WunderBlog Archive » Category 6™

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

Top Ten Tropical Cyclone Events of 2016 Potentially Influenced by Climate Change

By: Jeff Masters 4:19 PM GMT on December 27, 2016

Tropical cyclones—which include all hurricanes, typhoons, tropical storms and tropical depressions—are expected to change in intensity, frequency, location, and seasonality as a result of climate change. Many of the tropical cyclones of 2016 exhibited the type of behavior we expect to see more of due to global warming. Here, then, is a “top ten” list of 2016 tropical cyclone events of the type we should expect to see more of due to global warming.

Examples of the strongest storms getting stronger
Tropical cyclones are heat engines which extract heat energy from the oceans and convert it to the kinetic energy of the storms' winds. Thus, the strongest tropical cyclones are expected to get stronger in a world with warmer oceans. It was not a surprise that in 2016—a year with the warmest ocean temperatures on record, globally—we saw the strongest storms ever observed in the two of the six ocean basins that tropical cyclones commonly occur in. If we include the Northern Hemisphere’s strongest tropical cyclone on record—Hurricane Patrica of October 2015—records have been set in three of the six ocean basins over the past two years. The two all-time record storms in 2016 were Tropical Cyclone Winston in the South Pacific (180 mph winds, tied for strongest Southern Hemisphere storm on record) and Tropical Cyclone Fantala in the South Indian Ocean (175 mph winds.) With the upgrade of Super Typhoon Nock-Ten in post-analysis to Category 5 strength, 2016 also saw eight Category 5 storms, which was the fifth greatest on record (since 1990.)


Figure 1. Global Category 5 tropical cyclones from 1990 - 2016, as rated by NOAA's National Hurricane Center and the U.S. Navy's Joint Typhoon Warning Center. This time series is too short to make definitive conclusions about how climate change may be affecting these storms, though the past three years have had the highest 3-year total of Category 5 storms on record. The eight Category 5 storms of 2016 was the fifth highest yearly total on record.

Two of the Top Five Landfalling Tropical Cyclones Occurred in 2016
In addition, 2016 also saw two of the top five strongest landfalling tropical cyclones ever recorded—Super Typhoon Meranti with 190 mph winds on the Philippines’ Itbayat Island (tied for Earth’s strongest landfall on record), and Tropical Cyclone Winston with 180 mph winds at landfall in Fiji (the 5th strongest tropical cyclone at landfall in recorded history.) As we blogged about in August, landfalling typhoons have become more intense since late 1970s, with the peak winds of typhoons striking the region increasing by 12 - 15% since 1977. “The projected ocean surface warming pattern under increasing greenhouse gas forcing suggests that typhoons striking eastern mainland China, Taiwan, Korea and Japan will intensify further,” wrote the authors of the study we blogged about. “Given disproportionate damages by intense typhoons, this represents a heightened threat to people and properties in the region.”


Figure 2. The most intense world tropical cyclones at landfall, using the advisories taken from the National Hurricane Center in the Atlantic and Eastern Pacific, and the Joint Typhoon Warning Center (JTWC) for the rest of the world's oceans. Both agencies use 1-minute averaging times for their advisories, as opposed to the 10-minute averaging time used to report wind speeds by most international weather agencies and at most international airports. Two of the top five strongest landfalling tropical cyclones ever recorded occurred in 2016: Super Typhoon Meranti and Tropical Cyclone Winston. (Note that Super Typhoon Haiyan was originally assessed to have 195 mph winds at landfall by JTWC, but these were reduced to 190 mph after a post-season reanalysis. Also, Hurricane Camille's winds at landfall have also been reduced in a recent reanalysis, from 190 mph to 175 mph, as were Tropical Cyclone Winston’s winds, from 185 mph to 180 mph.)

February 20: Cyclone Winston Ties for Southern Hemisphere’s Strongest Tropical Cyclone on Record (180 mph Winds)
Just four months after the Northern Hemisphere experienced its strongest tropical cyclone on record—Hurricane Patrica of October 2015, with peak winds of 215 mph off the Pacific coast of Mexico—the Southern Hemisphere answered the challenge by spawning its strongest tropical cyclone ever recorded: Tropical Cyclone Winston, which topped out with 180 mph sustained winds at its peak intensity at 06 UTC February 20. These winds are tied for the highest for any Southern Hemisphere tropical cyclone ever rated by the Joint Typhoon Warning Center (JTWC), along with Cyclone Zoe of 2002 and Cyclone Monica of 2006. Winston's lowest central pressure as estimated by the Fiji Meteorological Service was 915 mb at 06 UTC February 20. This ranks Winston as the 29th most intense tropical cyclone in the Southern Hemisphere by pressure (the record lowest pressure is 890 mb by Cyclone Zoe of 2002.) Winston's top winds were higher than its central pressure might imply because it was a relatively small cyclone, so the wind-generating difference in pressure was packed into a small area. Winston’s landfall on Koro Island in Fiji with 180 mph winds puts Winston in fifth place for Earth's strongest landfalling tropical cyclone on record. Winston killed 44 people in Fiji and did $1.4 billion in damage (32% of Fiji's GDP), making it Fiji’s deadliest and most expensive cyclone in recorded history. Winston’s intensity was aided by ocean temperatures that were more than 1°C (1.8°F) warmer than average.


Figure 3. VIIRS infrared image of Tropical Cyclone Winston at 0057 UTC February 20, 2016. At the time, Winston was the strongest storm ever recorded in the Southern Hemisphere, with sustained winds of 180 mph. Fiji’s Koro Island is in the eye. Image credit: NOAA/NESDIS.

April 18: Fantala Ties for Strongest Tropical Cyclone on Record for the Indian Ocean
Tropical Cyclone Fantala intensified to a Category 5 storm with 175 mph winds (as estimated by the Joint Typhoon Warning Center) north of Madagascar on April 18, 2016, making the cyclone as strong as any on record anywhere in the Indian Ocean. Fantala is tied with Tropical Cyclone Agnielle as the strongest cyclone ever observed in the Southwest Indian Ocean. Fantala and Agnielle both top the record holder for the North Indian Ocean (Super Cyclonic Storm Gonu, June 2007, peak 1-minute winds of 165 mph). Reliable satellite-based records for the Indian Ocean only go back to 1990. Note that some consider Tropical Cyclone Monica (180 mph winds) as the strongest Indian Basin storm. Definitions vary on the boundary of the Indian Ocean, though, and Monica reached peak strength north of Australia in the Arafura Sea, which is considered by several sources, including the CIA World Factbook, to be part of the western Pacific Ocean, not the Indian Ocean. Fantala did $4.5 million in damage to Agaléga, Seychelles, Madagascar and Tanzania, and killed thirteen people in Tanzania. Fantala’s intensity was aided by ocean temperatures that were more than 1°C (1.8°F) warmer than average.


Figure 4. A visible image of Tropical Cyclone Fantala collected at 1025Z (6:25 am EDT) on April 18, 2016, by the Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) sensor on board the Aqua satellite. The north tip of Madagascar can be seen at bottom. At the time, Fantala was the strongest tropical cyclone ever observed in the Indian Ocean, with winds estimated at 175 mph. Image credit: NASA.

September 13: Super Typhoon Meranti Ties for Strongest Tropical Cyclone on Record at Landfall (190 mph Winds)
Super Typhoon Meranti made a direct hit on the Philippines’ Itbayat Island on September 13, 2016 as a Category 5 storm with 190 mph winds, tying the storm with Super Typhoon Haiyan (2013) for strongest tropical cyclone at landfall in world recorded history. Meranti’s peak 190 mph winds tied it for tenth strongest tropical cyclone in world history (by 1-minute averaged wind speed), according to the “best-track” data from the Joint Typhoon Warning Center and the National Hurricane Center. In addition, Meranti's 890 mb central pressure made it the seventeenth strongest tropical cyclone on record, by pressure. Meranti’s intensity was aided by ocean temperatures that were more than 1°C (1.8°F) warmer than average.

