being generated by burning coal or natural gas?

[Link]
Quoting 70. jmacgarland:

Any temperature record keeping before the late 70's is inaccurate. Records prior were from land based readings which are inaccurate. The fact that even today we still use temp. readings from Airports is insane. Airports are by far warmer because of the tarmac. We are going to see global temperatures drop over the next 30 years. When that happens, I hope to hear from all the Global Warming Doomsday people.

Are you saying that there are secret underwater airports creating record ocean temperatures and sea level rise? Here's a site that will get rid of all your Climate change doubts Link
Quoting 89. daddyjames:



Counter-arguement: wind and solar are eyesores. They will never provide enough energy to fulfill our needs. They are not competative price-wise.

That would be a false arguement. Even if it's not enough energy it would still greatly reduce pollution. They are price competitive, especially when you consider environmental damage. You're not going to the dark side on me now, are you? Oh, and rose colored glasses. But, no matter what, there shall be no wind towers seen from a golf course, so saith Lord Trump.
Quoting 71. EARTHMANRAY:


The earth IS warming ...this has been occurring since the last era of the frozen dihydrogen monoxide age, climate change IS normal and has been going on for 4.5 billion years..As for so-called man-made global warming, that concept must be separated from Mother Natures normal cyclical astronomically caused warming & cooling...

What you fail to realize that there are mechanisms behind the cycles one of them being the level of greenhouse gases in our atmosphere.
We could cover all of Oklahoma with wind towers since, Ok-lah-oma is where the wind comes sweeping down the plains.
Quoting 95. washingaway:

We could cover all of Oklahoma with wind towers since, Ok-lah-oma is where the wind comes sweeping down the plains.


They are - believe it or not.
Quoting 95. washingaway:
We could cover all of Oklahoma with wind towers since, Ok-lah-oma is where the wind comes sweeping down the plains.


"AND THE WAVIN' WHEAT, IT SURE SMELLS SWEET WHEN THE WIND COMES RIGHT BEHIND THE RAAAAAAAAIN!!!!"

(I know the whole sound track, don't get me started, PLEASE)
Quoting 95. washingaway:

We could cover all of Oklahoma with wind towers since, Ok-lah-oma is where the wind comes sweeping down the plains.


It's happening. I notice more and more every time my honey lamb and I go on a road trip.
"AND THE CORN IS AS HIGH AS AN ELEPHANT'S EYE..."
Quoting 97. aquak9:



"AND THE WAVIN' WHEAT, IT SURE SMELLS SWEET WHEN THE WIND COMES RIGHT BEHIND THE RAAAAAAAAIN!!!!"

(I know the whole sound track, don't get me started, PLEASE)


And the ice is nice, but does not suffice when all we want is the grain!
"...WITH A FRIIIIINGE - - OOOOONNNN ---- TOP!!!"
The San Joaquin Valley aka "Central Valley" is usually in a rain shadow getting less rain than the coastal areas to it's west. This valley runs from south of Bakersfield to north of Sacramento and is home to a whole lot of farming and animal (meat) production. This is where the underground aquifers have been depleted and wells are very deep now. Hope they get some good rains and downhill flow of creeks to the east. Have to recharge those aquifers!



Quoting 101. aquak9:

"...WITH A FRIIIIINGE - - OOOOONNNN ---- TOP!!!"


aqua - you are getting carried away there.
Quoting 70. jmacgarland:

Any temperature record keeping before the late 70's is inaccurate.


Categorically false. Accurate thermometers have been around for well over a century. The construction of thermometers to .01 degree accuracy is neither difficult nor requires modern technology.

Quoting 70. jmacgarland:
Records prior were from land based readings which are inaccurate.


Categorically false. Land and ocean temperatures have been measured for over a century. Ship logs include measurements of temperature, wind, etc.

Quoting 70. jmacgarland:
The fact that even today we still use temp. readings from Airports is insane. Airports are by far warmer because of the tarmac.


Weather stations are situated away from tarmacs. The average temperature would remain about the same as tarmacs and other surfaces radiate faster than normal background vegetation and they're not surrounded by buildings or other infrastructure that would act to raise overall temperature (like urban areas).

In addition, airports represent a small fraction of the number of weather stations. The same with cities. In fact, remove all airports and cities from the data set and it has almost no measurable impact on the trend.

Quoting 70. jmacgarland:
We are going to see global temperatures drop over the next 30 years. When that happens, I hope to hear from all the Global Warming Doomsday people.


And by what magical mechanism is this going to happen? Is the excess energy the Earth has been absorbing just going to decide to leave?

Try cracking open a book on physics.
Quoting 96. daddyjames:



They are - believe it or not.

You could paint them with the colors of the rainbow. Everyone would think their tripping. Whoa, all the spinning colors man. But seriously, aren't they fracking too. And isn't that causing earthquakes and water to catch fire?
Quoting 104. Xyrus2000:

...Try cracking open a book on physics.

That would only confuse him more.
From EcoWatch:

Dutch Trains Are World's First to Run on 100% Wind Power

The Netherlands, aka Windmill Country, is now operating 100 percent of its electric trains with wind energy.

As of Jan. 1, 600,000 daily train passengers have been traveling completely carbon neutral, according to an announcement from the Netherlands' principal passenger railway operator, NS.

Dutch electric trains are running on 1.2 billion kilowatt-hours of wind energy supplied by sustainable energy supplier, Eneco. As Brightvibes noted, a "decreasing and relatively small number" of Dutch trains are still running on diesel.

NS and Eneco first announced their plan of a wind-powered railway in 2015 in order to drastically slash train ride emissions. Their original goal was to transition the trains to 100 percent renewable energy by 2018, but that target was moved up after reaching 75 percent in 2016. Impressively, this means their initial goal was met one whole year ahead of schedule.

According to Eneco, the power used by the carriers comes from newly built wind farms in the Netherlands, Scandinavia and Belgium. By tapping into both domestic and foreign sources of wind power, it "[ensures] that there is always sufficient green power available on the grid for rail companies, even if the wind is not blowing," the company explained.

Read more here.

Find out more: http://brightvibes.com/443/en/today-all-dutch-tra ins-are-powered-100-by-wind-energy

I love it when Xyrus gets behind the podium. Plus plus plus plus...
Quoting 82. washingaway:

I think y'all are missing my point. Getting people to come together over pollution will be easier than with climate change. Wind and solar power reduces pollution. Electric cars reduces pollution etc.. These are the same solutions to climate change. So the question is, which argument brings more people together? Climate change or pollution?

fwiw, I happen to agree with you...to a certain extent. It ties into Sfloridacat5's point in post #17. The world is made up of more than a simple dichotomy between those that accept the science of AGW and those that deny it's occurring. Even among those that deny it, those that aren't sure, and those that are ambivalent about it, there are individuals who do care about clean air, clean water and safe food. They worry about whether or not their children will be exposed to air pollutants.

These are the people in the so-called 'denier camp' that can be reached by explaining it in terms of a pollutant and as a 'regular' environmental issue. The same people that might support the far right's efforts to undermine and dismantle the EPA due to a perceived negative impact to businesses and the economy due to governmental regulations, may not feel so strongly if they are more aware of the health impacts of emissions (PM2.5, for example).
Quoting 71. EARTHMANRAY:


The earth IS warming


True.

Quoting 71. EARTHMANRAY:
...this has been occurring since the last era of the frozen dihydrogen monoxide age,


False. The Earth did warm up from the last glacial period, but was slowly cooling up until around the start of the industrial revolution. From there it has warmed alarmingly fast, much faster than is typically found in the paleoclimate record outside of major extinction events.

Quoting 71. EARTHMANRAY:
climate change IS normal and has been going on for 4.5 billion years.


True. Over the course of Earth's history there are natural forcings that cause the planet to warm and cool, in addition to sudden calamitous changes that resulted in large scale extinctions and environmental changes.

Quoting 71. EARTHMANRAY:
As for so-called man-made global warming, that concept must be separated from Mother Natures normal cyclical astronomically caused warming & cooling...


It has been, and there is extensive research demonstrating this. According to where we are in the typical natural cycle of orbital and axial deviations, the planet should be in a long cool down going into the next ice age. This was the trend up until around the mid 1800's. The rapid climb in global temperatures we've seen since then is a direct result of increased greenhouse gases in the atmosphere as a result of man's activities. Chemistry and physics.
Quoting 70. jmacgarland:

Any temperature record keeping before the late 70's is inaccurate. Records prior were from land based readings which are inaccurate. The fact that even today we still use temp. readings from Airports is insane. Airports are by far warmer because of the tarmac. We are going to see global temperatures drop over the next 30 years. When that happens, I hope to hear from all the Global Warming Doomsday people.
Yeah, thermometers are so amazingly complicated that they weren't even invented until 10 years after we'd created the internet, perfected the artificial heart, and put a man on the moon.

Your logic is impeccable...
Sometimes this blog is just fantastic

"Are you saying that there are secret underwater airports...?"

"...my honey lamb and I go on a road trip." (Yes, I saw what you did there)

Oklahoma!
That's one big blob-like feature west of the Philippines:

Source : RAMMB-CIRA/JMA, Himawari-8 (airmass enhancement). 2140 UTC, Jan 10.
000
FXUS64 KOUN 102140
AFDOUN

Adapted from:
Area Forecast Discussion
National Weather Service Norman OK
340 PM CST Tue Jan 10 2017

.DISCUSSION...

The main forecast concern is winter weather this weekend, but first a brief word about fire

Is this a sponsor? Why the heck is fire sponsoring an ice storm?

weather tomorrow. Temperatures are expected to warm into the 70s and 80s tomorrow and winds will be a bit gusty

In Oklahoman: 25-30 mph, with higher gusts. Spring-like weather.

as the pressure gradient tightens. The air is dry enough that this warming will bring RH values across our
western counties down into the upper teens, creating elevated to near critical fire weather concerns.

Otherwise called: good barbecue weather

Thursday morning a strong shallow front is set to move in, bringing much colder temperatures behind it. Southerly low level winds will continue to bring in abundant moisture over this shallow front, resulting in the potential for several inches of widespread precipitation.

Models continue to hold to the slightly warmer trend. The GFS continues to be significantly warmer than the ECMWF, though both models seem to be coming closer together.

GFS don't give up any ground. Make the Euro come to you!

Right now it looks like freezing rain could set all the way down to about the I-44 corridor, though there is still the question as to when and how far this will pull back

pull GFS, pull!

with the ECMWF wanting to hold onto the cooler temperatures longer.

let it go, let it go, . . . .

Forecast reflects a blended solution, adjusted downward in temperature a few degrees to account for evaporative cooling and model tendency to under do shallow cold fronts.

stupid biases and accounting

Though, with the main upper low driving this storm off on the Pacific Coast, thinking model depiction of cold air advection may not be that far off. Also, reduced the diurnal swing as cloud cover and persistent rain should keep temperatures closer to wetbulb. Friday and Saturday are the main concern for freezing rain.

Well, that is just dandy!

By Sunday, temperatures look to be warm enough to transition most of the area to rain.

Hooray!

Flooding will also be a concern

Oh. :O

with the approaching storm system. As mentioned earlier,

I recall something about several inches of widespread precipitation, that's what that meant

storm total amounts have the potential to be several inches across much of the area, which would be well above a normal January rainfall.

On the brightside - this should help eliminate/reduce the drought that was developing

Day

G'night

&&
Quoting 108. aquak9:

I love it when Xyrus gets behind the podium. Plus plus plus plus...


Shh, it'll go to his head . . .
dj- I thought I was the only one who had a running dialogue inside their head, while reading a forecast discussion. So you do it too. Hmmmph.

We some sick pups, I'm tellin' ya...
Quoting 90. washingaway:


Not when the generating stations are wind, solar, hydro, etc.



Not to throw a wrench in the whole "electric cars are better for the environment" argument but....

https://youtu.be/17xh_VRrnMU
Research Aims to Support Farmers to Bring Back Saltwater-Damaged Land After Coastal Flooding
FloodList - December 2016.
(...) The East of England was struck by devastating coastal flooding from a huge storm tide on the night of 31st January 1953. (...) The impact on the prime agricultural lands of Lincolnshire and the Eastern Counties was felt for decades after the floods receded, with around 160,000 acres of English farmland contaminated by saltwater. (...)
Dr Iain Gould said: "Seawater inundation leaves residues of salts, such as sodium, on the soil - high concentrations of which can damage soil structure for years. Although farmland can recover over time and various mitigation measures, in the worst cases, deep soil structure is so badly damaged farmland can be left unable to support commercially-viable production for sustained periods."
Quoting 117. aquak9:

dj- I thought I was the only one who had a running dialogue inside their head, while reading a forecast discussion. So you do it too. Hmmmph.

We some sick pups, I'm tellin' ya...


I prefer: "Great minds think alike."
Quoting 81. snotly:

Mankind is so arrogant. First he created global warming by fixing the world, then he's going to fix the world from it All the while considering himself the one who should sit in the high and mighty throne and tell the universe and nature what it should and shouldn't do, which is even more crazy, nature made man not the other way around. Man going to tell nature what's bad for it? Ha ha. That's funny.
This comment is fimicolous, and the organisms pertinent would starve rather than digest its content.
Quoting 118. Newswatcher:




Not to throw a wrench in the whole "electric cars are better for the environment" argument but....

https://youtu.be/17xh_VRrnMU

Well that video only looked at one side of the coin and left out some stuff. Try this one. It will show both sides. Thanks for playing.
President Obama will deliver a Farewell Address to the American people on the evening of January 10, 2017 in Chicago at 9 p.m. ET. You can watch it live here.

This person may have the right idea for California's current winter weather. Called it back in October 2016, even mentioned the blocking and undercutting. Winter is not over yet but so far the forecast is on track.

Link
Quoting 118. Newswatcher:




Not to throw a wrench in the whole "electric cars are better for the environment" argument but....

https://youtu.be/17xh_VRrnMU
Yep...I guess rainwater contaminated by polluted air wont affect the safety of the worlds water and food supply either.
126. vis0
Quoting 81. snotly:

Mankind is so
arrogant. First he created global warming by fixing the world, then he's
going to fix the world from it All the while considering himself the
one who should sit in the high and mighty throne and tell the universe
and nature what it should and shouldn't do, which is even more crazy,
nature made man not the other way around. Man going to tell nature
what's bad for it? Ha ha. That's funn
Quoting 121. hydrus:

This comment is fimicolous, and the organisms pertinent would starve rather than digest its content.
Nature made man [chk]

Man in man's greed tinkers with parts of nature (no Trumpun intended] to gain wealth [chk]

Nature which made man with the hundreds of millions of years of  patience it took is told by snotly   that Nature should not be upset  that man in knowing how basic physics works would still inject into the atmosphere gases known as greenhouse gases (name is a clue) that turn the beauty that nature created using THE SAME LAWS OF PHYSICS now on its head and do it VERY unnaturally FAST[check]


Nature being in charge as snotly correctly stated now will begin to change the playing field till either man lowers/ends the greenhouse gas emissions



(nature has added a few centuries delay as to oceans since i think even snotly understands that water has a built in delay as in delays to warm up BUT THEN delays to cool off in am lag that takes decades )

 

If man decides to try and bluff man, man can succeed but man trying to bluff the laws of physics (nature) not going to work.  Since nature is in charge man will suffer from the reaction nature gives and eventually disappear / extinct unless  an animal can mutate 400 times faster than physics allows ...maybe if you watched I DREAM OF JEANNIE  >>blinkblink& gt;>blink could ya guess i was a "kat" m???