Officially, here are the top-ten strongest tropical cyclones in world history as rated by NOAA's National Hurricane Center and the U.S. Navy's Joint Typhoon Warning Center, by maximum sustained winds:

1) Hurricane Patricia (2015), 215 mph winds (the only Eastern Pacific storm on this list)
2) Super Typhoon Nancy (1961), 215 mph winds, 882 mb. Made landfall as a Cat 2 in Japan, killing 191 people.
3) Super Typhoon Violet (1961), 205 mph winds, 886 mb pressure. Made landfall in Japan as a tropical storm, killing 2 people.
4) Super Typhoon Ida (1958), 200 mph winds, 877 mb pressure. Made landfall as a Cat 1 in Japan, killing 1269 people.
5) Super Typhoon Haiyan (2013), 195 mph winds, 895 mb pressure. Made landfall in the Philippines with 190 mph winds.
5) Super Typhoon Kit (1966), 195 mph winds, 880 mb. Did not make landfall.
5) Super Typhoon Sally (1964), 195 mph winds, 895 mb. Made landfall as a Cat 4 in the Philippines.
5) Super Typhoon Opal (1964), 195 mph winds
5) Super Typhoon Joan (1959), 195 mph winds
10) Super Typhoon Meranti (2016), 190 mph winds, 890 mb pressure.
10) Super Typhoon Tip (1979), 190 mph winds
10) Super Typhoon Vera (1959), 190 mph winds
10) Super Typhoon Louise/Marge (1964), 190 mph winds
10) Hurricane Allen (1980), 190 mph winds (the only Atlantic storm on this list)

However, it is now recognized (Black 1992) that the maximum sustained winds estimated for typhoons during the 1940s to 1960s were too strong, which would make Meranti of 2016 the third strongest reliably measured tropical cyclone in recorded history for the planet.


Figure 5. At 17:32 UTC September 13, 2016, the eye of Super Typhoon Meranti lay directly over the Philippines’ Itbayat Island, as seen in this infrared VIIRS image. Itbayat recorded sustained winds of 112 mph (10-minute average) and a pressure of 934 mb at 1 am local time, 32 minutes prior to this image. At the time, Meranti was a Category 5 storm with 190 mph winds and a central pressure of 890 mb, and was tied for strongest tropical cyclone at landfall in world recorded history.

Examples of a longer tropical cyclone season in 2016
We might expect tropical cyclone seasons to get longer in the future, due to warming ocean temperatures. The Atlantic hurricane season does appear to be getting longer in the Atlantic south of 30°N and east of 75°W, according to a 2008 paper by Dr. James Kossin of the University of Wisconsin. A 2016 analysis by Dr. Ryan Truchelut of WeatherTiger also supported this idea. However, Juliana Karloski and Clark Evans of the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee found no trend in tropical cyclone formation dates when looking at the entire Atlantic, for the period 1979–2014. A 2015 study of season length in climate models led by MIT’s John Dwyer yielded mixed results, depending upon which model was used to simulate hurricane activity. Regardless, 2016 had four very notable out-of-season storms, probably influenced by unusually warm ocean temperatures: Hurricane Pali in the Central Pacific in January, Hurricane Alex in the Atlantic in January, Hurricane Otto in the Atlantic on Thanksgiving Day and Super Typhoon Nock-Ten in the Philippines on Christmas Day.

January 11: Hurricane Pali: Earliest Eastern Pacific Hurricane on Record
Peaking at Category 2 strength during its eight-day life, Pali was the earliest tropical storm and earliest hurricane ever observed between the International Date Line and the Americas. Only two other tropical cyclones have been observed in January in the Central Pacific. Pali’s formation was aided by ocean temperatures that were more than 2°C (3.6°F) warmer than average. One might consider January storms to "belong" to the previous year's season from a physical point of view.


Figure 6. MODIS visible satellite image of Hurricane Pali taken on the afternoon of January 12, 2016. At the time, Pali was at peak strength--a Category 2 storm with 100 mph winds. Image credit: NASA.

January 14: Alex Becomes the Atlantic’s First January Hurricane Since 1955
On January 14, Hurricane Alex became the Atlantic’s first January hurricane since 1955. Alex maintained Category 1 strength for almost 24 hours, peaking at 85 mph winds, before weakening to a tropical storm with 65 mph winds and making landfall on January 15 on the island of Terceira in the central Azores, roughly 1000 miles west of Portugal. No major damage or casualties were reported from Alex’s landfall. Only one other January storm since records began in 1851 has made landfall in the Atlantic: Hurricane Alice,  which moved from northeast to southwest over the islands of Saint Martin and Saba on January 2, 1954. The only other January hurricane in the Atlantic was Hurricane One on January 4, 1938. Alex’s ascension to hurricane strength was likely aided by sea surface temperatures that were up to 1°C above average for that time of year—near 22°C (72°F.) These unusually warm waters were part of a huge swath of above-average readings that covered much of the globe, strongly suggesting a link to longer-term climate change. On January 13, both Alex in the Atlantic and Pali in the Pacific were active, making it the first time in recorded history to have simultaneous January named storms in both the Atlantic and Pacific.


Figure 7. MODIS visible satellite image of Tropical Storm Alex at 9:20 am EST January 15, 2016. About an hour earlier, Alex’s western eywall passed over the Azores island of Terceira (black outline below the center of Alex). Image credit: NASA.

November 24: Hurricane Otto, Strongest Atlantic Hurricane so Late in the Year
We expect landfalling hurricanes on U.S. holidays like Labor Day (in September), on Independence Day (July 4), and even on occasion Memorial Day (in May.) But on Thanksgiving Day? That was unheard of until 2016, when deadly Hurricane Otto, the first hurricane known to make landfall on Thanksgiving Day, hit Nicaragua as a Category 2 storm with 110 mph winds on November 24. Otto was the Atlantic’s strongest hurricane on record so late in the year, and was the first hurricane to pass directly over Costa Rica since records began in 1851. Otto killed 17 people, making it the third latest deadly tropical cyclone in Atlantic recorded history. (The only later ones: Tropical Storm Olga, which killed 40 people in the Dominican Republic after landfall on December 11, 2007, and Tropical Storm Odette, which killed eight people in the Dominican Republic after landfall on December 6, 2003.) Otto’s formation was aided by ocean temperatures that were up to 1°C (1.8°F) warmer than average.


Figure 8. MODIS satellite image of Otto taken at approximately 11 am EST, November 24, 2016--Thanksgiving Day. At the time, Otto was a Category 2 storm with 110 mph winds about to make landfall in Nicaragua as the strongest Atlantic hurricane ever observed so late in the year. Image credit: NASA.

December 25: Super Typhoon Nock-Ten, Strongest Landfalling Northwest Pacific Typhoon so Late in the Year
Strong typhoons can occur year-round in the Northwest Pacific, but there has never been a landfalling typhoon as strong as Super Typhoon Nock-Ten so late in the year. After peaking as a Category 5 storm with 160 mph winds at 3 UTC Christmas Day (as per post-analysis by JTWC), Nock-Ten made landfall in the Philippines at 6 UTC Christmas Day, 2016 as a Category 4 storm with 155 mph winds and a central pressure of 915 mb. The only stronger typhoon ever recorded so late in the year was Super Typhoon Hester, which peaked as a Category 5 storm with 185 mph winds on December 31, 1952, about 1,000 miles east of the Philippines. Hester recurved out to sea without affecting any land areas. Nock-Ten’s formation was aided by ocean temperatures that were up to 1°C (1.8°F) warmer than average.


Figure 9. MODIS satellite image of Nock-Ten taken at approximately 06 UTC December 25, 2016. At the time, Nock-Ten was a Category 4 super typhoon with 155 mph winds, approaching the Philippines. Image credit: NASA.

Examples of a geographical shift in tropical cyclone activity in 2016
As I explained in my August 2014 post, Climate Change May Increase the Number of Hawaiian Hurricanes, warming sea surface temperatures may help shift the tracks of Eastern Pacific hurricanes closer to Hawaii. And for the third consecutive year, Hawaii saw a highly unusual level of tropical cyclone activity of activity in 2016, thanks, in part, to record- and near record-warm ocean temperatures.

July 23: Darby Hits Hawaii, Then Makes the Closest Pass to Honolulu by a Tropical Storm in Recorded History
Tropical Storm Darby made a direct hit on the Big Island of Hawaii on July 23, 2016, becoming just the fifth named storm since 1949 to make landfall on a Hawaiian Island. The next day, Darby made the closest approach on record by a tropical storm to the island of Oahu, which resulted in torrential rains in excess of 10 inches. Darby passed just 40 miles to the south and west of Honolulu with sustained winds of 40 mph. Darby’s formation was aided by ocean temperatures that were more than 1°C (1.8°F) warmer than average.


Figure 10. Another storm parade for Hawaii: VIIRS visible satellite image of ex-Hurricane Celia, Hurricane Darby, and Tropical Storm Estelle as seen on July 17, 2016. Image credit: NASA.

Examples of increased tropical cyclone rainfall in 2016
Increased evaporation from warmer oceans is expected to increase tropical cyclone rainfall by an average of 20% by the year 2100, agree hurricane scientists. Record- to near-record-warm ocean temperatures over the Atlantic waters near the U.S. in 2016 led to two instances of record- to near-record atmospheric moisture levels and record rainfall amounts in association with tropical systems: the “no-name” storm over Louisiana in mid-August, and Hurricane Matthew in October along the Southeast U.S. coast.