So
snotly got correct that Nature is in charge

but for some reason flipped the ending so that man seems smart to ignore nature/physios.
I was wondering when we'd start to hear about the necessity for geoengineering from the government. It's an inevitability given our inability to substantively curb emissions, and the sheer momentum of climate change we are witnessing (esp. the arctic death spiral)

see article - > U.S. should pursue controversial geoengineering research, federal scientists say for first time

AlertTahoe: January 2017 Truckee River Flood Event: 48 Hour Time Lapse
nvseismolab
Oh and with regards to geoengineering - just watch who will be vying for the gargantuan geoengineering federal contracts. Probably the same companies and billionaires involved in creating this mess in the first place.
Quoting 83. MahFL:

I see TWC finally send some reporters to CA.


Think I saw Cantore at Heavenly Ski Resort just outside South Lake Tahoe/Stateline NV
Quoting 86. oldnewmex:

Deeeeeep Derp.
Derpcon Level 4


Hows it going up near the lake?
Quoting 123. Xandra:

President Obama will deliver a Farewell Address to the American people on the evening of January 10, 2017 in Chicago at 9 p.m. ET. You can watch it live here.




Which has already been done. It took the US from 1792 to 2009 to spend 10 Trillion dollars. It President Obama just eight years to spend that much. We are now at $ 19.95 Trillion. This debt grows by over a billion dollars in interst every day.
Source for both : https://www.treasurydirect.gov/NP/debt/current
If Svensmark theory is wrong, then C02 is causing global warming. We better stop burning fossil fuels and better start reducing C02 levels.
Looking forward to President Obama's farewell address.
Good bye sir. Good bye.
Quoting 71. EARTHMANRAY:


The earth IS warming ...this has been occurring since the last era of the frozen dihydrogen monoxide age, climate change IS normal and has been going on for 4.5 billion years..As for so-called man-made global warming, that concept must be separated from Mother Natures normal cyclical astronomically caused warming & cooling...

This is slightly off topic but is it not funny that you have two posts in a little more than 11 years? Ok now what you are saying is correct but is not how I would think about it. I agree that climate change is quite normal in history. For example, not many people know that approximately 560 million years ago, there was an event known as snowball earth. Everything, was frozen, save for a small band of water near the equator. Well, if this climate change was really a scam by the Chinese, why are we not under miles of ice? In order to get rid of this ice, the low global temperatures need to drastically rise. Thats climate change. Without, our ancestors would not have participated in the Cambrian explosion 500 million years ago. In the last 500 million years, our world has experienced 4 great ice ages. Lets say that climate change was a scam, then how would you explain this? How would you explain how we got from there to here? Let us not forget the Cretaceous Thermal Maximum, in which the temperature was much higher than it is now. I suppose those dinosaurs had massive factories pumping co2 into the air, right? WRONG. This, compared to our present day climate change happened on a large time scale, approximately a few million years. We are pumping co2 into the air at a much higher rate in a shorter amount of time. At the time, the ssts in the equatorial Atlantic average 29 degrees Celsius. During the thermal maximum, they were much higher, at around 33 degrees Celsius.
Quoting wikipedia, " It was the most extreme disruption of the carbon cycle recorded in the past 100 million years."
My point is, climate change is something that happens regularly, however us human are speeding it up, thus having dire consequences around the globe.

Sorry for the rant i was attempting to get my point across. Hope ya liked it!!
Quoting 126. vis0:

Quoting 81. snotly:

Mankind is so
arrogant. First he created global warming by fixing the world, then he's
going to fix the world from it All the while considering himself the
one who should sit in the high and mighty throne and tell the universe
and nature what it should and shouldn't do, which is even more crazy,
nature made man not the other way around. Man going to tell nature
what's bad for it? Ha ha. That's funn
Nature made man [chk]

Man in man's greed tinkers with parts of nature (no Trumpun intended] to gain wealth [chk]

Nature which made man with the hundreds of millions of years of  patience it took is told by snotly   that Nature should not be upset  that man in knowing how basic physics works would still inject into the atmosphere gases known as greenhouse gases (name is a clue) that turn the beauty that nature created using THE SAME LAWS OF PHYSICS now on its head and do it VERY unnaturally FAST[check]


Nature being in charge as snotly correctly stated now will begin to change the playing field till either man lowers/ends the greenhouse gas emissions



(nature has added a few centuries delay as to oceans since i think even snotly understands that water has a built in delay as in delays to warm up BUT THEN delays to cool off in am lag that takes decades )

 

If man decides to try and bluff man, man can succeed but man trying to bluff the laws of physics (nature) not going to work.  Since nature is in charge man will suffer from the reaction nature gives and eventually disappear / extinct unless  an animal can mutate 400 times faster than physics allows ...maybe if you watched I DREAM OF JEANNIE  >>blinkblink& gt;>blink could ya guess i was a "kat" m???


So
snotly got correct that Nature is in charge

but for some reason flipped the ending so that man seems smart to ignore nature/physios.

Greetings Vis...My statement was directed more at the "First he created global warming by fixing the world", which is saying that the world or " Earth" somehow was being repaired or fixed by his industrious ways. In reality, mankind has been aware that the industrial Age, while certainly moving man and technology forward, was without question polluting the environment. This was a known fact well over a hundred years ago. Anyone that feels reversing the negative impact humans have had on the environment, and it would an easy task to clean it up, could be considered an idiot of epic proportions. As far as nature being in charge, and responsible for creating human beings, i am secure enough in the know that my stance on the subject is safe from any type of argument...:)
Quoting 133. TechnoCaveman:

Looking forward to President Obama's farewell address.
Good bye sir. Good bye.


IMO A very good POTUS
Quoting 133. TechnoCaveman:

Looking forward to President Obama's farewell address.
Good bye sir. Good bye.


Will the snow ever stop? Not for a little while anyway!

Cold front just offshore of the north coast of California. Blizzard warnings up for the Sierra. 3-5 FEET of snow forecast for Lake Tahoe (6200) where its already snowing moderate to heavy. Above 7000 feet, forecast calls for 7-10 FEET of snow. Donner Pass (I-80) is closed with heavy snow and high winds. Rain all day long here in the SF Bay Area, expected to become heavy this evening as the front gets close. Flash flood warning in the Napa and Sonoma valleys of the North Bay. Possible thunder and heavy showers overnight as a cold mid level low center crosses the north coast near Point Arena. Weaker system later tomorrow, then we should clear for the weekend. Long range has another rainy siege starting the middle of next week.


141. elioe
Quoting 127. VibrantPlanet:

I was wondering when we'd start to hear about the necessity for geoengineering from the government. It's an inevitability given our inability to substantively curb emissions, and the sheer momentum of climate change we are witnessing (esp. the arctic death spiral)

see article - > U.S. should pursue controversial geoengineering research, federal scientists say for first time


Ouch... an entire field of scientific research is deemed "controversial". Why so? Perhaps there is a considerable fear, that the results will not fit into the ideologies adhered to by the majority of scientific community?

I'm going to wait keenly for any results... whether those results (or even the existence of such studies) are to the liking of environmentalists.
Quoting 132. TechnoCaveman:



Which has already been done. It took the US from 1792 to 2009 to spend 10 Trillion dollars. It President Obama just eight years to spend that much. We are now at $ 19.95 Trillion. This debt grows by over a billion dollars in interst every day.
Source for both : https://www.treasurydirect.gov/NP/debt/current
If Svensmark theory is wrong, then C02 is causing global warming. We better stop burning fossil fuels and better start reducing C02 levels.

Refrain...refrain...refrain...Must refrain....
Quoting 140. MontanaZephyr:

Antarctica is about to lose an enormous piece of ice. The question is what happens after that.
Ron White has it shipped north for his next vat of scotch....

Save the bees! Bumblebees listed as endangered species for first time
Albert Einstein predict that if something eliminated bees from our planet, mankind would perish within 4 years?
signs signs everywhere the signs
yet nothing done but talk talk talk
Quoting 140. MontanaZephyr:

Antarctica is about to lose an enormous piece of ice. The question is what happens after that.
well we will have to wait till the day after tomorrow to find out
Quoting 146. KEEPEROFTHEGATE:

signs signs everywhere the signs
yet nothing done but talk talk talk


Anyone want to predict trump's tweet after Obama' speech? Or how long after it will be?
150. beell
Quoting 114. daddyjames:


Forecast reflects a blended solution, adjusted downward in temperature a few degrees to account for evaporative cooling and model tendency to under do shallow cold fronts.


&&


It's been rumored that the NAM does a decent job with cold, shallow surface air a-sweepin' down the plains.

All the models look similar in set-up.

The weather cartoon below is from this evenings 18Z NAM 2m temp chart @ 72 hrs.



A wavy, baroclinic boundary (black-dashed line) with a surface/near surface inflection (a bit on the weak side in the models) near the OK/AR border. This may serve to bring strongest ascent of warm (above freezing), moist air atop the sub-freezing surface temps-a requirement for freezing rain. The 32°F isotherm is loosely highlighted by the yellow dashed line. Northeastern OK?

18Z GFS 2m temps @ 72 hrs-with at least a notable difference in the 32° isotherm (white contour line).

Quoting 141. elioe:



Ouch... an entire field of scientific research is deemed "controversial". Why so? Perhaps there is a considerable fear, that the results will not fit into the ideologies adhered to by the majority of scientific community?

I'm going to wait keenly for any results... whether those results (or even the existence of such studies) are to the liking of environmentalists.
What nonsense. Spend some time thinking about the possible unintended consequences of geo-engineering. Hint: think about the unintended consequences of burning fossil fuel.
Quoting 131. HurricaneHunterJoe:



Hows it going up near the lake?

I-80 has been closed from Colfax to the Nevada St. line since last night; no trains over Donner Pass, either.
Here at the casa, I cleared 16 inches off the driveway mid-morning, 6 inches an hour ago. Higher elevations in town have much more. Very wind-driven storm, heavy snow. Wind should let up tomorrow morning, snow will continue until Thursday morning.
Quoting 111. Neapolitan:

Yeah, thermometers are so amazingly complicated that they weren't even invented until 10 years after we'd created the internet, perfected the artificial heart, and put a man on the moon.

Your logic is impeccable...
I guess preceding generations labored in an intellectual desert of luck and superstition.

Mcgarland must not have known accurate thermometers have been around for centuries , Accurate thermometers , especially airport thermometers ( i do not have to tell you why, your a pilot if I remember correctly :), and to suggest that he is enlightened as to what will happen the next 30 years while treating earlier generations making scientific observations as if they were just drooling dolts is not only ill-logical, but purely disgusting.
Quoting 149. washingaway:

Anyone want to predict trump's tweet after Obama' speech? Or how long after it will be?

We'll all draw straws, and who ever gets the short straw has to man his Twitter feed...
Excerpt from President Obama's farewell speech:

"Take the challenge of climate change. In just eight years, we’ve halved our dependence on foreign oil, doubled our renewable energy, and led the world to an agreement that has the promise to save this planet. But without bolder action, our children won’t have time to debate the existence of climate change; they’ll be busy dealing with its effects: environmental disasters, economic disruptions, and waves of climate refugees seeking sanctuary.

Now, we can and should argue about the best approach to the problem. But to simply deny the problem not only betrays future generations; it betrays the essential spirit of innovation and practical problem-solving that guided our Founders."
Quoting 154. hydrus:

I guess preceding generations labored in an intellectual desert of luck and superstition.

Mcgarland must not have known accurate thermometers have been around for centuries , especially airport thermometers ( i do not have to tell you why, your a pilot if I remember correctly :), and to suggest that he is enlightened as to what will happen the next 30 years while treating earlier generations making scientific observations as if they were just drooling dolts is not only ill-logical, but purely disgusting.


Airport thermometers have been around for centuries? I know what you meant but it was too funny to pass up.
Quoting 106. washingaway:


That would only confuse him more.
It did...He said thats what happens when you drop a can of soda then open it...:)
Quoting 132. TechnoCaveman:



Which has already been done. It took the US from 1792 to 2009 to spend 10 Trillion dollars. It President Obama just eight years to spend that much. We are now at $ 19.95 Trillion. This debt grows by over a billion dollars in interst every day.
Source for both : https://www.treasurydirect.gov/NP/debt/current
If Svensmark theory is wrong, then C02 is causing global warming. We better stop burning fossil fuels and better start reducing C02 levels.


Please refrain from political trolling. I've already been banned for an hour replying to political baiting.
Quoting 151. FLwolverine:

What nonsense. Spend some time thinking about the possible unintended consequences of geo-engineering. Hint: think about the unintended consequences of burning fossil fuel.


It's not non-sense. Again the observations of radical change are obvious BUT the mechanism has an electrical complexity. Not only does an electrical complexity explain the cross equator tropical storm uptick despite the Coriolis effect, or the northern slant to increases of average temps (more lightning north), but there is another area that really bothers me about the debate, and that's the complete failure to really address the teleconnections. The most obvious one, of course, is El Nino.

Let me address El Nino, hopefully without getting banned in 10 seconds. Here in California there has been a bad drought, and then last year the supposedly saving rains for SoCal were 1,000 miles north. First, a green house gas forcing is TOO SLOW to be a 1,000 mile difference from those warm SSTs. Second, and I point this out here knowing it's going to be controversial, but there is a problem with describing what is observed with ENSO and other teleconnections when they are cyclic and warming is a linear, maybe hockey stick concept. I am an alarmist, and agree that the changes are obvious, but lets not sit here and argue garbage because if you are a progressive like I am and you see the likes of Bastardi and others use this error of mechanism to put in the most extreme govt from the right ever. The fact is, El Ninos and other cycles go from hot to COLD. Why????? Never talked about, never discussed. No I agree that cO2 is in fact DEPENDANT. This is where an electrical complexity and only an electrical complexity makes sense for what is being observed on the ground. Here is the problem with el Nino. When the oceans get anomaly warm counterintuitively they hold LESS carbonation. No think about it mathematically. If you have a sine function, hypothetically, what's the first and second derivative??? Think clearly about this. It's cosine!!! Right? And what is the derivative of cosine? It's minus sine. Second derivative or the forcing on the temperature is going to be the negative of the pattern if the function is a wave. Now let's think again about how consistent this is. If the oceans are warm, they hold less CO2, cold, more. That's a minus sine to the sine. It really is. And because what we are talking about is electrical, when ENSO clouds decarbonate the oceans via surface lows and that carbonation gets into clouds you will see a GLOBAL impact, and immediate impact by way of changing global electrical circuit changes. Since the electrical complexity hasn't been addressed, the science has a long way to go. For the record I predict neo glacial storms from human activity. I am an alarmist and agree completely about unintended consequences. But I think that the lack of humility about what is really known about climate has hurt progressives politically and hurt us badly. The worst spokesperson we have is Michael Mann. Terrible and how he has damaged progressives. JMHO.
Quoting 157. Qazulight:



Airport thermometers have been around for centuries? I know what you meant but it was too funny to pass up.

My bad..I meant just thermometers, not the airports...Forgive me please...
The state wetness rankings don't indicate the way the USA looked this fall in the U.S. drought monitor map, which had most of California, much of the Southeast, and much of the Northeast in drought, with pronounced areas of severe or extreme drought.
mad giggle it's alive it's alive

KNVFALLO30
Quoting 157. Qazulight:



Airport thermometers have been around for centuries? I know what you meant but it was too funny to pass up.

I was referring to the fact that airport thermometers are very accurate..
Quoting 141. elioe:



Ouch... an entire field of scientific research is deemed "controversial". Why so? Perhaps there is a considerable fear, that the results will not fit into the ideologies adhered to by the majority of scientific community?

I'm going to wait keenly for any results... whether those results (or even the existence of such studies) are to the liking of environmentalists.

One of the worries is that deniers with political power will ultimately end up focusing on geoengineering as a solution rather than on reducing emissions.
Why are comments like #160 being flagged? On comment #160 I see nothing inappropriate or against the rules; All I see is a different point of view.
So, uh, guys.

While adding our new weather station (wasn't exactly a christmas present to me, but to the household and I get to play with it) (woohoo!) I noticed something.

As of 12/24 I seem to have a paid account.

Did, uh, someone do something nice out there?