Mid-August: Louisiana’s No-name Storm
A slow-moving tropical disturbance that was never officially classified as a tropical depression meandered over Louisiana in mid-August, dumping colossal amounts of rain. The extreme record flooding that resulted caused 13 deaths and an estimated $10 - 15 billion in damage, making it the most expensive natural disaster in the U.S. in 2016. Some parts of Louisiana recorded more than 20" of rain in 48 hours, which qualifies as a 1-in-1,000 year rainfall event (having a 0.1 percent chance of occurring at a particular location in any given year), according to the NWS Lower Mississippi River Forecast Center. The highest rainfall total from the storm was 31.39” in Watson, Louisiana. The storm system carried near-record amounts of atmospheric moisture, drawn from the Gulf of Mexico and northwest Atlantic, where sea-surface temperatures (SSTs) were at near-record levels—more than 1°C (1.8°F) warmer than average. A fast-track climate change attribution study published one month after the storm found that climate change approximately doubled the chances for the type of heavy downpours that caused the devastating flood.

This was Louisiana’s second 20” deluge of the year; on March 8 - 12, an upper-level low pressure system stuck in place over Texas brought a flow of moist Gulf of Mexico air with record levels of atmospheric moisture for this time of year to Louisiana, resulting in widespread 1-in-200 year rainfall amounts of 15 - 20”. The storm killed five, and total damage in Louisiana and Texas was estimated at $1.5 billion by insurance broker Aon Benfield.


Figure 11. Major flooding in Prairieville, Louisiana on August 12, 2016 from a no-name tropical disturbance that caused $10 - $15 billion in damage. Image credit: @presleygroupmk/twitter.com.

October 7 - 9: Hurricane Matthew Brings Record Rains and a Record Storm Surge to the Southeast U.S.
The main story of the 2016 Atlantic hurricane season was Hurricane Matthew, the Atlantic’s first Category 5 storm since Felix of 2007. Matthew lasted as a major hurricane for eight days from Sept. 30 to Oct. 7, and devastated Haiti as a Category 4 storm on October 4, killing at least 546, making it the Atlantic’s deadliest hurricane in 11 years. Matthew grazed the coast of Florida and Georgia before making landfall in South Carolina on October 8 as a Category 1 hurricane with 75 mph winds. Matthew’s storm surge brought water levels that were the highest ever observed along portions of the coasts of Northern Florida, Georgia and North Carolina, beating records that had been set as long ago as 1928. Some of these records—and much of the coastal damage—would not have occurred without sea level rise over the past century from human-caused global warming. In addition, near record-warm ocean waters more than 1°C (1.8°F) warmer than average contributed to atmospheric moisture levels that were the highest on record over portions of Florida and South Carolina as Matthew moved up the coast, allowing the hurricane to dump 1-in-1000 year rains in some areas of South Carolina and North Carolina. Matthew killed 49 people in the U.S., 28 of them in North Carolina, and U.S. damage was estimated at up to $10 billion. This would make Matthew the 17th most expensive hurricane in U.S. history.


Figure 12. Twenty-four hour rainfall amounts from Hurricane Matthew on October 6 - 10, 2016 over portions of South Carolina and North Carolina were so extreme, that one could expect them to have a recurrence interval of 1-in-1000 years based on past climatology (dark blue colors).

Links
Hurricane Patricia's 215 mph Winds: A Warning Shot Across Our Bow (my 2016 blog post)
Fewer but Stronger Global Tropical Cyclones Due to Ocean Warming (my 2015 blog post)
Hurricanes and Climate Change: Huge Dangers, Huge Unknowns (my 2013 blog post)
Climatesignals.org analysis of Hurricane Matthew
Climatesignals.org analysis of Super Typhoon Meranti

Jeff Masters

Hurricane Climate Change

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

Reader Comments

Tropical Storm Olga in 2007 was another lethal storm later in the year.


Atmospheric CO2

November 2016

403.64
yikes matthew really could of been bad for us. repeat of Donna will happen one day.
Thanks for the Update Dr. Masters.
WU still not letting me login on my main machine.
This is the only Computer of 4 that seems to get through.
I didn't have to log this one on it was just there.
Perhaps, the title should have ended with '.... So Far'.
Global Warming is a Hoax. No I haven't gone to the dark side. Be sure to watch the entire 6 minutes and 29 seconds. Love the analogies.
The facts are piling up, they can only be buried for so long; no matter what the president to be and congress may do. The question is, how many bodies will be buried along with that ostrich stance. Anti science is anti caring for what happens to our fellow men and women of the world. It's shameful and only for profit.
Quoting 1. all4hurricanes:

Tropical Storm Olga in 2007 was another lethal storm later in the year.


Thanks! I added Olga to the list.

Jeff Masters
Great summation for the year, thanks much for the lunchtime read Dr M.
Note the cyclonic shape of the Storm system known here as "The Rain with no name".


I was on the Southeastern edge of the system for 2 days and we saw the backbuilding reforming over and over as it remained stationary over the River Parishes NW of me.

It dosen't even have to have a name to do the nasty..it only has to be wet and linger.






Note regarding wunderground functionality: I have a bookmark for the wunderground 10-day forecast for my location.  Recently, I am unable to view the 10 day forecast.  All I can view is the top of the page... essentially the 'nowcast'.  Below the words '10-day weather forecast', the little wheel just spins & spins, never showing the 10-day.  Essentially, I have to go to other sources to view a weather forecast, which is kinda sad...
Quoting 12. islandraider:

Note regarding wunderground functionality: I have a bookmark for the wunderground 10-day forecast for my location.  Recently, I am unable to view the 10 day forecast.  All I can view is the top of the page... essentially the 'nowcast'.  Below the words '10-day weather forecast', the little wheel just spins & spins, never showing the 10-day.  Essentially, I have to go to other sources to view a weather forecast, which is kinda sad...


Same here...
Quoting 12. islandraider:

Note regarding wunderground functionality: I have a bookmark for the wunderground 10-day forecast for my location.  Recently, I am unable to view the 10 day forecast.  All I can view is the top of the page... essentially the 'nowcast'.  Below the words '10-day weather forecast', the little wheel just spins & spins, never showing the 10-day.  Essentially, I have to go to other sources to view a weather forecast, which is kinda sad...


We are seeing more and more complaints like yours as the Server issue is a definite sore thumb issue for many.

I hope the New Year brings that situation to a fast close. The Local forecast is the WU feature that brought me here 11 years ago.

We should send up the Wunderyakuza signal.

Konichi wah'


I had the same issue as islandraider and Ped a while back, someone suggested changing my settings from NWS to BestForecast to resolve the issue. Works but dont like using BestForecast, prefer NWS.
Quoting 15. justmehouston:

I had the same issue as islandraider and Ped a while back, someone suggested changing my settings from NWS to BestForecast to resolve the issue. Works but dont like using BestForecast, prefer NWS.


Sorry for the trouble, our two top troubleshooters are currently working on the problems.

Jeff Masters
Article on "man-made" Sea Ice thickening...

Link

I've always thought advancement in carbon sequestration tech was the only path to limit warming and the corresponding ocean level rises, but found this article interesting. Not sure if I linked correctly, don't do it very often.
How sad. Carrie Fisher has passed away.
The Princess has died.

Carrie Fisher dead at age 60.



Quoting 18. GeoffreyWPB:

How sad. Carrie Fisher has passed away.


2016 takes another...
Quoting 18. GeoffreyWPB:

How sad. Carrie Fisher has passed away.
2016 is just not the year for Hollywood.60 in this day and Age is to young.
Quoting 18. GeoffreyWPB:

How sad. Carrie Fisher has passed away.

Indeed, 60 is not that old.
Nothing is ever lost, it is only transformed.
Dying is part of living, which is what my father told me on his dying bed.
This is how I deal with death.
...a long time ago,

in a Galaxy far,far away..there lived a Beautiful Princess.


..is this end or just the beginning?'..


Sierra Nevada snowpack sitting at 72% of normal for this date. Down from 110% last year at this time, but still better than the 54% in Dec. 2014.
CA Snow Water Equivalents, taken from 105 snow gage stations in the Sierra Nevada, Trinity Alps, and southern Cascades.
what a sad, sad day. one of the best advocates for mental health ive ever seen, and a truly genuine human who did their best, and was honest with themselves and others. she and the others in star wars were i know mine and many others first introduction to literally thinking outside of ourselves, and out planet to imagine a greater system, supporting us all.

so very sad, but this song makes me feel a little bit better. so much love to carrie fisher.

Link
Carrie Fisher died of a heart attack, like George Michael. Her attack started the 23rd, in a airplane (more exposed to the solar winds). Saw some other people with heart issues struggle a little through that solar storm. It seemed like a bad one for people with heart issues, solar storms can be that way.

After six days we are finally starting to exit the broad band of solar wind flowing out of that hole...

Here it was Dec 18th.

Here is today.. The solar wind coming from this relatively minor coronal hole should reach Earth on Dec. 31st or Jan. 1st. Credit: NASA/SDO.
"

Thanks for the update Dr Masters.
Quoting 24. oldnewmex:

Sierra Nevada snowpack sitting at 72% of normal for this date. Down from 110% last year at this time, but still better than the 54% in Dec. 2014.
CA Snow Water Equivalents, taken from 105 snow gage stations in the Sierra Nevada and Trinity Alps.


How much snow did you get from the storms this past week?
Quoting 26. Skyepony:

Carrie Fisher died of a heart attack, like George Michael. Saw some other people with heart issues struggle a little through that solar storm. It seemed like a bad one for people with heart issues, solar storms can be that way.

After six days we are finally starting to exit the broad band of solar wind flowing out of that hole...

Here it was Dec 18th.

Here is today.. The solar wind coming from this relatively minor coronal hole should reach Earth on Dec. 31st or Jan. 1st. Credit: NASA/SDO.
"



That seems a bit of stretch without data to back it up. People die of heart attacks everyday. Is there any data to support what you are implying?
Quoting 28. HurricaneHunterJoe:



How much snow did you get from the storms this past week?

I cleared about 5 inches of snow off the truck and driveway Saturday morning, kind of medium density, I would say. First snowfall this season with cold air, not the rainy slush turning into snow we have experienced so much lately. Hoping this next week brings more before the current layer melts.
Quoting 29. washingaway:


That seems a bit of stretch without data to back it up. People die of heart attacks everyday. Is there any data to support what you are implying?

Didn't look for death data on this event but did you read link I left? There is also a lot of research done in Russia to Cuba on solar storms and heart attacks available out there, it's been pretty well researched..

Like climate change on weather..wasn't directly blaming the deaths on the solar storm, just they may have been influenced by, like some others I've seen struggling with their heart this week..& mainly, the storm is nearly over.
Quoting 5. PedleyCA:

Thanks for the Update Dr. Masters.
WU still not letting me login on my main machine.
This is the only Computer of 4 that seems to get through.
I didn't have to log this one on it was just there.


For everyone that is still logged into the server..

Don't log out -or-
clear your browser's cookies
Quoting 30. oldnewmex:


I cleared about 5 inches of snow off the truck and driveway Saturday morning, kind of medium density, I would say. First snowfall this season with cold air, not the rainy slush turning into snow we have experienced so much lately. Hoping this next week brings more before the current layer melts.


Models calling for 2 storms this week down here and maybe a 3rd Wed next week.......hope you get some more snow up there!

Area Forecast Discussion
National Weather Service San Diego CA
822 AM PST Tue Dec 27 2016

.SYNOPSIS...
High pressure aloft and at the surface will bring fair and mild
weather across SoCal through Thursday with gusty offshore flow at
times near the coastal foothills. The fine weather will sour on
Friday as low pressure from the southwest arrives with clouds and a
chance for showers. Warm days through Thursday will turn noticeably
cooler Friday, with further cooling into the weekend as a low
pressure trough develops over the West with periods of light rain
and mountain snow possible.

LONG TERM (Thursday night through Monday)...
A weak low pressure system to the southwest will move into
California late Thursday night and Friday bringing more clouds and
a chance of showers. Rainfall amounts are highly uncertain...but
could range from one quarter inch at lower elevations to around
one half inch in the mountains with local amounts to one inch.
Snow levels will lower to around 6000 to 6500 feet late Friday.

For Saturday into next week...the global models are in better
agreement with the general pattern...but continue to differ with
the details. Cold low pressure systems will move southward along
the West Coast...then move eastward across the southern tier of
states into the plains. For southwest California...this will be a
cool...breezy pattern with occasional periods of showers.

The first low pressure system from the northwest is compact and
decently strong and would arrive on Friday. Current model tracks
are just far enough west for it to entrain Pacific moisture. On
the current timing and track...the period of heaviest precipitation
would be Saturday afternoon and evening. Another system that could
potentially more significant would arrive around Wednesday of next
week.
Quoting 31. Skyepony:


Didn't look for death data on this event but did you read link I left? There is also a lot of research done in Russia to Cuba on solar storms and heart attacks available out there, it's been pretty well researched..

I did read the article, but that's all it is, an article. One of the things that struck me was the the study done on cosmonauts. Now I pretty sure being put on top of a rocket and shot into outer space, floating in outer space, gravity or the lack there of, looking down on the earth from space, reentry, all these things have a wide range of emotions that can effect heart beat, blood pressure etc.. To many variables with cosmonauts. From the article:

"We have analyzed numerous data on the heartbeat of cosmonauts from all Soyuz crews, and the majority of missions to the Mir Station and the International Space Station," said Doctor Tamara Breus (Physics and Mathematics) from the Russian Academy of Sciences' Institute of Space Studies, who heads of a group of physics and physicians, studying this problem.

"We subjected 45 cosmonauts to examination during landing and flights of various duration, when they were exposed to geomagnetic disturbance, and then studied the same parameters in a neutral situation,� he said.

"The influence of a magnetic storm was obvious. It was manifest in a change of pulse and blood pressure, vegetative disorders, reduction of heartbeat rate variability and the power of respiratory undulations, and in a more irregular heartbeat pattern. Reactions varied depending on the duration of the flights and an ability of cosmonauts to adapt themselves to the new environment."

In the opinion of Dr. Breus, these effects were a reaction of the vascular tonus and heartbeat rhythm to magnetic storms
.
Models for central Sierra have been hemming and hawing about our prospects for snow.

Area forecast discussion
National Weather Service Reno Nevada
259 am PST Tue Dec 27 2016

Synopsis...
high pressure through Thursday will continue to create strong
valley inversions, light winds, and limited ventilation. Light
rain or snow showers are possible near the Oregon border this
afternoon and evening. Snow showers are possible Friday night
into Saturday with another storm possible to start next week.



&&

Short term...

Only minor changes to the ongoing forecast today to increase cloud
cover and mountain top winds. The nose of strong jet stream winds
in the Pacific northwest is currently pushing upper level moisture
through northern California and Nevada. Mostly this is bringing
mid and high level clouds to the region along with an increase in
ridge level winds. This system will also bring a slight chance of
showers near the Oregon border, though accumulations if any,
should be light.

Strong inversions are expected to continue through Thursday with
light valley winds and limited mixing. A gradual warming trend
will occur through the week with daytime high temperatures rising
to the mid to upper 40's for most areas by Thursday. Increasing
clouds are expected for the eastern Sierra by Thursday as a cutoff
low pressure system begins to move inland. -Zach

Long term...Friday through Monday...

A Rex block will develop over the eastern Pacific as we go into
the weekend, which will strongly influence the amplified longwave
pattern over North America. This pattern will favor troughing over
the western U.S., Allowing shortwave energy to drop down out of Canada
and into the Sierra and Great Basin, bringing increasing chances
for showers and colder temperatures.

There have been some shifts in the recent model simulations, so we
haven't made many changes to the ongoing forecast for the Friday
night and Saturday timeframe. The latest runs of the GFS and
European model (ecmwf) are both shifting this shortwave much further west, taking
it off-shore and only grazing the Sierra. Previous runs over the
last couple days had showed more of a "slider" type system, coming
directly over the Sierra and western Nevada. This is a pretty significant
shift in the last 24 hours, so we will hold off on any big
changes to the forecast for now. If models continue this trend we
may need to lower precipitation chances with this initial wave
Friday night and Saturday.


Another fast-moving shortwave will drop through the Pacific
northwest and into the Great Basin by New Year's Day or Monday
bringing additional chances for showers, stronger winds and
colder temperatures behind the front. This trough with cold
unstable air aloft will remain over our region for the first
several days of the New Year, bringing cloudy skies, scattered
snow showers and below normal temperatures. Hoon
Forgive me, but I have to say it. Maybe the uptick in heart attacks came after, and because of, this:

Donald J. Trump
@realDonaldTrump

The United States must greatly strengthen and expand its nuclear capability until such time as the world comes to its senses regarding nukes
8:50 AM - 22 Dec 2016

Anger is a powerful emotion that does harm to body, especially the heart.
Quoting 34. washingaway:


I did read the article, but that's all it is, an article. One of the things that struck me was the the study done on cosmonauts.
.

So you skipped the part about babies and people in bad health & a load of other research out there. But yeah it's been proven if you are in a rocket, ISS, a satellite or the higher you are in a plane the more you get exposed too.. Carrie Fisher started her heart attack while flying from London to Los Angeles..