Who gets the thank you hug?
Quoting 141. elioe:



Ouch... an entire field of scientific research is deemed "controversial". Why so? Perhaps there is a considerable fear, that the results will not fit into the ideologies adhered to by the majority of scientific community?

I'm going to wait keenly for any results... whether those results (or even the existence of such studies) are to the liking of environmentalists.
I would say geoengineering is controversial because countries who don't participate will nevertheless bear the consequences, for good or ill. Many other reasons exist of course (will it work, how can we tell if it works, what happens if we screw up the planet making a mistake, whether countries which are harmed or claim harm will be compensated) etc.
nonblanche- I'm not sure, but I think when you upload your wxstation data to WU, you get that. It's like WU's way of saying thank you.

Oh and thank you for your purchase.
nonblanche I think that when you have your weather station become part of the wunderground network, you get paid status. Did I read that somewhere?

Anyway, weather station data from me would be worthless. The temperature on roof of my building hits 110 every summer.
Re: #160- there will be a pop quiz on calculus and trigonometry later...

And speaking of electricity, this interesting piece from yesterday's New York Times:

Lightning, Weather's Byproduct, May Become One of Its Predictors
Times Square NYC a few hours into blizzard of December 26-27, 1947, then the heaviest snowfall on record in New York City. Embiggenable.

Quoting 172. BaltimoreBrian:

Times Square NYC a few hours into blizzard of December 26-27, 1947, then the heaviest snowfall on record in New York City.



I would love to see snow like that in person. :)
Quoting 170. BaltimoreBrian:

nonblanche I think that when you have your weather station become part of the wunderground network, you get paid status. Did I read that somewhere?

Anyway, a weather station from me would be worthless. The temperature on roof of my building hits 110+ every summer.


We've got ours on the second-highest post of the Pirate Ship, the play structure we built the first summer we moved here. I'm the smallest lightest adult, so I was up there 10' above ground level in 30ish mph gusts trying not to drop those tiny mounting screws. The safety rails and ropes are kid-height so I was a tad nervous. Just. A. Tad.
Quoting 161. hydrus:

My bad..I meant just thermometers, not the airports...Forgive me please...


I knew what you meant, but I had this mental picture of Da Vinci checking the weather before firing up his latest contraption.

Cheers
Qazulight
Quoting 166. hotroddan:

Why are comments like #160 being flagged? On comment #160 I see nothing inappropriate or against the rules; All I see is a different point of view.


In the 80s when I was in college there was a brit named Lovelock who talked about gaia and he had a theory called Daisyland. The idea was the earth was like a giant flower and when it got too hot then the Daisy would turn white and reflect all the heat off. When it got too cold the earth flower would turn black and capture heat and warm up the earth. The academic community quickly crushed the idea because the CO2 as a green house gas as a warming mechanism was TOO SLOW. But the truth is much harder, because just because ONE mechanism is too slow doesn't mean that another doesn't exist, and more importantly with all the inputs into the active biosphere as a whole somehow the output is a range of not only temperatures that life can survive in but also chemistry. If there is too much O2 in the atmosphere everything burns up. Too little we suffocate. This says NOTHING about solar winds ripping away the atmosphere and making us Mars. I submit that it's much more difficult to explain why there isn't a daisyland than that there is not in light of the fact that almost 4 billion years have gone by and life is still here. Once again an electrical forcing is much faster, speed of electrical fields, and would allow local modulations by rivers and clouds to oceans to sum to climate and to sum to a surviving earth electrical field. It's tied in all together, and the problem is science by it's nature is deductive reasoning, and finds models hard to keep. The sun revolved around the earth for a long time . . .
Quoting 71. EARTHMANRAY:


The earth IS warming ...this has been occurring since the last era of the frozen dihydrogen monoxide age, climate change IS normal and has been going on for 4.5 billion years..As for so-called man-made global warming, that concept must be separated from Mother Natures normal cyclical astronomically caused warming & cooling...

Do you really think climate scientists are so stupid that they haven't studied the natural causes of climate change? There's a whole chapter on it in the latest IPCC report.

Anthropogenic and Natural Radiative Forcing (PDF)

Now radiative forcing isn't the whole story in climate change but on shorter time scales it's by far the biggest factor. Even Milankovitch Cycles that work on time scales of thousands of years or more and that appear to be the biggest factor in the cycle of "frozen dihydrogen monoxide" advance and retreat (AKA ice ages) work by changing radiative forcing.
10th Jan, 49 BC Julius Caesar crosses the Rubicon and according to Plutarch, quotes Menander (the Indo-Greek Buddhist king on a coin in yesterday's comment on my blog) as he does so. Alea iacta esto--the die is cast. In the original by Menander Ἀνερρίφθω κύβος. Ironic that perhaps Rome's greatest general quoted a Buddhist king when he decided to take over Rome! Weather on Jan 10th, 49 BC not recorded.
hotroddan I can see comment #160. Did you click ignore by mistake?
Old English Word of the Day: īs-earn, a kingfisher, literally "ice-eagle". Pronounced "eez-ay-arn"

Quoting 166. hotroddan:

Why are comments like #160 being flagged? On comment #160 I see nothing inappropriate or against the rules; All I see is a different point of view.

How can you tell it's being flagged?
Orð of the Day I found Grothar's twitter!
Worlds in water droplets or bloggers in bubbles? Dartmoor, England, January 10, 2017. Embiggenable

I thought Neanderthals were extinct.
Why do we save daylight in the summertime when the days are already longer? Shouldn't we save that daylight for the winter when the days are shorter?
If I had a car that could travel at the speed of light, and I turn my headlights on, would they work?
191. elioe
Quoting 151. FLwolverine:

What nonsense. Spend some time thinking about the possible unintended consequences of geo-engineering. Hint: think about the unintended consequences of burning fossil fuel.


What an assumption, that I've not thought of such. But then, isn't further research the best way to constrain, which consequences are possible, which are not, and what are their likelihoods? That's what seems to be at stake. People want to stick to the idea that there are "possible unintended consequences". The best way to categorically oppose any change. They don't want any research that alleviates their dear fears.

And further: think about the unintended consequences of the invention of agriculture. Or of artificial fertilizers. Every action may have unintended consequences. And in numerous cases it has been worth the risk. At least if the interests of humans are worth considering.

Quoting 165. LAbonbon:


One of the worries is that deniers with political power will ultimately end up focusing on geoengineering as a solution rather than on reducing emissions.


Entirely possible. However, another possibility is, given the existence of such deniers (and many other factors), that the two politically viable options are:
1) geoengineering as a method to mitigate the effects of climate change, or
2) business-as-usual warming.


Quoting 168. BaltimoreBrian:

I would say geoengineering is controversial because countries who don't participate will nevertheless bear the consequences, for good or ill. Many other reasons exist of course (will it work, how can we tell if it works, what happens if we screw up the planet making a mistake, whether countries which are harmed or claim harm will be compensated) etc.


We are in such situation already. However, now the situation is such, that country A emits carbon dioxide for reasons other than intentional changing of climate, yet country B suffers. The basic cause-effect relations have been known for over a century, yet the entire world politics continue in such a manner to confirm, that (at least de facto) country A can alter the atmospheric composition by actions done within its borders, as part of its rights as sovereign entity, without having any liability over what happens outside its borders due to those actions. Now, if this climate modification changes from unintentional to intentional, what difference is it really expected to make in the workings of world politics?

For me, it's simply logical, to begin a shift from unintentional consequences to intentional, calculated, researched actions, when it comes to changes in climate. To stop carbon dioxide emissions is only one such possible action, among many others.
194. MahFL
Quoting 189. washingaway:

Why do we save daylight in the summertime when the days are already longer? Shouldn't we save that daylight for the winter when the days are shorter?


From Wikipedia :

"Putting clocks forward benefits retailing, sports, and other activities that exploit sunlight after working hours ".

The often much shorter days in the winter in the far north and far south would not benefit by a 1 hour extension, as it would still be getting dark about 5:30 pm, just after most people finish work.
Quoting 171. LAbonbon:

Re: #160- there will be a pop quiz on calculus and trigonometry later...

And speaking of electricity, this interesting piece from yesterday's New York Times:

Lightning, Weather's Byproduct, May Become One of Its Predictors
cant we jus do the trig...pleeze...:)
Quoting 192. Patrap:



So, if unstand correctly, as I approach the speed of light my mass would increase and thereby requiring more energy, which in turn, would only convert into more mass. Which means I could never reach the speed of light because it would constantly keep requiring more energy.. Easy peasy.
Quoting 141. elioe:



Ouch... an entire field of scientific research is deemed "controversial". Why so? Perhaps there is a considerable fear, that the results will not fit into the ideologies adhered to by the majority of scientific community?

I'm going to wait keenly for any results... whether those results (or even the existence of such studies) are to the liking of environmentalists.


Step 1: Admit you have a problem.

Geoengineering doesn't solve any problems and has a large likelihood of creating more. It's like taking ibuprofen for the pain caused by a brain tumor. If you don't address the problem, the best you're going to do is cover it up until it finally kills you. In this, the problem is additional greenhouse gases being added to the atmosphere. When, and it would be a when with our history, those mechanisms for geoengineering collapse the shock to the system would be catastrophic. The longer the problem is covered up, the greater the probability of disaster when whatever geoengineering solution that was being used failed.

Step 2: Stop making the problem worse.

So what about those solutions that actually do address the problem? What about those solution that actually include removing CO2 from the atmosphere? With our current level of advancement they're not feasible either technically, economically, or socially. You'd get far more reduction by simply phasing out fossil fuel use and replacing it with as many renewable sources as you can.

Step 3: Begin taking steps for a recovery.

The problem here is thermodynamics. It took X amount of energy to dig it up, transport it, and burn it. It's going to take X+Y amount of energy to get it back out of the atmosphere and re-sequester it, and there is A LOT of it we've added over the past 100+ years. Our current technologies to do so are not that efficient or simply cannot be scaled to the level necessary to get the CO2 levels down to "safe" levels. Socially it would require a massive concerted global effort, and as current events show we are no where near achieving that.

That's not to say we can't start now (actually we should have started in the 80's), but there is no "miracle solution" here. You also have to be very careful. Introducing an engineered microbe or something into the environment without knowing the full scope of what it will do (and possible negative mutations) could quickly ravage entire ecosystems for example.

Geoengineering is a problem with an inferiority complex looking for a way to become a bigger problem.
From the hills* of South Salem, Oregon. We had a snow flurry this evening that put down about 1/4 inch of snow, fast enough to cover the traffic lane on the road in front of my house. Forecast calls for up to an inch of snow overnight and tomorrow morning and freezing or below until Saturday. But we're getting off easy. I heard of forecast of up to 15 inches of snow in the upper Hood River valley tonight and 10 inches in Bend which has over a foot on the ground already.

What's unusual is that we've been getting snow in the Willamette Valley on and off for several weeks in a row. That doesn't happen very often.

*The reason I say "hills" is that I'm around 300 feet above the valley floor which makes a difference. It's around 180 feet along the river in downtown Salem and 210 feet at the airport. My home is about 490 feet. For example it's pretty common for there to be thick fog on the valley floor when it's bright and sunny at home.
Just don't go quantum on me Pat, that stuff is freaky hard.
Quoting 88. MahFL:



Electric cars move the pollution to the generating stations, the power still needs to be produced somewhere.
True but most power generating stations, even coal, are quite a bit more fuel efficient than an ICE engine.
Quoting 166. hotroddan:

Why are comments like #160 being flagged? On comment #160 I see nothing inappropriate or against the rules; All I see is a different point of view.


1 + 1 = Banana, therefore monkeys are really aliens after our precious bodily fluids and throw mind control poop at us to try and take over the world.

Is that a different point of view? No, it's just plain stupid. Or crazy. Take your pick.

The "electric universe" crap has been floating around the web in one form or another ever since I was a freshman in college surfing alt.physics on Usenet. Every so often some other nutball would come along a resuscitate some aspect of it to come up with a reason to wear tin foil hats and collect their own urine in jars. The poster you're referring to is just rehashing the same garbage in slightly different package. The monomania reminds of an infamous alt.physics troll who was convinced that the life, the universe, and everything could be explained simply by studying the atomic structure of plutonium, which he deemed to be the "perfect atom".

As has been mentioned many times, there are plenty of sites that truck with crazy pseudo-scientific nonsense. WUWT, CA, OverUnity, and soon WhiteHouse.gov. There's really no reason to clutter up this blog with people trying to convince us that chemtrails are real and they have a radio in their toenail.
Flash Flood Warning
MSC033-TNC157-110745-
/O.NEW.KMEG.FF.W.0001.170111T0442Z-170111T0745Z/
/00000.0.ER.000000T0000Z.000000T0000Z.000000T0000 Z.OO/

BULLETIN - EAS ACTIVATION REQUESTED
Flash Flood Warning
National Weather Service Memphis TN
1042 PM CST TUE JAN 10 2017

The National Weather Service in Memphis has issued a

* Flash Flood Warning for...
Northeastern DeSoto County in northwestern Mississippi...
Southeastern Shelby County in west Tennessee...


* Until 145 AM CST

* At 1041 PM CST...Doppler Radar estimates 1 to 3 inches of rain has
occurred over the past 3 hours. Showers and thunderstorms will
produce an additional 1 to 2 inches of rain over the next 2 hours.

* Some locations that will experience flooding include...
Southaven, Collierville, Germantown, Olive Branch, Horn Lake,
Cordova, Memphis, Southeast Memphis, Southwest Memphis, Whitehaven,
Lynchburg, Fisherville, Capleville, Plum Point, White Station and
Parkway Village.

PRECAUTIONARY/PREPAREDNESS ACTIONS...

Turn around, don`t drown when encountering flooded roads. Most flood
deaths occur in vehicles.

Be especially cautious at night when it is harder to recognize the
dangers of flooding.

Excessive runoff from heavy rainfall will cause flooding of small
creeks and streams, urban areas, highways, streets and underpasses as
well as other drainage areas and low lying spots.
Quoting 190. washingaway:

If I had a car that could travel at the speed of light, and I turn my headlights on, would they work?


Relative to what?

When you approach the speed of light, this nice continuum you see every day begins to break down. Everything starts becoming relative to the observer. So it really does depend on which position you're taking.

If you were in the car and you turned on your head lights, then they would work. The speed of light is constant regardless of reference frame, so you would see the beams head out from you at the speed of light relative to you (as long as you weren't accelerating).

For someone watching you zip by, the answer would be no. First, due to time dilation you would appear to be frozen in time. You'd never turn on your lights because time for you essentially stopped according to the outside observer.

But for the sake of argument, lets say you jumped to light speed the instant you turned your lights on. The answer would still be no. At the speed of light, length contracts to 0, and mass increases to infinity. So your lights would never appear to be "on" (traveling at the same speed you are). But since you would have collapsed into a singularity anyway the question would be moot regardless.

Again, this only applies to non-accelerating frames of reference (the simple or "special") relativity. For accelerating frames you need to apply general relativity and things get a whole lot more complicated.
Quoting 204. Xyrus2000:



Relative to what?

When you approach the speed of light, this nice continuum you see every day begins to break down. Everything starts becoming relative to the observer. So it really does depend on which position you're taking.

If you were in the car and you turned on your head lights, then they would work. The speed of light is constant regardless of reference frame, so you would see the beams head out from you at the speed of light relative to you (as long as you weren't accelerating).

For someone watching you zip by, the answer would be no. First, due to time dilation you would appear to be frozen in time. You'd never turn on your lights because time for you essentially stopped according to the outside observer.

But for the sake of argument, lets say you jumped to light speed the instant you turned your lights on. The answer would still be no. At the speed of light, length contracts to 0, and mass increases to infinity. So your lights would never appear to be "on" (traveling at the same speed you are). But since you would have collapsed into a singularity anyway the question would be moot regardless.