#35

Might be better if you get the track over the Sierra to get that snowpack up. Models hemmed and hawed on the last couple of storms and Ive had 5.44" of rain in December. Glad we got a few days to dry out down here so if we do get the next storms it won't all runoff.
Quoting 37. Skyepony:


So you skipped the part about babies and people in bad health & a load of other research out there. But yeah it's been proven if you are in a rocket, ISS, a satellite or the higher you are in a plane the more you get exposed too.. Carrie Fisher started her heart attack while flying from London to Los Angeles..



I'm not looking to argue. I just saying there are many that look to prove an idea and skew things that favor that idea, much the way climate deniers do. I concluded that climate change is real because I took the time to look at real data like that provided by NASA. One article doesn't do that for me. But that doesn't mean you're wrong. It just means I need more.
@ 36
Yea, thats caused her heart attack ...had nothing to do with years of cocaine abuse attempting to self medicate away mental health issues...
Quoting 36. washingaway:

Forgive me, but I have to say it. Maybe the uptick in heart attacks came after, and because of, this:

Donald J. Trump
@realDonaldTrump

The United States must greatly strengthen and expand its nuclear capability until such time as the world comes to its senses regarding nukes
8:50 AM - 22 Dec 2016

Anger is a powerful emotion that does harm to body, especially the heart.


I do not follow his tweets and its still 24 days till he gets close to any nuclear codes so I doubt it.
Solar storm maybe. We like to find reasons for things. Not having a reason, a cause for why G. Micheal and Carrie Fisher both died of heat attacks is scary.
I have not seen any research that those living under the norther lights, more exposed to solar radiation, have a significant increase in heat trouble.
As for the big T or @Trump, President Regean scared the world and it worked. Since I can not change it, I hoping scary works again.
Be positive :)
Quoting 40. justmehouston:

@ 36
Yea, thats caused her heart attack ...had nothing to do with years of cocaine abuse attempting to self medicate away mental health issues...

I was being sarcastic to make a point.
Quoting 39. washingaway:


I'm not looking to argue. I just saying there are many that look to prove an idea and skew things that favor that idea, much the way climate deniers do. I concluded that climate change is real because I took the time to look at real data like that provided by NASA. One article doesn't do that for me. But that doesn't mean you're wrong. It just means I need more.



Washingaway,
Hi. Just one quick question.
What would you say has caused the recent climate change in the past fifty to one hundred years?
Thanks in advance.
Most heart attacks are caused by heart disease. About every 35 seconds somebody somewhere has a heart attack. It's probably not the sun, IMO, and it certainly not because of Donald Trump (it was sarcasm). Just because two famous people have a heart attach after a solar storm is no reason to blame the sun. I'm done on this subject.
Quoting 43. TechnoCaveman:



Washingaway,
Hi. Just one quick question.
What would you say has caused the recent climate change in the past fifty to one hundred years?
Thanks in advance.

Mostly people.
Since an increase in global temperature is making hurricanes more destructive, shouldn't scientists and weather experts be discussing plans to cool the earth as we cut back on CO2 ?
To use an analogy, if the patient is dying from taking poison then by all means stop the injection of poison but also work to undue the effects.
What are some ways to cool the earth?
Quoting 45. washingaway:


Mostly people.


Ok. Climate change is mostly people caused.

I go more with solar cycles, followed by increase in water vapor and then CO2.
Why? The weather on Mars has gotten warmer since Viking landed in the late 70's and the increase in sun spots.
Water vapor reflects more infra-red energy than CO2.
However everyone is on the CO2 bandwagon so that is where the possibility for change, for education, for discussion, for making things better lies. Solutions, like problems, are drive by
Quoting 45. washingaway:Mostly people.
Quoting 46. TechnoCaveman:

Since an increase in global temperature is making hurricanes more destructive, shouldn't scientists and weather experts be discussing plans to cool the earth as we cut back on CO2 ?
To use an analogy, if the patient is dying from taking poison then by all means stop the injection of poison but also work to undue the effects.
What are some ways to cool the earth?

I'm not qualified to answer that question. I wish it was so simple a caveman could do it. (:D
Quoting 14. Patrap:



We are seeing more and more complaints like yours as the Server issue is a definite sore thumb issue for many.

I hope the New Year brings that situation to a fast close. The Local forecast is the WU feature that brought me here 11 years ago.

We should send up the Wunderyakuza signal.

Konichi wah'





Make of this what you will:

I have a five year old laptop, and my desktop is closer to ten years old. Both run windows 7, and I hardly ever have a hard time with this site. If you have an old rig in the closet or the basement or where-ever, pull it out and fire it up and visit WU and see what you get.
Quoting 48. washingaway:


I'm not qualified to answer that question. I wish it was so simple a caveman could do it. (:D


Love the quote "A caveman could do it" (sigh) Yes.
Fortunately there are 1) brighter people with the answer, 2) Richer people with the funding and 3) Government people who can cast the permits and oversight.
Hoping to hear from at least group one.
Quoting 47. TechnoCaveman:



Ok. Climate change is mostly people caused.

I go more with solar cycles, followed by increase in water vapor and then CO2.
Why? The weather on Mars has gotten warmer since Viking landed in the late 70's and the increase in sun spots.
Water vapor reflects more infra-red energy than CO2.
However everyone is on the CO2 bandwagon so that is where the possibility for change, for education, for discussion, for making things better lies. Solutions, like problems, are drive by



citation please... (I looked into it, and it looks like total denier BS.. but I want to make sure I didn't miss something)
Quoting 50. TechnoCaveman:



Love the quote "A caveman could do it" (sigh) Yes.
Fortunately there are 1) brighter people with the answer, 2) Richer people with the funding and 3) Government people who can cast the permits and oversight.
Hoping to hear from at least group one.

It will take more than some bright people. It requires a collective effort. Something that is about to be tossed out the window on January 20, 2017.
Stress!!!
Quoting 8. DeepSeaRising:

The facts are piling up, they can only be buried for so long; no matter what the president to be and congress may do. The question is, how many bodies will be buried along with that ostrich stance. Anti science is anti caring for what happens to our fellow men and women of the world. It's shameful and only for profit.


I have been trying to figure out what science deniers have going on between their ears.... and I mean the unpaid ones. The paid ones are simply trying to earn money, and have no care. And I may have figured it out.

I looked into my past at a time when I went into denial. My apologies if this sounds like oversharing or being too candid. A few years ago an acquaintance sent me an email indicating that a family member was involved in making (appearing in) porn films, and sent me a link. I refused to click on it, and I absolutely refused to believe it, even though in a part of the self that is pretty close to that part that senses when someone is looking at you KNEW it was true. I went down by the river and just cried, and didn't think of it. I refused to believe it out of pure loyalty.

And I get that these deniers.... they are being loyal to a past that no longer exists, if it ever did.... the image world of Happy Days and Eisenhower, where white guys were demigods that drove cars with big tail-fins and had stay-at-home wives that were real babes in aprons, that scrupulously read the Readers' Digest and took an existential delight in Christmas Catalogs from Sears and Montgomery Ward, and anticipating a forever expanding economy.

And I get it. I long for that past myself, even though I know that it is just an image, mostly fictitious, and a pretty surface on a time that had a lot of ugliness. I suggest that getting through to these people involves getting past their nostalgia for that illusion.
Quoting 47. TechnoCaveman:



Ok. Climate change is mostly people caused.

I go more with solar cycles, followed by increase in water vapor and then CO2.
Why? The weather on Mars has gotten warmer since Viking landed in the late 70's and the increase in sun spots.
Water vapor reflects more infra-red energy than CO2.
However everyone is on the CO2 bandwagon so that is where the possibility for change, for education, for discussion, for making things better lies. Solutions, like problems, are drive by

Oh great! The sun causes heart attacks, the sun is causing climate change, the sun is causing earthquakes. Maybe we should figure out a way to get rid of the sun. Why didn't I think of that sooner.
Two groups of hikers got saved in New Mexico over Christmas. Too much rain, they couldn't get past a river and then freezing temps set in.. They were taken out by helicopter.



Quoting 39. washingaway:


I'm not looking to argue. I just saying there are many that look to prove an idea and skew things that favor that idea, much the way climate deniers do. I concluded that climate change is real because I took the time to look at real data like that provided by NASA. One article doesn't do that for me. But that doesn't mean you're wrong. It just means I need more.


Solar wind research points out that that heart arrhythmia might actually be helped by soar winds, while there is varying documented percent increase of risk for having an infarction sort of heart attack. Yeah not knowing the difference doesn't make it any less true. There is more articles out there if you want to look at them. Nowhere am I saying that was the cause of their death, just perhaps a contributing factor...pointing out a higher than normal percent risk that we have all suffered for six days that is finally passing. Good point you had about anger and heart issues..
Quoting 53. Grothar:

Stress!!!