Again, this only applies to non-accelerating frames of reference (the simple or "special") relativity. For accelerating frames you need to apply general relativity and things get a whole lot more complicated.

I was just trying to be funny, I'm in a really good mood tonight. So to answer your question; relative to my good mood. However, this one of my favorite subjects. Especially spacetime. And Xyrus2000, I'm big fan.
@ Xyrus2000 - re: #160 - I give him credit for freely admitting to being an 'alarmist' and a 'progressive'. The far right has labeled those that accept the science with the term 'alarmist', in an effort to pigeonhole and minimize our valid concerns. Similarly, the term 'progressive' is thrown around as a pejorative, when in fact most progressives couldn't care less they are labeled as such, and are in fact proud of their stances. The far right has tried to engender these terms (and others) with such negative connotations that many will dodge them if they can. So kudos to him for not doing so.

(Note I'm not commenting on his science views...)
Quoting 196. washingaway:


So, if unstand correctly, as I approach the speed of light my mass would increase and thereby requiring more energy, which in turn, would only convert into more mass. Which means I could never reach the speed of light because it would constantly keep requiring more energy.. Easy peasy.


Relative to the outside observer, you would appear to gain in mass. You'd also appear to compress in the direction of travel and time would dilate. Relative to you, the universe would start to compress, appear more massive, and time would slow down.

One possible way to get around this little problem is to convince the universe you're not really there in the first place. If you could create a field around a ship to counter the warping your ships mass has on space-time (become massless) then hypothetically light and possibly faster than light travel would be possible. By using an asymmetric field you could even use space-time itself to accelerate your craft.

There are several hypotheses around (including the Alcubierre drive) that attempt something like this in one form or another. The problem is that even if you could construct such a drive, the side-effects are pretty intense so you wouldn't hoping from planet to planet unless you intend on reducing said planet to atomic particles.
Flash Flood Warning
CAC053-110815-
/O.NEW.KMTR.FF.W.0021.170111T0514Z-170111T0815Z/
/00000.0.ER.000000T0000Z.000000T0000Z.000000T0000 Z.OO/

BULLETIN - EAS ACTIVATION REQUESTED
Flash Flood Warning
National Weather Service San Francisco CA
914 PM PST TUE JAN 10 2017

The National Weather Service in The San Francisco Bay Area has issued
a

* Flash Flood Warning for the Soberanes Burn Area in...
West central Monterey County in central California
...

* Until 1215 AM PST

* At 910 PM PST, Doppler radar indicated heavy rain moving across
the Soberanes Fire burn scar. In addition, the Big Sur River near
Big Sur was at 11.3 feet and rising rapidly. Flood stage on the
Big Sur River is 10 feet. The Big Sur River is expected to rise
further before subsiding.

* Additional heavy rain is expected for the next hour across the
burn scar and Big Sur River Basin. This will lead to flash
flooding and possible debris flows.

PRECAUTIONARY/PREPAREDNESS ACTIONS...

A Flash Flood Warning for a burn area means that flash flooding,
debris flows and or rock slides are likely or already occurring. If
you are in or near the warned area, you should seek a safe location
immediately. Your life may depend on how quickly you react.
From NWS-San Francisco Bay Area/Monterey, things out in California are looking quite 'colorful':

Quoting 208. Xyrus2000:



Relative to the outside observer, you would appear to gain in mass. You'd also appear to compress in the direction of travel and time would dilate. Relative to you, the universe would start to compress, appear more massive, and time would slow down.

One possible way to get around this little problem is to convince the universe you're not really there in the first place. If you could create a field around a ship to counter the warping your ships mass has on space-time (become massless) then hypothetically light and possibly faster than light travel would be possible. By using an asymmetric field you could even use space-time itself to accelerate your craft.

There are several hypotheses around (including the Alcubierre drive) that attempt something like this in one form or another. The problem is that even if you could construct such a drive, the side-effects are pretty intense so you wouldn't hoping from planet to planet unless you intend on reducing said planet to atomic particles.

Got any thoughts on gravitational waves now that we know they exist?
212. MahFL
Looks like some power went out at Truckee Airport.

trucke-airport-live
Yes, but they would not be very bright!

Quoting 190. washingaway:

If I had a car that could travel at the speed of light, and I turn my headlights on, would they work?
I, personally, have put away a lot of saved daylight. Keeping them for a raining day which has not happened here in SW FL for awhile.


Quoting 189. washingaway:

Why do we save daylight in the summertime when the days are already longer? Shouldn't we save that daylight for the winter when the days are shorter?
215. vis0
Quoting 208. Xyrus2000:


Relative to the outside observer, you would appear to gain in mass. You'd also appear to compress in the direction of travel and time would dilate. Relative to you, the universe would start to compress, appear more massive, and time would slow down.

One possible way to get around this little problem is to convince the universe you're not really there in the first place. If you could create a field around a ship to
counter the warping your ships mass has on space-time (become massless) then hypothetically light and possibly faster than light travel would be possible. By using an asymmetric field you could even use space-time
itself to accelerate your craft.

There are several hypotheses around (including the Alcubierre drive) that attempt something like this in one form or another. The problem is that even if you could construct such a drive, the side-effects are pretty intense so you wouldn't hoping from planet to planet unless you intend on reducing said planet to atomic particles.
         Quoting 211. washingaway:


Got any thoughts on gravitational waves now that we know they exist?
Unless one uses  forms of encased sounds whose side-effects remain within the encased  "tubes" that fed black hole -novae-quasar  energy regulators ... of the uni-verse...as to q211 it's the wave of the future...me waving its nap time div.image_information{ padding:2px; -moz-opacity: 0.8; opacity: 0.8; background-color:#FF99FF; font-size:13px; font-family:Arial,Verdana; font-weight:normal; font-style:normal; color:#000000; border:1px solid #99FF99; text-align:left; box-shadow: 0 0 10px rgba(0,0,0,0.5); position:absolute; z-index:999;} div.image_information{ padding:2px; -moz-opacity: 0.8; opacity: 0.8; background-color:#FF99FF; font-size:13px; font-family:Arial,Verdana; font-weight:normal; font-style:normal; color:#000000; border:1px solid #99FF99; text-align:left; box-shadow: 0 0 10px rgba(0,0,0,0.5); position:absolute; z-index:999;} div.image_information{ padding:2px; -moz-opacity: 0.8; opacity: 0.8; background-color:#FF99FF; font-size:13px; font-family:Arial,Verdana; font-weight:normal; font-style:normal; color:#000000; border:1px solid #99FF99; text-align:left; box-shadow: 0 0 10px rgba(0,0,0,0.5); position:absolute; z-index:999;}
Quoting 212. MahFL:

Looks like some power went out at Truckee Airport.

trucke-airport-live

Power went out at my house awhile ago. Still blowing snow. Winds should let up mid-morning.
Quoting 200. BaltimoreBrian:

(...) (...) (...)
Pretty in pink: Some algae like it cold



It's a good find. Looks like a positive feedback to me, with potentially important implications:
Cosmopolitan snow algae accelerate melting of Arctic glaciers
Phys.org - June 2016.

From the first article (Pretty in pink: Some algae like it cold):
Describing the rosy pigment as a natural protective sunscreen, the researchers say there is also a downside to the algae's colorful hue -- it tends to lower the snow's albedo, or in other words the snow surface's ability to reflect sunlight. Instead, the pink patches absorb heat from the sun leading to a rise in surface melting, which they say can result in an increase in algal growth.
(...)
"The snow algae need nitrogen as well, and some of our preliminary results indicate that these algal communities are getting their nitrogen primarily from an anthropogenically [human] generated source like combustion engines," says Havig, UC adjunct professor of geology. "A rich supply of nitrogen can also come from regional dairy farms where there are large lagoons of cow manure that generate a lot of ammonia from the breakdown.

"We can track the snow algae's chemical signatures, and it looks indeed like a large source of their nitrogen might be coming from those sorts of human-made sources rather than from a biological pathway."


Oh the irony...
Quoting 214. swflurker:

I, personally, have put away a lot of saved daylight. Keeping them for a raining day which has not happened here in SW FL for awhile.




Finally, someone with a sense of humor. I was begining to think I was the only in a good mood. Although I do understand why many would not be and I have no idea why I am. I guess I'm storing my despair for the 20th.
Quoting 216. oldnewmex:


Power went out at my house awhile ago. Still blowing snow. Winds should let up mid-morning.

I hope you still have heat.
Quoting 216. oldnewmex:


Power went out at my house awhile ago. Still blowing snow. Winds should let up mid-morning.


Huh.
This weather station thing's fun. Usually the anenometer's more exciting than the rain gauge around these parts.
Quoting 202. Xyrus2000:



1 + 1 = Banana, therefore monkeys are really aliens after our precious bodily fluids and throw mind control poop at us to try and take over the world.

Is that a different point of view? No, it's just plain stupid. Or crazy. Take your pick.

The "electric universe" crap has been floating around the web in one form or another ever since I was a freshman in college surfing alt.physics on Usenet. Every so often some other nutball would come along a resuscitate some aspect of it to come up with a reason to wear tin foil hats and collect their own urine in jars. The poster you're referring to is just rehashing the same garbage in slightly different package. The monomania reminds of an infamous alt.physics troll who was convinced that the life, the universe, and everything could be explained simply by studying the atomic structure of plutonium, which he deemed to be the "perfect atom".

As has been mentioned many times, there are plenty of sites that truck with crazy pseudo-scientific nonsense. WUWT, CA, OverUnity, and soon WhiteHouse.gov. There's really no reason to clutter up this blog with people trying to convince us that chemtrails are real and they have a radio in their toenail.


Your 'argument' appears to be that I am a tin foil hat and therefore what I am saying should be censored. Correct me if I am wrong.

Radical ideas are equally met with bias on so called skeptics sites, but I am not even going to go there, in part because it feeds into this notion that there are two acceptable positions on climate change, ghg warming and doubt, and not observations of change and different mechanism informed by doubt.

What surprises me is that there is no comments about the cross equator storms, and the implausible nature of these storms occurring on up tick with a green house gas theory given corioles, yet a directly electrical forcing on the cloud behaviors would be predicted. Why does this comment go to tin foil hat?

The teleconnections like ENSO are even more important to discuss, because it's a microcosm of the entire debate and the problems with it. It gets to how the ocean is coupled with the atmosphere and cloud behaviors. How about if it is framed in a question? Why do El Nino's die? What is creating the warm pool near Oz that is heading toward South America in the tropics? How do cold oceans cause this? In a math way, how does a cycle like a sine wave get explained in terms of the acceleration that is causing it? Eg minus a sine wave second derivative. During El Nino in the most lightning struck area on earth, the tropics, the tropics warm with El Nino and text book science is salt water becomes 1 percent more conductive with each deg F. That would be a positive acceleration that should increase the electrical intensity of what is occurring around the world. At the same time El Ninos END. Why??? Should they continue to couple to greater cloud cover? That is the green house gas argument, really. Instead it dies and now after the second 500 year El Nino since 1997 there is a La Nina? What is behind the change from one to another? My answer is that colder oceans hold more carbonation, so surface lows have less carbonation to organize them and increase cirrus cover in the tropics relative to the El Nino event and this causes less cirrus cloud heat trapping and the event ends. In contrast La Nina, colder SSTs, allow for greater decarbonation and for relative warming. This means that CO2 increased by human activity is a dependent variable on this electrical forcing and the net of the cycles is more decarbonation and more heat trapping cirrus getting produced. Comment, please, on what I am teaching rather than the foil on my head. Please attack my argument, not me.

Quoting 211. washingaway:


Got any thoughts on gravitational waves now that we know they exist?


They're an interesting phenomena. In my opinion they lend some credibility to hypothetical conjectures regarding our universe being a hyper dimensional/"holographic" projection of some sort. Like how you're a 4 dimensional object, but your shadow is only 3 dimensions.

If you remove the constraints of "normal" thinking about space and time, some of the "WTF?" phenomena we see is more easily explainable. Take quantum entanglement. In our "normal" universe we see quantum entanglement as "spooky". That's because we perceive two particles separated by distance instantly being known simply by observing them.

The thing is, that's just how it happens to appear when "projected" on our universe. Much like how your shadow can appear to be 30 feet tall when project but you're actually only 6 feet tall. In the hyper-dimensional plane of these particles, they may not even be physically separated at all.

Think of it like a hyper-dimensional coin. When we "split" the particles in our universe, this does the equivalent of flicking this coin to make it spin. When we observe one of the particles, it's the equivalent of slamming your hand down on the hyper-dimensional coin to make it stop. Now we know know which side is facing up or down. But in our universe it appears as if two quantum particles went flying apart from one another but instantly became know when one was measured.

Interesting and fun things to think about, but needless to say not exactly trivial to test. The machine needed to detect gravitational waves was a major engineering undertaking and achievement. It wouldn't surprise if that level of skill will be needed to flesh out any of the more hypothetical models of our universe.
223. MahFL
"Electric Outage Details
START TIME: JAN 8, 2:57 PM
ESTIMATED RESTORATION: JAN 12, 2:50 AM
CUSTOMERS AFFECTED: 4
CAUSE: Found a broken power pole in the area
STATUS: PG&E is sending a repair crew to the outage location.
LAST UPDATED: JAN 11, 12:14 AM"
Good morning abroad with some European cold spell news:

Europe's deep freeze claims new victims
AFP on January 11, 2017, 8:28 am
Warsaw (AFP) - Sub-freezing temperatures across swathes of Europe have claimed over 60 victims in recent days -- notably in Poland, Romania and the Balkans -- with migrants and the homeless among the most vulnerable, officials said on Tuesday. ...

Refugees brave snow, sub-zero temperatures in Greek camps
Reuters, Tue Jan 10, 2017 | 1:05pm EST
Refugees stranded in Greece suffered sub-zero temperatures and heavy snowfall on Tuesday at camps not designed for winter weather and the government promised those on one island temporary warm accommodations aboard a navy ship.
A mid-winter icy spell and snowstorms have gripped central and southeastern Europe for days, and parts of Greece have been covered in rare snow with temperatures dipping to -20 degrees Celsius this week. Snow also fell in Athens on Tuesday. ...


Even my mild town Mainz on Rhine got snow yesterday. Below two of the pics I was able to take of the historic city (click them to enlarge; more on my blog), seen from the cathedral:




Meanwhile in Australia:

Temperatures to soar above 40C as heatwave sweeps eastern Australia
Mercury readings in parts of central and southern Queensland and NSW eclipse those in country's tropical north, sparking warnings to avoid sun and drink plenty of water
The Guardian, Wednesday 11 January 2017 02.31 GMT
... Temperatures are expected to soar above 40C in parts of central and southern Queensland and New South Wales over coming days, eclipsing the mercury readings in Australia's tropical north.
The Bureau of Meteorology predicts an extreme heatwave straddling the inland border of both states, with Bourke in the NSW outback and Thargomindah in Queensland's channel country tipped to reach the highest temperatures of 45C and 44C respectively on Wednesday. The mercury in Thargomindah will hit 46C (115F] on Thursday, according to the bureau. ...

More details see link above.


Temperature anomalies in the next five days worldwide. Source.
Quote:

208. Xyrus2000

...One possible way to get around this little problem is to convince the universe you're not really there in the first place. If you could create a field around a ship to counter the warping your ships mass has on space-time (become massless) then hypothetically light and possibly faster than light travel would be possible. By using an asymmetric field you could even use space-time itself to accelerate your craft...

Reply:

...
Re: #141 - elioe -

Professor Raymond T. Pierrehumbert: "When has humanity managed to sustain a concerted complex technological enterprise for centuries, let alone millennia?"

From The Daily Beast:

Science Can’t Save the Earth This Time

Politicians seem to hope we’ll be able to ‘science the s**t’ out of global warming’s consequences at some point in the distant future—but the point of no return is fast approaching.

[...]

Even if one of these massive geoengineering projects could be developed, financed, and implemented in the future, the question arises whether it will do more harm than good. When you’re talking about trying to control climate via an engineering project, there are a thousand variables at play. Pull the wrong string and everything could unravel. An international team of researchers ran models for a dozen different geoengineering projects and concluded that such massive endeavors would likely have disastrous unintended consequences. Their final conclusion was even more disturbing. Even if a project was successful at controlling carbon levels for 50 years, once the project was stopped, the rebound effect could actually accelerate climate change.

So in the end, geoengineering is a lose-lose scenario. It’s a scientific pipe dream. We will not be able to “science” our way out of a climate collapse. Instead, we must act now. Rather than slamming on the brakes in the future, let’s start tapping that brake before we skid into oblivion.

[...]

Click here to read full article.

See also:

The Royal Society: Geoengineering the climate - Science, governance and uncertainty

What’s the right temperature for the Earth? And what happens when countries disagree about what it should be?

Why Geoengineering Is "Untested and Untestable"

Climate Hacking Is Barking Mad - You can’t fix the Earth with these geoengineering proposals, but you can sure make it worse.

The Risks of Climate Engineering

Geoengineering Is Not a Solution to Climate Change

Starting, Then Stopping Geoengineering Could Dangerously Accelerate Climate Change

Geo-engineering no quick fix for climate change, warn experts

Atmospheric consequences of disruption of the ocean thermocline

Any attempts to engineer the climate are likely to result in "different" climate change, rather than its elimination, new results suggest

20 reasons why geoengineering
may be a bad idea:


1. Effects on regional climate
2. Continued ocean acidification
3. Ozone depletion
4. Effects on plants
5. More acid deposition
6. Effects of cirrus clouds
7. Whitening of the sky (but nice
sunsets)
8. Less sun for solar power
9. Environmental impacts of implementation
10. Rapid warming if deployment
stops
11. There’s no going back
12. Human error
13. Undermining emissions mitigation
14. Cost
15. Commercial control of technology
16. Military use of the technology
17. Conflicts with current treaties
18. Control of the thermostat
19. Questions of moral authority
20. Unexpected consequences
From Fast Company:

One Year From Today, We'll Have Blown The World's Entire Carbon Budget

By one calculation, we have 365 days left to do something drastic with our carbon emissions before we lock in a future of drastic climate change.


[Photo: NASA/Goddard Space Flight Center/Flickr]

ADELE PETERS 01.09.17 6:00 AM

As of now—by the least optimistic calculations—the world has one year to stop pumping CO2 into the atmosphere if we want to stop climate change at 1.5 degrees Celsius of warming, the aim of the Paris climate agreement.

A carbon countdown clock from researchers at the Mercator Research Institute on Global Commons and Climate Change does the math, estimating the time left at current emission levels. Even with a higher limit of two degrees of warming and the most optimistic projections, we still only have about 23 years to fully transition to a carbon-free economy.

"Once we have exhausted the carbon budget, every ton of CO2 that is released by cars, buildings, or industrial plants would need to be compensated during the 21st century by removing the CO2 from the atmosphere again," says Fabian Löhe, a spokesperson for the Mercator researchers. "Generating such 'negative emissions' is even more challenging, and we do not know today at which scale we might be able to do that. Hence, the clock shows that time is running out: It is not enough to act sometime in the future, but it is necessary to implement more ambitious climate policies already in the very short-term."

Click here to read full article.
Quoting 227. Xandra:

Re: #141 - elioe -

Professor Raymond T. Pierrehumbert: "When has humanity managed to sustain a concerted complex technological enterprise for centuries, let alone millennia?"

From The Daily Beast:

Science Can’t Save the Earth This Time

Politicians seem to hope we’ll be able to ‘science the s**t’ out of global warming’s consequences at some point in the distant future—but the point of no return is fast approaching.

[...]

Even if one of these massive geoengineering projects could be developed, financed, and implemented in the future, the question arises whether it will do more harm than good. When you’re talking about trying to control climate via an engineering project, there are a thousand variables at play. Pull the wrong string and everything could unravel. An international team of researchers ran models for a dozen different geoengineering projects and concluded that such massive endeavors would likely have disastrous unintended consequences. Their final conclusion was even more disturbing. Even if a project was successful at controlling carbon levels for 50 years, once the project was stopped, the rebound effect could actually accelerate climate change.

So in the end, geoengineering is a lose-lose scenario. It’s a scientific pipe dream. We will not be able to “science” our way out of a climate collapse. Instead, we must act now. Rather than slamming on the brakes in the future, let’s start tapping that brake before we skid into oblivion.

[...]

Click here to read full article.

See also:

The Royal Society: Geoengineering the climate - Science, governance and uncertainty

What’s the right temperature for the Earth? And what happens when countries disagree about what it should be?

Why Geoengineering Is "Untested and Untestable"

Climate Hacking Is Barking Mad - You can’t fix the Earth with these geoengineering proposals, but you can sure make it worse.

The Risks of Climate Engineering

Geoengineering Is Not a Solution to Climate Change

Starting, Then Stopping Geoengineering Could Dangerously Accelerate Climate Change

Geo-engineering no quick fix for climate change, warn experts

Atmospheric consequences of disruption of the ocean thermocline

Any attempts to engineer the climate are likely to result in "different" climate change, rather than its elimination, new results suggest

20 reasons why geoengineering
may be a bad idea:


1. Effects on regional climate
2. Continued ocean acidification
3. Ozone depletion
4. Effects on plants
5. More acid deposition
6. Effects of cirrus clouds
7. Whitening of the sky (but nice
sunsets)
8. Less sun for solar power
9. Environmental impacts of implementation
10. Rapid warming if deployment
stops
11. There’s no going back
12. Human error
13. Undermining emissions mitigation
14. Cost
15. Commercial control of technology
16. Military use of the technology
17. Conflicts with current treaties
18. Control of the thermostat
19. Questions of moral authority
20. Unexpected consequences



I'm surprised "Military use of the technology" is #16. That is usually in the top three. Not for "storm of battle" but making Russia the worlds bread basket instead of America. Of turning the Ghobie dessert into an oncoming tsunami over China. Or going teh other way - frosting over Europe and America making the mid east a paradise.

Your URLs are so much to read to understand why we might not be able to fix earth while talking about terraforming Mars.

While these are all valid concerns, I'm not sure any are show stoppers.
Quoting 221. vanderwaalselectrics:



YWhat surprises me is that there is no comments about the cross equator storms, ...



Please check first whether they exist in the first place.
Pro-tip: not.









Quoting 208. Xyrus2000:



Relative to the outside observer, you would appear to gain in mass. You'd also appear to compress in the direction of travel and time would dilate. Relative to you, the universe would start to compress, appear more massive, and time would slow down.

One possible way to get around this little problem is to convince the universe you're not really there in the first place. If you could create a field around a ship to counter the warping your ships mass has on space-time (become massless) then hypothetically light and possibly faster than light travel would be possible. By using an asymmetric field you could even use space-time itself to accelerate your craft.

There are several hypotheses around (including the Alcubierre drive) that attempt something like this in one form or another. The problem is that even if you could construct such a drive, the side-effects are pretty intense so you wouldn't hoping from planet to planet unless you intend on reducing said planet to atomic particles.

Good Morning; regardless of your political affiliation, it was nice to see President Obama side with the science last evening in the Farewell Address. Here is the excerpt of my favorite point:


But without bolder action, our children won’t have time to debate the existence of climate change. They’ll be busy dealing with its effects. More environmental disasters, more economic disruptions, waves of climate refugees seeking sanctuary. Now we can and should argue about the best approach to solve the problem. But to simply deny the problem not only betrays future generations, it betrays the essential spirit of this country, the essential spirit of innovation and practical problem-solving that guided our founders.
Good Morning Guys!

It appears by looking at all the various models that come mid next week we will be entering into a very active period across the southern US including Florida. One of the reason for this change in the weather pattern is what I have been saying would occur for sometime now and that is the return of El-Nino it does appear that we will be transitioning back to El-Nino this Spring and in fact it might already be beginning to occur in the Atmosphere across the Globe.

Per JB one of his analogs for the rest of this Winter is 1993 and if you remember we had the Superstorm that occurred that year on March 13th. Not saying it will occur this year but you have to watch this as the Gulf Sea Surface temps are way above average for this time of year



Below is the Euro Ensembles and notice all the energy now reversing from a northern stream flow to more of a southern stream flow.



Latest NNME Enso forecast suggest weak El-Nino in place this Summer

Quoting 229. TechnoCaveman:



I'm surprised "Military use of the technology" is #16. That is usually in the top three. [...]


They are not ranked according to how important they are. It is a list of 20 reasons to not playing God with the Climate.
Quoting 233. weathermanwannabe:

Good Morning; regardless of your political affiliation, it was nice to see President Obama side with the science last evening in the Farewell Address. Here is the excerpt of my favorite point:


But without bolder action, our children won’t have time to debate the existence of climate change. They’ll be busy dealing with its effects. More environmental disasters, more economic disruptions, waves of climate refugees seeking sanctuary. Now we can and should argue about the best approach to solve the problem. But to simply deny the problem not only betrays future generations, it betrays the essential spirit of this country, the essential spirit of innovation and practical problem-solving that guided our founders.


It was a very good speech. One thing about Obama is that he will go down as one of the greatest speakers.
New from Tamino:

Global Warming’s Record Year

It is widely publicized that 2016 will certainly break the record for yearly average global temperature. Again. This will be the third year in a row we’ve set a new record. It’s time we paid attention.

I’ve often emphasized that just because Earth shows an indisputable warming trend, that doesn’t mean every year will be hotter than the one before. In addition to trend, there is also a lot of fluctuation in things like global temperature. So we shouldn’t expect each year to break the temperature record.

But we did in 2014. We did again in 2015, by a substantial margin. We did again in 2016, by a substantial margin. The third year in a row of record-breaking global temperature will probably get the most attention, but it may not be the most important or most worrisome record set last year.


More ...
Good Morning Class! 12 Hour Rainfall totals on our 2 storms due in Soo Cal starting today and ending tomorrow night.

Link

And still snowing in the Sierra's! Wow!

First storm looks pretty weak but totals for both are a bit better- .25-.75 coast and valleys .50"-2.00" Mountains for both storms. Nice easy soakers if it comes as forecast.


A low pressure system will bring increasing showers today along with areas of strong winds in the mountains and deserts. A colder trough of low pressure will bring more showers and greater snowfall to the region Thursday into Friday.
Quoting 241. daddyjames:



Unfortunately they're leaving a bunch of clowns in control.


The picks Trump selected are very solid picks and I think you will be surprised on how this Country will turn around from 8 years of chaos. I mean he held his speech in Chicago a place which has the highest murder rate in America. A great speaker yes but lacked actions.
Quoting 243. StormTrackerScott:



The picks Trump selected are very solid picks and I think you will be surprised on how this Country will turn around from 8 years of chaos. I mean he held his speech in Chicago a place which has the highest murder rate in America. A great speaker yes but lacked actions.


8 years of chaos? Oh, you're referring to the previous administration, the one before Obama's.
Quoting 242. StormTrackerScott:



LOL! I agree. Great speaker but he was a definite divider especially when it come to race and the lack of respect for cops and law and order.


Being a man of color he had the platform to bridge gaps like this country has never seen before. But I totally agree with you, it was a complete failure and he's divided this country like most of us have never seen. But hey, he signed the Paris Agreement so we'll just salute him on top of his pedestal and ignore all the failures.
Off to the VA Hospital in La Jolla/San Diego for 3 appointments. Coumadin Clinic, Cardiomyopathy Clinic and Case Study/Medication . Be back in the PM...........Wish all a good day!
Quoting 245. luvtogolf:



Being a man of color he had the platform to bridge gaps like this country has never seen before. But I totally agree with you, it was a complete failure and he's divided this country like most of us have never seen. But hey, he signed the Paris Agreement so we'll just salute him on top of his pedestal and ignore all the failures.


Thought he did a pretty good job myself.
248. elioe
Quoting 227. Xandra:



Lots of opinion pieces indeed. Lots of "can", "could", "may", "might". But one claim deserves special attention: that geoengineering is untestable. As the headline does not specify this, I should: the intended effects of geoengineering can be proven true or false by testing them. As such, it is a proper scientific hypothesis, rather than pseudoscience. The opinion piece writer simply quotes an ethical standpoint, which dictates, that no-one should have to take even the slightest risk of unintended negative consequences from such testing. Of course, I disagree. First, the effects of geoengineering should be modelled. Any expected consequences should be charted. If there are negative effects expected from the field test, create a plan of relief and compensation. If there are more expected positive effects than negative, proceed with testing. For example, in case of sulphur dioxide spraying, begin with slight amounts. Perhaps amounting to 0.1 W/m² more of sunlight reflection. Run the test for decade or so. Verify, whether the real impacts match the modelled ones.

But I don't expect sulphur dioxide spraying, or any other form of stratospheric reflection, to produce promising results. My "actions of choice" are:

- Iron fertilization. So far studies suggest, that with such amount of fertilization, that iron ceases to be the limiting factor to primary production everywhere in oceans, 1 - 2 Gt of carbon could be permanently sequestered annually. And my best guess is, that the effect of increased phytoplankton to albedo would also cause the planet to absorb sunlight by 2 W/m² on average. Not sure if that effect has been studied by anyone. But in that matter, this link you provided is interesting. It suggests that a decrease in SST reduces temperature in low-latitude land areas, and causes more precipitation in subtropics. Although in the link, the mechanism causing the reduced SST is heat transport from surface waters into deep ocean, rather than increase in ocean albedo. Such regional changes would likely be mostly beneficial to humans.

- Regarding the link above: artificially enhancing thermohaline circulation is also my "action of choice".

- Filling of endorheic basins. Tarim Basin, Lake Eyre, Lake Chad and Caspian Sea, when all filled to the lowest point of their water divide, would hold so much more water, that it's equivalent to more than 50 cm off the global ocean surface level. And those are not the only such basins. Mainly positive regional effects can also be expected, in terms of increased precipitation, reduced evaporation, and reduced fluctuation of temperature between seasons and times of day.

- Artificial thickening of Antarctic ice shelves. Looking at radiation balance alone: if seawater was sprayed on top of Ross and Ronne ice shelves for 180 days each Southern winter, the amount of ice could increase by at least 3000 km³ each year. Majority of those ice shelves would become grounded within a century, so that most of the extra ice is off the ocean volume. Not accounting for the reduced flow of glaciers behind those ice shelves. Best of all: the process would generate its own power, perhaps even electricity for other consumption.
249. beell
Accumulated precip by type.
00Z GFS (top), 00Z NAM (bottom).




(click for larger image(s)
Quoting 249. beell:

Accumulated precip by type.
00Z GFS (top), 00Z NAM (bottom).




(click for larger image(s)


Notwithstanding my focus on what potentially will happen here in OK. Looks as if Missouri is going to be in for a world of hurt.

Anyone there, stay safe and warm!
weird double post
Quoting 245. luvtogolf:



Being a man of color he had the platform to bridge gaps like this country has never seen before. But I totally agree with you, it was a complete failure and he's divided this country like most of us have never seen. But hey, he signed the Paris Agreement so we'll just salute him on top of his pedestal and ignore all the failures.