Quoting 37. Skyepony:


So you skipped the part about babies and people in bad health & a load of other research out there. But yeah it's been proven if you are in a rocket, ISS, a satellite or the higher you are in a plane the more you get exposed too.. Carrie Fisher started her heart attack while flying from London to Los Angeles..


And her flight was undoubtedly a great circle flight over the pole, where the geomagnetic activity is enhanced. Also, the heart muscle is activated by an electrical signal and that signal is probably being affected by the electrical currents and rapid movement through the concentrated magnetic field lines at the magnetic poles. I bet if everyone on that flight had been hooked up to heart monitors the resulting recordings would be eye-openers.
New study out today... Non-accidental mortality due to dust storms in the United States. Also expected to increase with AGW..

The Association between Dust Storms and Daily Non-Accidental Mortality in the United States, 1993-2005.
Contact
National Health and Environmental Effects Research Laboratory
email: NHEERLScience@epa.gov
Citation:

Crooks, J., W. Cascio, M. Percy, J. Reyes, L. Neas, AND E Hilborn. The Association between Dust Storms and Daily Non-Accidental Mortality in the United States, 1993-2005. ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH PERSPECTIVES. National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS), Research Triangle Park, NC, 124(11):1735-43, (2016).
Description:

Background:The impact of dust storms on human health has been studied in the context of Asian,Saharan, Arabian, and Australian storms,but there has been no recent population-level epidemiological research on the dust storms in North America . The relevance of dust storms to public health is likely to increase as extreme weather events are predicted to become more frequent with anticipated changes in climate through the 21st century.Objectives: We examined the association between dust storms and county-level non-accidental mortality in the United States from 1993 through 2005.Methods:Dust storm incidence data, including date and approximate location. are taken from the U.S. National Weather Service storm database. County-level mortality data for the years 1993-2005 were acquired from the National Center for Health Statistics. Distributed lag conditionallogistic regression models under a time-stratified case-crossover design were used to study the relationship between dust storms and daily mortality counts over the whole United States and in Arizona and California specifically. End points included total non-accidental mortality and three mortality subgroups (cardiovascular, respiratory, and other non-acc idental).Results: We estimated that for the United States as a whole, total non-accidental mortality increased by 7.4% (95% Cl: 1.6, 13.5; p = 0.011) and 6.7% (95% Cl: 1.1,12.6; p = 0.018) at 2- and 3-day lags, respectively, and by an average of 2.7% (95% Cl: 0.4, 5.1; p = 0.023) over lags 0-5 compared with referent days. Significant associations with non-accidental mortality were estimated for California (lag 2 and 0-5 day) and Arizona (lag 3),for cardiovascular mortality in the United States (lag 2) and Arizona (lag 3), and for other non-accidental mortality in California (lags 1-3 and 0-5).Conclusions: Dust storms are associated with increases in lagged non-accidentaland cardiovascular mortality.
Purpose/Objective:

Dust storms are relevant to the Agency because they have been shown to have health impacts in the other counties and because they are likely to increase in frequency as a result of anthropogenic climate change. The purpose of our manuscript is to examine the association between dust storms and non-accidental mortality over the entire U.S. and in the two states with the largest number of dust storms, Arizona and California. This work may inform U.S. Global Change Research Program climate/health assessments and may be relevant to policy-making regarding climate change.
Quoting 58. CaneFreeCR:

And her flight was undoubtedly a great circle flight over the pole, where the geomagnetic activity is enhanced. Also, the heart muscle is activated by an electrical signal and that signal is probably being affected by the electrical currents and rapid movement through the concentrated magnetic field lines at the magnetic poles. I bet if everyone on that flight had been hooked up to heart monitors the resulting recordings would be eye-openers.


The oxygen concentration in the cabin is like being at 5000-10000 feet altitude. The heart has to work harder, It is the reason cardiac patients are often counselled not to fly.
I never drank or smoked ever. I ran at least a mile every morning. I hardly ever ate red meat or fried foods. I had no heart disease. No one in my family had any. Most people in my family live into their 90's and hundreds. I always had low blood pressure and my weight has been the same since I was about 18. (OK, it may have moved around a little :)

I had one of the most massive heart attacks one can have, my survival rate was less than 2%. I had been under terrible stress for about 3 years. All the doctors said the only reason I survived, was that I was otherwise extremely healthy. It can happen to anybody. Although the doctors did say that if I did drink I would have been more relaxed. :):)

I must admit. I had flown in that night from New York.
Models still flip flopping

Area Forecast Discussion
National Weather Service San Diego CA
1243 PM PST Tue Dec 27 2016


The cut-off low to our SW will continue to retrograde through
Wednesday, then start to swing north and then east toward the CA
coast. The system will weaken and open as it draws closer to the
main westerly wind belt. Models show showers with this system
arriving about Fri morning and ending by Sat. There will be ample
moisture drawn north (PW 1-1.25") but the low weakens as it moves
inland. So at this time, rainfall amounts of from one-quarter to one-
half inch look possible, depending on the exact track, with snow
levels falling to around 6000 FT Fri night.

Unfortunately, beyond Sat, forecast confidence lowers due to flip-
flopping of the global model runs. The development of a large block
over the EastPAc has made a difficult job of determining downstream
developments along the West Coast. The models all show a large, cold
trough developing across N.A. into the New Year, but the process is
messy along the edges. The various models/solutions carve out the
trough differently with several amplifying shortwaves which would
have different consequences for sensible weather this far south.

Generally, look for cooler weather through the weekend with a chance
of showers at times. Lower snow-levels would mean snow showers at
resort levels in the mountains. But due to the uncertainty, amounts,
if any, are too difficult to predict. Hopefully this will be
rectified in a couple of days.
Quoting 61. Grothar:

I never drank or smoked ever. I ran at least a mile every morning. I hardly ever ate red meat or fried foods. I had no heart disease. No one in my family had any. Most people in my family live into their 90's and hundreds. I always had low blood pressure and my weight has been the same since I was about 18. (OK, it may have moved around a little :)

I had one of the most massive heart attacks one can have, my survival rate was less than 2%. I had been under terrible stress for about 3 years. All the doctors said the only reason I survived, was that I was otherwise extremely healthy. It can happen to anybody. Although the doctors did say that if I did drink I would have been more relaxed. :):)

I must admit. I had flown in that night from New York.

3 years of terrible stress seems like a reasonable cause. Hope things are better for you now.
Quoting 61. Grothar:

I never drank or smoked ever. I ran at least a mile every morning. I hardly ever ate red meat or fried foods. I had no heart disease. No one in my family had any. Most people in my family live into their 90's and hundreds. I always had low blood pressure and my weight has been the same since I was about 18. (OK, it may have moved around a little :)

I had one of the most massive heart attacks one can have, my survival rate was less than 2%. I had been under terrible stress for about 3 years. All the doctors said the only reason I survived, was that I was otherwise extremely healthy. It can happen to anybody. Although the doctors did say that if I did drink I would have been more relaxed. :):)

I must admit. I had flown in that night from New York.

The benefits of red wine and dark chocolate should not be underestimated LOL

Quoting 61. Grothar:

I never drank or smoked ever. I ran at least a mile every morning. I hardly ever ate red meat or fried foods. I had no heart disease. No one in my family had any. Most people in my family live into their 90's and hundreds. I always had low blood pressure and my weight has been the same since I was about 18. (OK, it may have moved around a little :)

I had one of the most massive heart attacks one can have, my survival rate was less than 2%. I had been under terrible stress for about 3 years. All the doctors said the only reason I survived, was that I was otherwise extremely healthy. It can happen to anybody. Although the doctors did say that if I did drink I would have been more relaxed. :):)

I must admit. I had flown in that night from New York.


Always good to be a survivor! Glad you are still with us!
Just finished reading the Doc's blog. A lot of information there. I wonder if they are ever going to study the lackluster Atlantic seasons. Good blog Doc.
Looks like the worst drought may get help if forecasts come to fruition.



nice end of the year tropical entry thanks gentlemen have a great evening
Quoting 68. Grothar:

Just finished reading the Doc's blog. A lot of information there. I wonder if they are ever going to study the lackluster Atlantic seasons. Good blog Doc.


I'm very happy with "lack luster" Atlantic hurricane season. Hoping for another dull year in 2017 :)
Quoting 61. Grothar:

I never drank or smoked ever. I ran at least a mile every morning. I hardly ever ate red meat or fried foods. I had no heart disease. No one in my family had any. Most people in my family live into their 90's and hundreds. I always had low blood pressure and my weight has been the same since I was about 18. (OK, it may have moved around a little :)

I had one of the most massive heart attacks one can have, my survival rate was less than 2%. I had been under terrible stress for about 3 years. All the doctors said the only reason I survived, was that I was otherwise extremely healthy. It can happen to anybody. Although the doctors did say that if I did drink I would have been more relaxed. :):)

I must admit. I had flown in that night from New York.


You're not allowed to die. NOT ALLOWED!
Quoting 51. OKsky:




citation please... (I looked into it, and it looks like total denier BS.. but I want to make sure I didn't miss something)


No problem in case I'm mis reading something.

NASA 2007 - looking at Mars temperature rise and changes in albedio. Albedio changed did not account for all the temprature rise but did account for changes in climat and dust devil distribution.
Source: https://www.nasa.gov/centers/ames/research/2007/ma rswarming.html

National Geographic - Mars is warming hinting at natural, not man made causes. Does not go into other causes on Mars but looks complete.
Source: http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2007/02/07 0228-mars-warming.html

I'm looking for the graph showing Viking 1, Viking 2 and pathfinder data over several years. Please bear with me as I should have saved it when I had it.
Quoting 51. OKsky:




citation please... (I looked into it, and it looks like total denier BS.. but I want to make sure I didn't miss something)


I hate to quote Wikipedia so you may need to follow their citations.
In short, Marts temprature rose and then in recent decades has dropped. To me that is the scary part because of Mars low thermal inertia due to the lack of surface water. Sun spots have dropped off in the past few years to where we have had several sun spot free days.
Here is the Wikipedia (Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climate_of_Mars) quote
"Although Mars is smaller, at 11% of Earth's mass, and 50% farther from the Sun than the Earth, its climate has important similarities, such as the polar ice caps, seasonal changes and the observable presence of weather patterns. It has attracted sustained study from planetologists and climatologists. While Mars's climate has similarities to Earth's, including seasons and periodic ice ages, there are also important differences, such as much lower thermal inertia. Mars' atmosphere has a scale height of approximately 11 km (36,000 ft), 60% greater than that on Earth. The climate is of considerable relevance to the question of whether life is or was present on the planet. The climate briefly received more interest in the news due to NASA measurements indicating increased sublimation of the south polar icecap leading to some popular press speculation that Mars was undergoing a parallel bout of global warming,[1] although Mars' average temperature has actually cooled in recent decades."
Quoting 51. OKsky:




citation please... (I looked into it, and it looks like total denier BS.. but I want to make sure I didn't miss something)


I hate to quote Wikipedia so you may need to follow their citations.
In short, Marts temprature rose and then in recent decades has dropped. To me that is the scary part because of Mars low thermal inertia due to the lack of surface water. Sun spots have dropped off in the past few years to where we have had several sun spot free days.
Here is the Wikipedia (Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climate_of_Mars) quote
"Although Mars is smaller, at 11% of Earth's mass, and 50% farther from the Sun than the Earth, its climate has important similarities, such as the polar ice caps, seasonal changes and the observable presence of weather patterns. It has attracted sustained study from planetologists and climatologists. While Mars's climate has similarities to Earth's, including seasons and periodic ice ages, there are also important differences, such as much lower thermal inertia. Mars' atmosphere has a scale height of approximately 11 km (36,000 ft), 60% greater than that on Earth. The climate is of considerable relevance to the question of whether life is or was present on the planet. The climate briefly received more interest in the news due to NASA measurements indicating increased sublimation of the south polar icecap leading to some popular press speculation that Mars was undergoing a parallel bout of global warming,[1] although Mars' average temperature has actually cooled in recent decades."
Lastly, this may be a double quote as WU page went "unresponsive" (that is all the information I got)
"It's the sun" is one of the most common lies from the deniers of the basic fifth grade science of the greenhouse effect.

Quoting NASA:

"All three major global surface temperature reconstructions show that Earth has warmed since 1880. Most of the warming occurred in the past 35 years, with 15 of the 16 warmest years on record occurring since 2001. The year 2015 was the first time the global average temperatures were 1 degree Celsius or more above the 1880-1899 average. Even though the 2000s witnessed a solar output decline resulting in an unusually deep solar minimum in 2007-2009, surface temperatures continue to increase."
Late good evening hello with thanks to our doc for this amazing summary of tropical cyclones in all bassins ...

Three days after landfall some more news about the devastation from Nock-ten's (Nina's) landfall in the Philippines starts to trickle out:

Virac, Catanduanes totally devastated by Nina - AFP
Initial impressions from the air seems to indicate that Virac, Catanduanes was severely devastated by Typhoon "Nina".
This was revealed by Armed Forces of the Philippines spokesperson Brig. Gen. Restituto Padilla after a combined team from the AFP, Department of National Defense and National Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Council arrived in the area 12: 30 p.m. Tuesday, December 27.
The team was headed by Secretary Delfin Lorenzana and AFP chief-of-staff Lt. Gen. Eduardo Ano who deployed there to assess "Nina's" damage to the island and confer with local officials ahead of President Rodrigo Duterte's visit. ...



Nock-ten's (Nina's) first landfall at Virac (Catanduanes).

CIMSS got an impressive and scary loop of Nock-ten's approach and landfall.

Philippines: Search begins for the missing crew members of sunken cargo ship
The National, 32 mins ago / George Gaynor, Reporter
This almost gave me a heart attack.
With satellites we can see these storms so much better and get better wind estimates than years past. To say climate change is causing hurricanes to get stronger, is a stretch. This is an area of much uncertainty in the meteorological community. Shear and larger scale wind patterns could negatively impact hurricanes too. This is scare mongering to get the general public's attention of an issue that is minor to most people. Its hard to scare people with 1-2C of warming. So stuff like this is proposed. Just like the whole arctic amplification non-sense. If it warms overall, winter are going to get milder.
Good night from my part of Europe which is currently under nearly record high pressure with 1048 mb in Luxemburg between France and Germany (earlier it had been even 1049mb). Here a list of historic atmospherical pressure records in Europe.


(Click to enlarge). Current readings in Europe (saved) with the dome of high pressure over western/central Europe. Source for updates.


Average pressure at mean sea level in the next five days. You can spot the dark red color of very high pressure in the lower right corner. As long as this high, dubbed "Yoern", prevails more storms in the Atlantic are due to take the usual path towards Greenland/Iceland. This might change in the first days of the New Year.

Unseasonal high-pressure system keeping snow away from Switzerland
27/12/2016 By Le News
83. blizzard1024
8:20 PM EST on December 27, 2016

Here comes the domino effect with someone coming on and spreading this stuff.The bombarding of backlash will now commence in 3...2....1....
Quoting 75. TechnoCaveman:



I hate to quote Wikipedia so you may need to follow their citations.
In short, Marts temprature rose and then in recent decades has dropped. To me that is the scary part because of Mars low thermal inertia due to the lack of surface water. Sun spots have dropped off in the past few years to where we have had several sun spot free days.
Here is the Wikipedia (Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climate_of_Mars) quote
"Although Mars is smaller, at 11% of Earth's mass, and 50% farther from the Sun than the Earth, its climate has important similarities, such as the polar ice caps, seasonal changes and the observable presence of weather patterns. It has attracted sustained study from planetologists and climatologists. While Mars's climate has similarities to Earth's, including seasons and periodic ice ages, there are also important differences, such as much lower thermal inertia. Mars' atmosphere has a scale height of approximately 11 km (36,000 ft), 60% greater than that on Earth. The climate is of considerable relevance to the question of whether life is or was present on the planet. The climate briefly received more interest in the news due to NASA measurements indicating increased sublimation of the south polar icecap leading to some popular press speculation that Mars was undergoing a parallel bout of global warming,[1] although Mars' average temperature has actually cooled in recent decades."
Lastly, this may be a double quote as WU page went "unresponsive" (that is all the information I got)



forgive me if I am being dense... but I don't follow how the Wikipedia article quote backs your claim of a Martian warming trend correlation with Earth's.. in fact, it seems to directly counter it. That National Geographic link.. That article was more of a story about a russian astronomer named Abdussamatov with a wacky unaccepted hypothesis that the sun is responsible for GW on Earth as it is on Mars. This guy seems to be the actual source of your claim... however, the link you provided wasn't flattering, pointing out that his outsider ideas are not supported by (2007) climate science... Your NASA link points to this paper. That paper makes NO connection between Martian and Earth climates......

Edit: plz, no more goose chases.. read your sources, don't just scan them.
A legend in Astrophysics has died....Vera Rubin passed away Sunday night. She confirmed the existence of "dark Matter".
Link
Quoting 47. TechnoCaveman:



Ok. Climate change is mostly people caused.

I go more with solar cycles, followed by increase in water vapor and then CO2.
Why? The weather on Mars has gotten warmer since Viking landed in the late 70's and the increase in sun spots.
Water vapor reflects more infra-red energy than CO2.
However everyone is on the CO2 bandwagon so that is where the possibility for change, for education, for discussion, for making things better lies. Solutions, like problems, are drive by
Solar activities have been declining slightly since a peak in the 1950s. They did increase in the first half of the 20th century which had an effect on temperature.