A complete failure.... how so? The debt has increased, yes, but he was also left with the worst deficit in our history. What are his other failures?
REPORTING IN FROM CLEARWATER.....back to shorts and flip-flops....man we got it made!
rex tillerson speaking now, almost immediately interrupted by a protester deriding his companies climate non actions. these are trying times, and all of us are going to need to stand up for the environment, not just humans. 'nature needs not of man, but man needs much of nature'
Quoting 248. elioe:



Lots of opinion pieces indeed. Lots of "can", "could", "may", "might". But one claim deserves special attention: that geoengineering is untestable. As the headline does not specify this, I should: the intended effects of geoengineering can be proven true or false by testing them. As such, it is a proper scientific hypothesis, rather than pseudoscience. The opinion piece writer simply quotes an ethical standpoint, which dictates, that no-one should have to take even the slightest risk of unintended negative consequences from such testing. Of course, I disagree. First, the effects of geoengineering should be modelled. Any expected consequences should be charted. If there are negative effects expected from the field test, create a plan of relief and compensation. If there are more expected positive effects than negative, proceed with testing. For example, in case of sulphur dioxide spraying, begin with slight amounts. Perhaps amounting to 0.1 W/m more of sunlight reflection. Run the test for decade or so. Verify, whether the real impacts match the modelled ones.

But I don't expect sulphur dioxide spraying, or any other form of stratospheric reflection, to produce promising results. My "actions of choice" are:

- Iron fertilization. So far studies suggest, that with such amount of fertilization, that iron ceases to be the limiting factor to primary production everywhere in oceans, 1 - 2 Gt of carbon could be permanently sequestered annually. And my best guess is, that the effect of increased phytoplankton to albedo would also cause the planet to absorb sunlight by 2 W/m on average. Not sure if that effect has been studied by anyone. But in that matter, this link you provided is interesting. It suggests that a decrease in SST reduces temperature in low-latitude land areas, and causes more precipitation in subtropics. Although in the link, the mechanism causing the reduced SST is heat transport from surface waters into deep ocean, rather than increase in ocean albedo. Such regional changes would likely be mostly beneficial to humans.

- Regarding the link above: artificially enhancing thermohaline circulation is also my "action of choice".

- Filling of endorheic basins. Tarim Basin, Lake Eyre, Lake Chad and Caspian Sea, when all filled to the lowest point of their water divide, would hold so much more water, that it's equivalent to more than 50 cm off the global ocean surface level. And those are not the only such basins. Mainly positive regional effects can also be expected, in terms of increased precipitation, reduced evaporation, and reduced fluctuation of temperature between seasons and times of day.

- Artificial thickening of Antarctic ice shelves. Looking at radiation balance alone: if seawater was sprayed on top of Ross and Ronne ice shelves for 180 days each Southern winter, the amount of ice could increase by at least 3000 km each year. Majority of those ice shelves would become grounded within a century, so that most of the extra ice is off the ocean volume. Not accounting for the reduced flow of glaciers behind those ice shelves. Best of all: the process would generate its own power, perhaps even electricity for other consumption.



Derp.

All of it.

We have been engineering a new atmosphere for 170 years.

At 400,000 tons of Co2 added per hour, per day, per week,etc, etc.


Man has and continues to Warm the Biosphere via His use of fossil fuels to run these Global Societies.


When you can compete on that level globally, with a engineering process to remove that 400,000 tonnes rate, get back to us in reality land.

It takes actual numbers and a process.

There are ZERO currently.

None.



Quoting 253. Tampa969mlb:

REPORTING IN FROM CLEARWATER.....back to shorts and flip-flops....man we got it made!


Not too far off here in Birmingham, mid 60s to low 70s for the next 10 days here. Record highs for this time of year range from the mid 70s to upper 70s, so this is warm for us.

We hit 17 degrees just a few days ago.
Quoting 244. daddyjames:



8 years of chaos? Oh, you're referring to the previous administration, the one before Obama's.


Indeed, if a GOP one had got OBL,saved the economy, saved the Auto industry, Got healthcare for millions..they would be on the dime and Mt. Rushmore already.

Ignorant is no way to go thru life.

Truth and History determine the years.

What we see here in the thread is the complete programming of some Humans by their respective choice of information..

# HugelySad
Quoting 254. earthisanocean:

rex tillerson speaking now, almost immediately interrupted by a protester deriding his companies climate non actions. these are trying times, and all of us are going to need to stand up for the environment, not just humans. 'nature needs not of man, but man needs much of nature'



nature will deliver the process has already begun for awhile now

faster and faster
Quoting 247. HurricaneHunterJoe:



Thought he did a pretty good job myself.


Of course you do because that's what CNN and NBC tell you.
Quoting 221. vanderwaalselectrics:



Your 'argument' appears to be that I am a tin foil hat and therefore what I am saying should be censored. Correct me if I am wrong.

Radical ideas are equally met with bias on so called skeptics sites, but I am not even going to go there, in part because it feeds into this notion that there are two acceptable positions on climate change, ghg warming and doubt, and not observations of change and different mechanism informed by doubt.

What surprises me is that there is no comments about the cross equator storms, and the implausible nature of these storms occurring on up tick with a green house gas theory given corioles, yet a directly electrical forcing on the cloud behaviors would be predicted. Why does this comment go to tin foil hat?

The teleconnections like ENSO are even more important to discuss, because it's a microcosm of the entire debate and the problems with it. It gets to how the ocean is coupled with the atmosphere and cloud behaviors. How about if it is framed in a question? Why do El Nino's die? What is creating the warm pool near Oz that is heading toward South America in the tropics? How do cold oceans cause this? In a math way, how does a cycle like a sine wave get explained in terms of the acceleration that is causing it? Eg minus a sine wave second derivative. During El Nino in the most lightning struck area on earth, the tropics, the tropics warm with El Nino and text book science is salt water becomes 1 percent more conductive with each deg F. That would be a positive acceleration that should increase the electrical intensity of what is occurring around the world. At the same time El Ninos END. Why??? Should they continue to couple to greater cloud cover? That is the green house gas argument, really. Instead it dies and now after the second 500 year El Nino since 1997 there is a La Nina? What is behind the change from one to another? My answer is that colder oceans hold more carbonation, so surface lows have less carbonation to organize them and increase cirrus cover in the tropics relative to the El Nino event and this causes less cirrus cloud heat trapping and the event ends. In contrast La Nina, colder SSTs, allow for greater decarbonation and for relative warming. This means that CO2 increased by human activity is a dependent variable on this electrical forcing and the net of the cycles is more decarbonation and more heat trapping cirrus getting produced. Comment, please, on what I am teaching rather than the foil on my head. Please attack my argument, not me.


Suppose you were to waltz into a convention of astronomers this afternoon and announce that the earth didn't rotate on its axis, but in reality the Titan god Helios arose from his golden palace in Oceanus every morning, had himself pulled across the sky on his chariot drawn by four winged steeds, then descended into a golden cup in the land of the Hesperides at the end of the day.

You'd not gain much traction. In fact, they'd likely laugh you out onto the street. But that wouldn't be censorship; it wouldn't be the "astronomy establishment" shutting down a "skeptic". It would be, simply, right.

Science moves ever forward, and that means a *lot* of illogical theories and ideas and postulates necessarily fall by the wayside. Your beloved "electric universe" pseudo-scientific idea is one such pieces of delusional jetsam. Robitaille has been proven an "untenable" and "completely wrong" crank. Ditto Talbott and Evans and Crothers.

Rising concentrations of human-caused CO2 are heating the planet in unprecedented ways. That's not true because a million scientists say it is (although they do), but rather because the overwhelming evidence says it is.

My suggestion: become a bit more skeptical of unbelievable theories.
Quoting 245. luvtogolf:



Being a man of color he had the platform to bridge gaps like this country has never seen before. But I totally agree with you, it was a complete failure and he's divided this country like most of us have never seen. But hey, he signed the Paris Agreement so we'll just salute him on top of his pedestal and ignore all the failures.

Nice piece of blaming a victim of racism, in this case the sitting PoTUS.
Quoting 243. StormTrackerScott:



The picks Trump selected are very solid picks and I think you will be surprised on how this Country will turn around from 8 years of chaos.

I love irony, even blunt US irony...
263. OKsky
Quoting 257. Patrap:



Indded, if a GOP one had got OBL,saved the economy, saved the CAr industry, Got healthcare for millions..they would be on the dime and Mt. Rushmore already.

Ignorant is no way to go thru life.

Truth and History determine the years.

What we see here is the complete programming of a Human by their respective choice of information..

# HugelySad


Don't forget... Obama is the anti-christ. (or at least that is the concern that a few people genuinely expressed to me with tears in their eyes). Also, he took our guns.... you can't just let him off the hook for that either.

(Since there are some slow people that like to hangout here, I will go ahead and explain that I am making fun of the stupid BS people just blindly believe)
The speech section I posted below basically makes common sense when you look into the future. The industrialized nations, who are the main carbon emitters, need to take the lead in tying to address climate change and to reduce greenhouse gasses. The smaller, poor, and un-industrialized nations and cultures of the world have a big stake in the process when you consider that they will suffer the most from drought and flooding issues (as well as fresh water issues) causing the climate change refugee issue that then falls back on the more powerful nations in terms of a humanitarian crisis.

It's a huge challenge for all of us but we have to face it head on as the earth, as related to weather and climate which crosses all borders, is actually a relatively small place and interconnected when it comes to temperature and oceans; ask any Astronaut that has gone up into orbit a circled the globe in the scope of a few hours..............
Quoting 259. luvtogolf:


Of course you do because that's what CNN and NBC tell you.


CNN and NBC did not tell me to support someone who makes fun of the disabled. I'm just curious- what media outlet should I blame for encouraging you to do that?
Welcome to Doom Con 6....it's the end of the world out there. And starting January 20th this blog will self destruct ;)
The Gop'hers come out here every time like they think this is a Briebart convention.

Never with science, but alway's just some coughed up hairball of a same minded Political group that dismiss facts as inconvenient.

JB at weatherbell we will never be..."here".

Science rues the day here.

Thats why this comment section, when it comes to weather and AGW, is second to NONE on the Intranet's.

#crankyoljarhead.
Quoting 259. luvtogolf:



Of course you do because that's what CNN and NBC tell you.


would you like to have an intelligent discussion on your opinions or would you rather make illogical, unsubstantiated claims about another person's opinions?

If you'll like to have an actual discussion, I'll ask my question again. What did Obama do directly during his presidency that you would consider a total failure?
Seems someone sliced a tee shot right into someones pond.

Sic um, doggie!


Grrrrrrrrr'

Been in lurking since Hurricane Matthew.

But I just have to say... cant wait for the post season analysis of Hurricane Matthew and Hurricane Hermine... they are going to be very interesting!

I wonder if they were underestimating Hurricane Matthews strength during its strike at Haiti.....

Cant wait!

Hope you are all having a nice day....

Kinda funny how bipolar our weather has been... 2 days ago we had snow on the ground... yesterday it warmed up to 50 degrees.... we had a severe thunderstorm warning LAST NIGHT and then thiss morning the roads were icy due to the rapid freeze from last night and now temperatures are going up to the 60s...

Mother Nature give Cincinnati a break! Lol.
I am back.

A few reasons why I was gone:
I got busy, especially after December 17th, 2016 (day of Winter Storm Ahriman).
I almost came back for Winter Storm Badrukk (January 5th, 2017), but I had other things to do that day.

Now, for why I am back.



As you can see, there are Winter Storm Watches to my west and northwest. I would expect to see a Winter Storm Watch for me later today. Once this happens, then the incoming winter storm for Friday will be named Calgar.

ICE accumulation graphic.


Looking forward to the post season upgrade of the RAIN with NO NAME that was the most expensive disaster in 2016.

13 Billion-15 Billion.

It won't add nada to the 2016 ACE though, as it formed over land.

Gee...that will b comforting to the Hundred thousand Humans who lost all.

That 7% mo WV globally is making a dent in the long termed History of many places rainfall.




And we add mo C02 every hour, 365 days a year, non stop.





Potential ice accumulation graphic from NWS Norman this morning...
Friday through Sunday.
">
Quoting 257. Patrap:



Indeed, if a GOP one had got OBL,saved the economy, saved the Auto industry, Got healthcare for millions..they would be on the dime and Mt. Rushmore already.

Ignorant is no way to go thru life.

Truth and History determine the years.

What we see here in the thread is the complete programming of some Humans by their respective choice of information..

# HugelySad


He saved the economy? He saved the car industry? You may want to go check out these claims as some of the credit goes to the last president (who I am no fan of)

You are correct though ignorant is no way to go through life.

There is a complete programming being done on both sides as proved by your comment. Sad indeed

Taking a Hour away from werk to watch this,er,PC with da PE.

Quoting 249. beell:

Accumulated precip by type.
00Z GFS (top), 00Z NAM (bottom).




(click for larger image(s)


There is no way I can get 1 inch of ICE. No. Fething. Way.

That's like 1/2 of the 2009 ICE Storm.
Quoting 221. vanderwaalselectrics:



Your 'argument' appears to be that I am a tin foil hat and therefore what I am saying should be censored. Correct me if I am wrong.


On a science driven blog with an explicit rule against monomania, yes. You've said your piece, multiple people pointed out flaws with your basic premise. You provide no physically consistent model, nor provide any links to reviewed research supporting your claims. Yet you continue. We've have had several people such as yourself follow the same obsessive pattern over some psuedo-scientific topic or another on this blog, hence why there's a rule against monomania.

Quoting 221. vanderwaalselectrics:
Radical ideas are equally met with bias on so called skeptics sites, but I am not even going to go there, in part because it feeds into this notion that there are two acceptable positions on climate change, ghg warming and doubt, and not observations of change and different mechanism informed by doubt.

What surprises me is that there is no comments about the cross equator storms, and the implausible nature of these storms occurring on up tick with a green house gas theory given corioles, yet a directly electrical forcing on the cloud behaviors would be predicted. Why does this comment go to tin foil hat?.


Because it's pure nonsense. You start with an incorrect assumption (cross-equator storms are impossible) and provide a completely unsubstantiated "electrical forcing" explanation without considering all the ramifications and consequences of said forcing. And that would be in addition to your fundamental premise that electron orbitals can have non-quantum states, which makes zero sense.

Quoting 221. vanderwaalselectrics:
The teleconnections like ENSO are even more important to discuss...


And then you proceed onward to ever more esoteric distractions without ever addressing the fundamental issues with your premise. This is the behavior I've seen on other science forums when a random crazy blows in and starts creating elaborate unsubstantiated hypotheses. When someone points out "well, that's not how it works" the crazy basically ignores them or creates some hand-wavery nonsense and continues on like nothing happened.

Quoting 221. vanderwaalselectrics:
Why do El Nino's die? What is creating the warm pool near Oz that is heading toward South America in the tropics? How do cold oceans cause this?


Amazingly, there's a whole branch of science dedicated to studying the ocean, it's currents, how it influences and interacts with the atmosphere, etc. Lots of books. Lots of research articles. There's even modeling code and data you can download run. Instead of trying to re-invent the wheel by claiming a square is more efficient, you could try researching why the wheel is round in the first place.

Quoting 221. vanderwaalselectrics:
In a math way, how does a cycle like a sine wave get explained in terms of the acceleration that is causing it? Eg minus a sine wave second derivative.


What are you even talking about? Trigonometric functions don't "accelerate" in math. They aren't temporal. That context is applied by physics. If you meant to imply the rate of change (first derivateive) or the rate of that change (second derivative), that's basic calculus.

Regardless, what does that have to do with anything you're talking about?

Quoting 221. vanderwaalselectrics:
During El Nino in the most lightning struck area on earth, the tropics, the tropics warm with El Nino and text book science is salt water becomes 1 percent more conductive with each deg F. That would be a positive acceleration that should increase the electrical intensity of what is occurring around the world. At the same time El Ninos END. Why???


No it isn't a positive acceleration. The ocean isn't a battery. Electrical discharges find the shortest path to ground. It doesn't matter if you have ten lightning strikes or a thousand. They dissipate pretty much instantly.

And again, there has been a considerable amount of research done on El Nino/La Nina. The simple answer is wind patterns. For more details feel free to dive into the deep end. But endlessly harping on an unsubstantiated hypothesis from a standpoint of ignorance certainly does nothing to help your case.

Quoting 221. vanderwaalselectrics:
Should they continue to couple to greater cloud cover? That is the green house gas argument, really. Instead it dies and now after the second 500 year El Nino since 1997 there is a La Nina? What is behind the change from one to another? My answer is that colder oceans hold more carbonation, so surface lows have less carbonation to organize them and increase cirrus cover in the tropics relative to the El Nino event and this causes less cirrus cloud heat trapping and the event ends. In contrast La Nina, colder SSTs, allow for greater decarbonation and for relative warming. This means that CO2 increased by human activity is a dependent variable on this electrical forcing and the net of the cycles is more decarbonation and more heat trapping cirrus getting produced.


And again, you're hypothesis makes no physical sense. There's plenty of REAL research on the topic. Try starting there.

Quoting 221. vanderwaalselectrics:

Comment, please, on what I am teaching rather than the foil on my head. Please attack my argument, not me.


I have commented on your naivety. I have commented on the flaws in your reasoning. I have pointed out the substantial holes in your hypotheses. So have others. And yet you insist on repeating the same nonsense. THAT is monomania, and yes that is against rules of the blog.
Quoting 272. Patrap:

Looking forward to the post season upgrade of the RAIN with NO NAME that was the most expensive disaster in 2016.

13 Billion-15 Billion.

It won't add nada to the 2016 ACE though, as it formed over land.

Gee...that will b comforting to the Hundred thousand Humans who lost all.

That 7% mo WV globally is making a dent in the long termed History of many places rainfall.




And we add mo C02 every hour, 365 days a year, non stop.








I'm predicting the NO NAME will be upgraded to a minimal TS, which should it get a name, would most likely get retired.
Quoting 278. Xyrus2000:

THAT is monomania, and yes that is against rules of the blog.


I second that!
Quoting 157. Qazulight:



Airport thermometers have been around for centuries? I know what you meant but it was too funny to pass up.



Leonardo knew that we would need thermometers at airports. :)
Listening to Trump's news conference. It sounds like a series of tweets. At least he is consistent.
Predict that "stream of consciousness" and "James Joyce" will peak on Google for the next four years.
Lord..

Geez.

What a derp dialect of nonsense.

Not one werd on Foreign Policy.

Not one.

On AGW, not one.

Tremendous things...?

A great Spirit?

Many people have told me.


geezy Peezy...


What a conceited Man.

And one not in touch with reality, in any sense.

Quoting 274. nymore:



He saved the economy? He saved the car industry? You may want to go check out these claims as some of the credit goes to the last president (who I am no fan of)

You are correct though ignorant is no way to go through life.

There is a complete programming being done on both sides as proved by your comment. Sad indeed




yes, O saved the auto industry. bush offered up a small amount that the auto companies themselves said wouldn't have been enough. in his defense, after TARP (which the GOP voted down the first time), neither he nor his party had the stomach to spend any more money. later the auto companies came back saying "we need a real bailout" and O started to push through the vast majority of the 85 or so billion that was spent bailing out the industry, around the time he pushed through the fiscal stimulus.
Quoting 248. elioe:



Lots of opinion pieces indeed. [...]
.

These scientists have contributed with their knowledge to
those "opinion pieces":

Alan Robock, Distinguished Professor of Climate Science at Rutgers University

Simon Redfern, Professor of Mineral Physics at the University of Cambridge, Department of Earth Sciences

Professor Ken Caldeira, Atmospheric scientist in the Department of Global Ecology at the Carnegie Institution at Stanford University. He also serves as a professor in Stanford’s Department of Environmental Earth System Science.

Professor Mark Lawrence, Managing Scientific Director at the Institute for Advanced Sustainability Studies (IASS)

Clive Hamilton, Professor of public ethics at Charles Sturt University in Canberra

Raymond T. Pierrehumbert, Halley Professor of Physics, University of Oxford

David Keith, Gordon McKay Professor of Applied Physics at Harvard’s John A. Paulson School of Engineering and Applied Sciences and Professor of Public Policy at the Harvard Kennedy School

Professor John Shepherd FRS Professorial Research Fellow in Earth System Science, University of Southampton.

Professor Ken Caldeira Director, Caldeira Lab, Carnegie Institution, USA.

Professor Peter Cox Professor of Climate System Dynamics, University of Exeter, UK.

Professor Joanna Haigh Head of Department of Physics, Professor of Atmospheric Physics,
Imperial College, London, UK.

Professor David Keith Canada Research Chair in Energy and the Environment, Director, ISEEE,
Energy and Environmental Systems Group, University of Calgary, Canada.

Professor Brian Launder FREng FRS Professor of Mechanical Engineering, University of Manchester, UK.

Professor Georgina Mace CBE FRS Director, NERC Centre for Population Biology, Division of Biology, Imperial College, London, UK.

Professor Gordon MacKerron Director, Science and Technology Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex, UK.

Professor John Pyle FRS 1920 Professor of Physical Chemistry, University of Cambridge, UK.

Professor Steve Rayner James Martin Professor of Science and Civilization, Director, Institute for Science, Innovation and Society, University of Oxford, UK.

Professor Catherine Redgwell Professor of International Law, University College London, UK.

Professor Andrew Watson FRS Professor of Environmental Sciences, University of East Anglia, UK.

Rachel Garthwaite Senior Policy Adviser, Environment, Energy and Climate Change.

James Wilsdon Director, Science Policy Centre.

Quoting 273. Barefootontherocks:

Potential ice accumulation graphic from NWS Norman this morning...
Friday through Sunday.
">


Looking a little better but not good enough.
Quoting 243. StormTrackerScott:



The picks Trump selected are very solid picks and I think you will be surprised on how this Country will turn around from 8 years of chaos.


Solid picks? Like Perry for DoE? Now there's a good idea. Let's put a complete idiot with zero experience in any of the fields of science in charge of the department responsible for nuclear materials, weapons, and advanced research. What could possibly go wrong?

The only pick that even remotely makes sense is for DHS. Everyone else is who's who of corruption, cronyism, and outright stupidity. They're not even popular among his supporters according to recent polls. But honestly, what were they expecting?
Quoting 287. Xyrus2000:



Solid picks? Like Perry for DoE? Now there's a good idea. Let's put a complete idiot with zero experience in any of the fields of science in charge of the department responsible for nuclear materials, weapons, and advanced research. What could possibly go wrong?

The only pick that even remotely makes sense is for DHS. Everyone else is who's who of corruption, cronyism, and outright stupidity. They're not even popular among his supporters according to recent polls. But honestly, what were they expecting?


hey now, ben carson is a good pick for housing and urban development because...well...he lives in a house, right?
Widening gaps between rich and poor, and old and young, are fueling feelings of resentment.
WEF said that while inequality between countries has been decreasing over the past 30 years, inequality within many developed nations -- including the U.S. and Britain -- has risen. The group pointed to Brexit and Trump's election as clear signs of a backlash against the status quo.

"Rapid changes of attitudes in areas such as gender, sexual orientation, race, multiculturalism, environmental protection and international cooperation have led many voters -- particularly the older and less-educated ones -- to feel left behind in their own countries," the WEF said in its annual risk report.
Did Putin help elect Trump to restore $500 billion Exxon oil deal killed by sanctions

Follow the money: Will Trump repay Putin by ending Russian sanctions and killing the Paris climate deal?


Russia’s $500 billion oil deal with Exxon was killed by U.S. sanctions. No doubt coincidentally, drilling In the Russian Arctic would be easier if warming-driven sea ice melt continued. CREDIT: Wall Street Journal, 9/11/2014.


When was the last time we saw a atty at PE PC?

Lordy, a 2 Billion dollar deal with a Guy named Hussein?

LOL

Yeah....we in uncharted derpville beaucoup cher.

Here's a Surface map.

Enjoy

Totally weird. Trump has to have a spokeswoman address potential conflicts of interest. Of course, this is without actually releasing any plan.
Also, here are my predictions for names retiring.
Alex (5%)
Bonnie (0%)
Colin (20%)
Danielle (10%)
Earl [20%]
Fiona [0%]
Gaston [30%]
Hermine [50-60%]
Ian [0%]
Julia [20%]
Karl [0%]
Lisa [0%]
Matthew [100%]
Nicole [70%]
Otto [50%]
Quoting 289. RitaEvac:

Widening gaps between rich and poor, and old and young, are fueling feelings of resentment.
WEF said that while inequality between countries has been decreasing over the past 30 years, inequality within many developed nations -- including the U.S. and Britain -- has risen. The group pointed to Brexit and Trump's election as clear signs of a backlash against the status quo.

"Rapid changes of attitudes in areas such as gender, sexual orientation, race, multiculturalism, environmental protection and international cooperation have led many voters -- particularly the older and less-educated ones -- to feel left behind in their own countries," the WEF said in its annual risk report.


Corporate interests, which is the driving force between current global inequality issues and common folks being left behind in the name of a "global economy" crosses all borders...........In a nutshell, we are basically headed towards "Rollerball" where corporate entities matter more than the individual nation state (or their individual citizens)....................................
This could be some good news for the Sierra Nevada to get a solid snowpack along the mountain ranges. Still a little over a week out. But this is an encouraging run.



A waterway along the Tuolumne River. Such beautiful landscape and topography.

Quoting 282. daddyjames:

Listening to Trump's news conference. It sounds like a series of tweets. At least he is consistent.
Predict that "stream of consciousness" and "James Joyce" will peak on Google for the next four years.


But Finnegan's Wake is more coherent than Trump's tweets.
number one reason trump is going to be president is the obama care mandate. many people are tired of the IRS hitting their returns for lack of insurance.
Quoting 297. islander101010:

number one reason trump is going to be president is the obama care mandate. many people are tired of the IRS hitting their returns for lack of insurance.


unfortunately the mandate is necessary to get the popular stuff to work, like community rating, guaranteed issue, subsidies, and ending recission.

ETA: maybe not subsidies. likely separable.
A different perspective on Trump's tweets.
Well I was going to post about how nice the temperatures are where I am, but um



Quoting 297. islander101010:

number one reason trump is going to be president is the obama care mandate. many people are tired of the IRS hitting their returns for lack of insurance.


That and lots of blue-collar workers believe his message of helping their industries doing more in the US. Also lots of people are unhappy with amnesty and sanctuary cities in the SW, whether or not they think the wall is a dumb idea or not.
Quoting 295. GTstormChaserCaleb:

This could be some good news for the Sierra Nevada to get a solid snowpack along the mountain ranges. Still a little over a week out. But this is an encouraging run.



A waterway along the Tuolumne River. Such beautiful landscape and topography.



Definitely good news for Sierra snowpack if it comes true which is already at 158% of normal for this date Link
303. elioe
Quoting 285. Xandra:



Opinion pieces, most often, have some factual information included in them. But, hopefully no-one here really thinks, that every word and sentence a scientist types out of his/her keyboard has automatically the status of a solid scientific fact. And thanks for listing these authorities.

And the writers, as well as the ones they quote, indeed are in very advanced and respected situations. Environmentalists are currently controlling the tone of discussion in scientific community. If one of those listed would speak in such a tone like "hey, perhaps something else than unconditional reversion to natural state, or as close to it as possible, should be considered as an equal option as eventual outcome", career and reputation among colleagues could exhibit a serious backlash.

Coming back to the point where the entire discussion started:
Really... Doesn't anyone else see it disturbing, that a journalist in scientific magazine calls an entire field of research as "controversial", while revealing, that there has indeed been peer pressure for scientists to refrain from such studies? It is clear for me, that for ideological reasons, "dogmatically untrue" results shouldn't be allowed to exist among climatological studies.
Tillerson on climate: Increase in atmospheric ghg is having an effect, but "our ability to predict that effect is very limited."
Professor Martin Bunzl:

"You can test a vaccine on one person, putting that person at risk, without putting everyone else at risk. But with geoengineering, You can’t build a scale model of the atmosphere or tent off part of the atmosphere. As such you are stuck going directly from a model to full scale planetary-wide implementation. In short, you could not conduct meaningful tests of these technologies without enlisting billions of people as guinea pigs—for years".

So much water in CA heading out to the ocean completely belies the argument that you couldn't build more storage to provide for both environmental and industrial purposes. The mantra we heard during the drought that "It will take many wet years to refill these reservoirs" when here not two years removed from a historic drought on the heels of an average year and in the beginning of a wet year many of our reservoirs including our largest are spilling flood flows some of which were doing so the previous year as well. The next argument will be "well it will take 20 years just to build one" and 20 years from now we will ask why we didn't do so 20 years ago.
Same idiots different day

No learning curve with the media and pollsters, apparently they haven't figured out polls were....WRONG

CNN Politics
January 11, 2017 12:53pm

"Trump says public doesn't care 'at all' about his taxes
But his comment is directly contradicted by most major public polls on the issue. A CNN poll from October found 86% of registered voters said they see paying taxes as every American's civic duty."
All the risks of climate change, in a single graph
There are a lot of them.


Updated by David Roberts@drvoxdavid@vox.com Jan 9, 2017, 8:40am EST

The risks of climate change are not easy to communicate clearly. Since the atmosphere affects everything, everything will be affected by its warming — there’s no single risk, but a wide and varied array of risks, of different severities and scales, affecting different systems, unfolding on different timelines. It’s difficult to convey to a layperson, at least without droning on and on.

One of the better-known and more controversial attempts to address this problem is a graphic from the reports by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. The so-called “burning embers” graph attempts to render the various risks of climate change — “reasons for concern,” or RFCs — in an easy-to-grasp visual form.

In a new paper in the journal Nature Climate Change, a group of 17 scholars examines the RFC conceptual framework and reviews the latest science. (Because IPCC reports take so long to produce, the science they contain is always a few years behind.)

Long story short, they find that the graphic is generally accurate (though it has key limitations). They offer suggestions for how the RFC framework could be extended in the future to “better account for possible changes in social and ecological system vulnerability.”

I won’t get into the details — I just want to have a look at their new and improved burning-embers graph, which is up at the top of this post.

As you can see, there is a ton of information about the risks of climate change crammed in there, so it’s worth unpacking a bit. It offers a remarkably coherent overview of the various risks that lie ahead this century.


Quoting 296. JohnLonergan:


But Finnegan's Wake is more coherent than Trump's tweets.

Jabberwocky, anyone?

Weather-wise, 40F here with light rain, temperature expected to drop today with a turn to snow. Snowing of course in the mountains; skiers are haaaapppy.
Meanwhile we have armchair climate change experts on here, lol. People like to talk, talk, talk, talk, but....just can't seem to take action. In other words...your all, S. O. L.

And that would be in addition to your fundamental premise that electron orbitals can have non-quantum states, which makes zero sense.



The van der waals attractive forces are not covalent bonds. Look it up. It's a weak polar electrical attraction or repulsion of water which is how it freezes or liquefies depending on temperature.



And then you proceed onward to ever more esoteric distractions without ever addressing the fundamental issues with your premise. Wow! That's what I am saying about the warmers and so called skeptics. Yet I refrain from calling for censorship because I don't agree.


Amazingly, there's a whole branch of science dedicated to studying the ocean, it's currents, how it influences and interacts with the atmosphere, etc.
There was a lot of research dedicated to complex patterns of how the sun orbited the earth, and a lot of bullies who worked very hard to make sure everyone was reading that material instead of any other views.


Regardless, what does [the second derivative of sine] that have to do with anything you're talking about


The green house gas theory is premised on CO2 warming the earth in a basically linear fashion. The first derivative of that would be generally a constant with zero acceleration. But what is observed is up and down--the best teleconnection to speak about this is ENSO, particularly when there are two 500 year events (1997-8 and 2015-16} back to back..


research done on El Nino/La Nina. The simple answer is wind patterns.


Simple answers do not always work with complex problems. Remember the movie Twister? The scientists studying the storms put measuring balls inside the tornado to try to understand them. But what if there is an electrical complexity to how they behave? This is what Charles Chandler thinks: http://charles-chandler.org/Geophysics/Tornadoes.p hp?text=full

It turns out by observation that during La Ninas there are more tornadoes in the alley. Why? Winds ONLY as you suggest. Let me frame it in a question. When I walk across the carpet and touch you and there is a static ZAP! -- would there be the same result if I had not walked across the carpet and touched you? What is going on with the SOI index when it rises and correlates to severe storms and tornadoes in the CONUS?

Quoting 222. Xyrus2000:



They're an interesting phenomena. In my opinion they lend some credibility to hypothetical conjectures regarding our universe being a hyper dimensional/"holographic" projection of some sort. Like how you're a 4 dimensional object, but your shadow is only 3 dimensions.

If you remove the constraints of "normal" thinking about space and time, some of the "WTF?" phenomena we see is more easily explainable. Take quantum entanglement. In our "normal" universe we see quantum entanglement as "spooky". That's because we perceive two particles separated by distance instantly being known simply by observing them.

The thing is, that's just how it happens to appear when "projected" on our universe. Much like how your shadow can appear to be 30 feet tall when project but you're actually only 6 feet tall. In the hyper-dimensional plane of these particles, they may not even be physically separated at all.

Think of it like a hyper-dimensional coin. When we "split" the particles in our universe, this does the equivalent of flicking this coin to make it spin. When we observe one of the particles, it's the equivalent of slamming your hand down on the hyper-dimensional coin to make it stop. Now we know know which side is facing up or down. But in our universe it appears as if two quantum particles went flying apart from one another but instantly became know when one was measured.

Interesting and fun things to think about, but needless to say not exactly trivial to test. The machine needed to detect gravitational waves was a major engineering undertaking and achievement. It wouldn't surprise if that level of skill will be needed to flesh out any of the more hypothetical models of our universe.

In February of 2016, scientist detected, or observed, gravitational waves for the first time. I postulate, similar to that of the famous double slit experiment, that gravitational waves are waves of probability, and the detection of these waves caused the the wave function to collapse and thus bombarding us with particles of space-time, which, skewed us right into an alternate reality where nothing makes sense anymore. I call this weird reality the "Alt Right Reality".
Quoting 307. civEngineer:

So much water in CA heading out to the ocean completely belies the argument that you couldn't build more storage to provide for both environmental and industrial purposes. The mantra we heard during the drought that "It will take many wet years to refill these reservoirs" when here not two years removed from a historic drought on the heels of an average year and in the beginning of a wet year many of our reservoirs including our largest are spilling flood flows some of which were doing so the previous year as well. The next argument will be "well it will take 20 years just to build one" and 20 years from now we will ask why we didn't do so 20 years ago.


If you assume that the earth is alive and the rivers are like arteries, as I do, that help modulate earth chemistry and temperature, then the engineering if it is to serve both modulations and human demands, must include consideration of the electrical feedbacks that occur and how river changes alter those feedbacks or there will be no water to capture.
I like the discussion going on between Xandra and elioe. Sure they disagree, but the back-and-forth is informative and civil. Have either of you considered doing a blog on this topic? I for one would enjoy reading both of them! Couple of questions for elioe from his earlier posts:

Quoting 248. elioe:

(snip)

- Artificial thickening of Antarctic ice shelves. Looking at radiation balance alone: if seawater was sprayed on top of Ross and Ronne ice shelves for 180 days each Southern winter, the amount of ice could increase by at least 3000 km³ each year. Majority of those ice shelves would become grounded within a century, so that most of the extra ice is off the ocean volume. Not accounting for the reduced flow of glaciers behind those ice shelves. Best of all: the process would generate its own power, perhaps even electricity for other consumption.

What do you mean by 'the process would generate its own power, perhaps even electricity for other consumption'? (sorry if it's obvious)

Quoting 303. elioe:


(snip)

It is clear for me, that for ideological reasons, "dogmatically untrue" results shouldn't be allowed to exist among climatological studies.

I'm not sure what you're referring to in regards to '"dogmatically untrue" results'. Can you clarify this a bit?

Quoting 315. vanderwaalselectrics:



If you assume that the earth is alive and the rivers are like arteries, as I do, that help modulate earth chemistry and temperature, then the engineering if it is to serve both modulations and human demands, must include consideration of the electrical feedbacks that occur and how river changes alter those feedbacks or there will be no water to capture.

Well if that's the case the Earth is suffering from cancer, and that being us.
319. OKsky
Quoting 315. vanderwaalselectrics:



If you assume that the earth is alive and the rivers are like arteries, as I do, that help modulate earth chemistry and temperature, then the engineering if it is to serve both modulations and human demands, must include consideration of the electrical feedbacks that occur and how river changes alter those feedbacks or there will be no water to capture.


....but what does it mean if you assume that all balloon animals are alive? You have to keep them in consideration because of the static build up if you rub them the wrong way under certain conditions.

Next Thursday thru next Saturday should be very active across FL "IF" these models hold true. This pattern could hold true even past the mentioned timeframe below too so something to really watch as possibly some excessive rains across FL. Euro showing 6" to 8" across Tampa with 5" amount in Orlando is something we haven't seen forecast since Hurricane Matthew in early October of 2016.

Thursday


Friday


Saturday
Quoting 303. elioe:



Coming back to the point where the entire discussion started:
Really... Doesn't anyone else see it disturbing, that a journalist in scientific magazine calls an entire field of research as "controversial", while revealing, that there has indeed been peer pressure for scientists to refrain from such studies? It is clear for me, that for ideological reasons, "dogmatically untrue" results shouldn't be allowed to exist among climatological studies.


No, because the controversy does exist in the scientific community. So the journalist is only reporting accurately what exists within that scientific community.

Would you care to expound upon your last statement?

Your assertions - for example listing all the possible ways of geoengineering - often lacks any attribution to any studies that have been actually been done.

For example, "seeding" of the oceans. Yes it has been done, but there is no significant evidence that indeed it could and would work. In fact, results have been mixed with essentially little demonstration of any carbon actually being sequestered. If you could point me to any paper that demonstrates that it was effectively sequestered, much appreciated.

The amounts of CO2 that would be removed - even in the best scenario - would not even come close to matching that currently being released annually into the atmosphere. So, in essence, it (and many of the other techniques mentioned) would only be beneficial in conjunction with reductions of CO2 from emissions.

Edit: corrected some grammar and spelling errors.
Warming quickly in S C IL, was 46 at noon, now 55. Started at 30 this a.m., little black ice on my street, hit accel coming out of lane and little unexpected power slide to right. Very overcast, was foggy at lunch, changed to drizzle coming back as winds picked up a little, now 8-10 S w/ a 23 gust, pressure dropping, at 29.71". Current forecast has the worst of the ice mainly S of I-70, but looked at an hourly for Sat. calling for foggy conditions, but temps shown below freezing. At least at this point, accumulations seem to be backing off a bit, hope that trend continues. Long range still has next work week in mid 40s to mid 50s w/ lows at or above freezing, so any that develops won't be around long.

We were only about 53-54 yesterday, but StL tied its all time daily high of 68 from 1890. They also said across the River in Alton a 71 mph gust was recorded, although nowhere else was above 50s. Back to work and lurk.

Edit : now 57 & avg wind now 11-12, say 58 for high, but at this rate...
Quoting 313. vanderwaalselectrics:



The green house gas theory is premised on CO2 warming the earth in a basically linear fashion.


Um, its logarithmic.
It's spring time here again in Mobile Al. Highs in the mid 70's and lows in the upper 50's for the next week I have lived here for 40 years and have never seen such long stretches of above normal temperatures during the winter.
Quoting 293. Famoguy1234:

Also, here are my predictions for names retiring.
Alex (5%)
Bonnie (0%)
Colin (20%)
Danielle (10%)
Earl [20%]
Fiona [0%]
Gaston [30%]
Hermine [50-60%]
Ian [0%]
Julia [20%]
Karl [0%]
Lisa [0%]
Matthew [100%]
Nicole [70%]
Otto [50%]



Nicole I think pretty slim. The damage in Bermuda was remarkably moderate.
326. elioe
Quoting 317. LAbonbon:

I like the discussion going on between Xandra and elioe. Sure they disagree, but the back-and-forth is informative and civil. Have either of you considered doing a blog on this topic? I for one would enjoy reading both of them! Couple of questions for elioe from his earlier posts:


I've done one geoengineering blog so far, but I've been too lazy to continue. I have many ideas, from which to do blogs. Some day :)

Quoting 317. LAbonbon:

What do you mean by 'the process would generate its own power, perhaps even electricity for other consumption'? (sorry if it's obvious)


Well, it goes very technical. Typical water temperature beneath the ice shelf is -1.8 degrees Celsius, typical air temperature above is -30 degrees Celsius during July. First, compress the air, so that its temperature rises from -30 to -1.8 (isentropic compression). Second, run the compressed air through a series of turbines, while continuing to keep it at -1.8 degrees Celsius by injecting seawater from beneath the ice (isothermal expansion), until the pressure of the air is again the same as in environment. If this was a closed cycle, the last step would be isobaric loss of heat. But since the loss of heat happens, after the air has left the power plant, the heat-to-power efficiency will exceed the theoretical maximum of a closed cycle, being capable of reaching 0.95. In one year, this process could generate some 250 trillion kilowatt-hours of power, of which less than 0.1% is consumed by the pumping of seawater.

Quoting 317. LAbonbon:

I'm not sure what you're referring to in regards to '"dogmatically untrue" results'. Can you clarify this a bit?




In environmentalism, natural state has a great intristic value. For general public to "buy" the action favored by environmentalists, disruptions to "natural state" like geoengineering have to be portrayed in a manner, which gets the public to think, that such schemes have mainly negative consequences for humans. So, if a study was to show, that a certain geoengineering scheme would have primarily positive consequences, it wouldn't fit the environmentalist way of communication.
Quoting 198. riverat544:

From the hills* of South Salem, Oregon. We had a snow flurry this evening that put down about 1/4 inch of snow, fast enough to cover the traffic lane on the road in front of my house. Forecast calls for up to an inch of snow overnight and tomorrow morning and freezing or below until Saturday. But we're getting off easy. I heard of forecast of up to 15 inches of snow in the upper Hood River valley tonight and 10 inches in Bend which has over a foot on the ground already.

What's unusual is that we've been getting snow in the Willamette Valley on and off for several weeks in a row. That doesn't happen very often.

*The reason I say "hills" is that I'm around 300 feet above the valley floor which makes a difference. It's around 180 feet along the river in downtown Salem and 210 feet at the airport. My home is about 490 feet. For example it's pretty common for there to be thick fog on the valley floor when it's bright and sunny at home.


From 40 miles to the north (Tualatin, south Portland) we have 4". Snow/sleet started on commute home. Finally stopped an hour ago. Seeing pictures on news of Koehler Park (across from office) has 10-12". So glad I can work from home. We're not due to be above freezing until Saturday - so we'll have these conditions for a while. All of Portland is shut down - we have few plows, and are trying salt here for the first time. This the coldest/snowiest winter here in decades. (I blame it on new coworkers that moved here from FL.)
Quoting 318. washingaway:


Well if that's the case the Earth is suffering from cancer, and that being us.


More like bacteria that produce toxins.
JeffMasters has created a new entry.
Quoting 326. elioe:



I've done one geoengineering blog so far, but I've been too lazy to continue. I have many ideas, from which to do blogs. Some day :)



Well, it goes very technical. Typical water temperature beneath the ice shelf is -1.8 degrees Celsius, typical air temperature above is -30 degrees Celsius during July. First, compress the air, so that its temperature rises from -30 to -1.8 (isentropic compression). Second, run the compressed air through a series of turbines, while continuing to keep it at -1.8 degrees Celsius by injecting seawater from beneath the ice (isothermal expansion), until the pressure of the air is again the same as in environment. If this was a closed cycle, the last step would be isobaric loss of heat. But since the loss of heat happens, after the air has left the power plant, the heat-to-power efficiency will exceed the theoretical maximum of a closed cycle, being capable of reaching 0.95. In one year, this process could generate some 250 trillion kilowatt-hours of power, of which less than 0.1% is consumed by the pumping of seawater.



In environmentalism, natural state has a great intristic value. For general public to "buy" the action favored by environmentalists, disruptions to "natural state" like geoengineering have to be portrayed in a manner, which gets the public to think, that such schemes have mainly negative consequences for humans. So, if a study was to show, that a certain geoengineering scheme would have primarily positive consequences, it wouldn't fit the environmentalist way of communication.


What about the energy required to compress the air?
Quoting 214. swflurker:

I, personally, have put away a lot of saved daylight. Keeping them for a raining day which has not happened here in SW FL for awhile.


Quoting 189. washingaway:

Why do we save daylight in the summertime when the days are already longer? Shouldn't we save that daylight for the winter when the days are shorter?

You two are a hoot.
Quoting 227. Xandra:

So in the end, geoengineering is a lose-lose scenario. It’s a scientific pipe dream. We will not be able to “science” our way out of a climate collapse.


What I see in this discussion is two different ways of thinking - engineer versus scientist.
Engineers are generally trained optimists, with a tendency to construct and build up, that's their job.
Scientists are observers, applying different angles of approach to an issue and thus considering much more elements of influence.
Engineers will look for visible results, whereas scientists will look for answers, helpful or not.
So there is no way that both will agree on a thing like geo-engineering.
Quoting 323. daddyjames:



Um, its logarithmic.


Okay. Read paper.

It's talking about outgoing long wave radiation that INCLUDES cloud behavior--how clouds trap or release heat.

El Nino and the measurement of it, namely a coupled discussion between how the ocean behaves by temperatures and winds, has a dynamics part.

I am not disagreeing with the earth average temperature right now is behaving the way that this paper is stating. What I am saying is that there is a constant increase in green house gas CO2. That's the input. And that the MECHANISM is not CO2 as a green house gas amplified a heat trapping gas on cloud behaviors but instead it's directly in the clouds and changes how they trap or release heat. And if you look at the oceans during a full blow El Nino in the tropics there is a strong signal of CO2 removed from the oceans because the oceans hold less CO2 the warmer they become. That CO2 in the oceans are removed from the oceans from surface lows and that CO2, additionally, gets into clouds and has an electrical meaning in how the clouds behave, how they produce cirrus clouds that trap or release heat on orders of scale above CO2 as a green house gas. What you then see is a cyclical behavior of El Nino, with a DEPENDANT relationship of higher cO2 from human activity in the active biosphere.

This paper is tortured because it's looking at spectrums of heat trapping from CO2, looking at the statics of the phenomenon, when it's a dynamical system with kinetic expressions of energy as well as heat trapping expressions. The sun is orbiting the earth kind of model. Again there is a slow steady increase (linear) of human related CO2 pumped into the atmosphere and what is the behavior observed? Two massive back to back 500 year El Ninos followed by La Ninas. This is cyclical, not logarithmic. No I agree observationally that there is average warming, and OLR emissions may be moving as a log function, but that doesn't mean that the present movement can be used to predict future behaviors if mechanism is wrong. And for the record I think non linear super storms are coming. That as ice is placed on land north of Washington, as was in the past when glacial storms raged, that the oceans become more saline and hence more conductive, and then the hydrates melt in the region and storms will rage for about 10 years until a new equilibrium is reached to be followed by much colder and drier climate. Billions will die or be displaced.
Quoting 326. elioe:


In environmentalism, natural state has a great (edit)intrinsic value. For general public to "buy" the action favored by environmentalists, disruptions to "natural state" like geoengineering have to be portrayed in a manner, which gets the public to think, that such schemes have mainly negative consequences for humans. So, if a study was to show, that a certain geoengineering scheme would have primarily positive consequences, it wouldn't fit the environmentalist way of communication.


"Mainly" and "primarily" is good enough for engineers, but not for nature - the consequences of side effects are possibly too heavy. Engineering can't provide for those little wing-clapping butterflies that may or may not cause a lot of trouble. Engineering doesn't take the complexity of natural systems into account.