Changes in water vapor in the atmosphere are strictly controlled by temperature. Humans have no ability to affect the level of water vapor in the atmosphere except very locally where the effects quickly die out.

CO2 has been increasing in the atmosphere for over 200 years now. Every little increment we add adds a bit of warming.

So despite solar activity declining temperatures are still increasing. Unless you can come up with something no one has thought of yet CO2 is the primary cause.
Regarding solar weather and health... I did find a summary, 'Rheumatoid arthritis and giant cell arteritis linked with solar cycles' on ScienceDaily. which describes work done by the DOE and Princeton, and shows a correlation between solar cycles and health. It doesn't mention heart attacks, which do have a lot of different causes, as people have already said.

I tried repeatedly to make the link but it wouldn't work. If you go to Science Daily you can do a search if you are interested.
Quoting 90. annabatic:

Regarding solar weather and health... I did find a summary, 'Rheumatoid arthritis and giant cell arteritis linked with solar cycles' on ScienceDaily. which describes work done by the DOE and Princeton, and shows a correlation between solar cycles and health. It doesn't mention heart attacks, which do have a lot of different causes, as people have already said.

I tried repeatedly to make the link but it wouldn't work. If you go to Science Daily you can do a search if you are interested.


Rheumatoid arthritis and giant cell arteritis linked with solar cycles

Not sure why it wouldn't work for you. Another recent WU oddity perhaps. Earlier today I hit the link for Rood's current blog, and was sent to one from years ago...apparently I wasn't the only one who made that trip!
Quoting 17. Treehorn:

Article on "man-made" Sea Ice thickening...

Link

I've always thought advancement in carbon sequestration tech was the only path to limit warming and the corresponding ocean level rises, but found this article interesting. Not sure if I linked correctly, don't do it very often.

Kudos to you for finding and sharing an interesting paper that's not behind a paywall. Thanks!
Quoting 90. annabatic:

Regarding solar weather and health... I did find a summary, 'Rheumatoid arthritis and giant cell arteritis linked with solar cycles' on ScienceDaily. which describes work done by the DOE and Princeton, and shows a correlation between solar cycles and health. It doesn't mention heart attacks, which do have a lot of different causes, as people have already said.

I tried repeatedly to make the link but it wouldn't work. If you go to Science Daily you can do a search if you are interested.


Thanks for your post. I have arthritis and I do know that the weather here on earth has an effect on me. However, it is by far worst in the winter. I've notice that cold weather causes the pain to increase. I also notice that the changes in air pressure also causes pain.

I read the article, but I am skeptical. First, it mentions "Intriguing scientific discovery" but from then on it states suggest this and that. In addition, the data used comes from one place, Olmsted County, Minnesota. Now rheumatoid arthritis is not hereditary, but genes can increase your risk of getting the disease and does run in families. So you have to look at some history of Olmsted and the gene pool. As for as the 10 year solar cycle and the county data. If its in the gene pool one might expect to a see spike in arthritis every decade. Then there's the question; is the sun causing rheumatoid arthritis or merely aggravating it? I would be more inclined to accept that it aggravates. I would like to see data charts and data for from a wider range.
Just a short comment about the posts here.
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Very interesting, thoughtful, and most may deserve more looking into!
No, well, little bashing, just most looking for more info about stated posts.
The ones about the sun, causing different issues, is something that may be
not totally understood today.
Hopefully, with new research, some of these questions may be answered one day.
Peace/Out

P.S. Politics were on the down-low!
95. vis0
Since in the fewcha space will help predict weather trends up to 7(8)( yrs in advance), i feel this person and others helped start that area of forecasting (i used her knowledge as to "dark matter" (only ~20% of the universe, ~20% quantum hence the so called observed quantum disappear as they are temporary bridges that "disappear" into the dark matter BUT not part of Dark matter) plus my crappy work on what i called "clear matter" ( ( /-) 45% of the Universe) to do deep/long term predictions.) She did tough work errors occurred when others incorrectly categorized her work.  (i'm having trouble posting my % as i forgot its a WxU blog and it does not accept certain modern formatting styles)


Vera Rubin, Who Confirmed Existence Of Dark Matter, Dies At 88 |   NPR,  (37.8KB)
 
Vale Vera Rubin, the greatest astronomer you never heard of | The Sydney Morning Herald, (111KB)
 
How Vera Rubin discovered dark matter | Astronomy Magazine, (84.7KB)


Small earthquakes a few minutes apart, causing the Christmas tree to sway, leaving some "icicle" ornaments swinging for awhile. 5.7 on the Richter scale, between Bridgeport, CA and Hawthorne, NV.
Earthquake Map
Good morning with some good news from China:
Bike-sharing revolution aims to put China back on two wheels
From Shanghai to Sichuan, schemes are being rolled out to slash congestion, cut air pollution - and spin a profit
The Guardian, Tom Phillips in Beijing, Wednesday 28 December 2016 03.49 GMT

Sweden just broke its wind power record by half a million kWh
The Local (Sweden), 27 December 2016, 15:57 CET 01:00
The powerful winds that hammered Sweden on Tuesday morning set a new all-time wind energy record.

'This is possible. We did it': the week Portugal ran on renewables
Campaigners say the 107 hours when the country was powered by wind, sun and water show they can replace fossil fuels
The Guardian, Monday 26 December 2016 08.00 GMT
Good morning everyone. Interesting research on the Antarctic Circumpolar Current was summarized in an article in EOS:

Notorious Ocean Current Is Far Stronger Than Previously Thought
The Antarctic Circumpolar Current is the only ocean current to circle the planet and the largest wind-driven current on Earth. It's also 30% more powerful than scientists realized.

An ocean circulation model shows the Antarctic Circumpolar Current swirling around Antarctica, with slow-moving water in blue and warmer colors indicating faster speeds (red represents speeds above 1 mile per hour). But how much water is really flowing through the current? Recent fieldwork provides unexpected results. Credit: M. Mazloff, MIT; Source: San Diego Supercomputer Center, UC San Diego

By Emily Underwood 23 hours ago

Notorious among sailors for its strength and the rough seas it creates, the Antarctic Circumpolar Current (ACC) is the largest wind-driven current on Earth and the only ocean current to travel all the way around the planet. Now, researchers have found that the current transports 30% more water than previously thought. The revised estimate is an important update for scientists studying how the world’s oceans will respond to a warming climate.

The ACC transports massive amounts of water between the Atlantic, Indian, and Pacific oceans in an eastward loop. Just how much water has long been uncertain, however, because of the difficulty and expense of accurately measuring its flow.

For the new study, Donohue et al. installed gauges along the bottom of Drake Passage, spanning an 800-kilometer passage between Cape Horn and the South Shetland Islands of Antarctica. Housed in glass spheres and spaced between 30 and 60 kilometers apart along a line near the seafloor, the gauges included pressure sensors, floating current meters attached by 50-meter tethers, and instruments that measure acoustic travel time from the seafloor to the sea surface.

The classic estimate used for the ACC’s transport is 134 sverdrups (Sv). One sverdrup is equivalent to 1 million cubic meters per second. Using 4 years of data collection from 2007 to 2011, the researchers found that the transport rate was 30% higher than historical estimates, around 173.3 Sv. Although it’s possible that stronger winds in the Southern Ocean over the past few decades may have caused the increase, satellite-based studies showing that transport has remained fairly steady during this time suggest that improved measurement tools, not increased wind, are responsible for the discrepancy. (Geophysical Research Letters, doi:10.1002/2016GL070319, 2016)


The full research as published in Geophysical Research Letters is freely available (no paywall): Mean Antarctic Circumpolar Current transport measured in Drake Passage
Due to the current drought and strong winds two large wildfires could spread in the Swiss Alps. Below the report about one of them. In this region no precipitation fell in the last four weeks according to Swiss media.

Firefighters battle forest fires in eastern Switzerland
The Local (Switzerland), 28 December 2016, 09:06 CET 01:00
Photo-Gallery

Skiers left disappointed as snow steers clear of Swiss slopes
The Local (Switzerland), 27 December 2016, 13:33 CET 01:00
As if last year wasn't bad enough, a lack of snow at Alpine ski resorts during the Christmas period has left some slopes completely bare. And as temperatures rise to unseasonable highs, there is little sign of much snow falling before the end of the year. Several resorts, including the popular Charmey, where no snow has fallen since December 19th, have closed due to the mild weather. The situation is much the same as the 2015 season, when snow didn't arrive until the middle of January. ....


(Click to enlarge). European precipitation anomaly in the last four weeks with a lot of brown (negative) numbers. Source.
Quoting 100. KEEPEROFTHEGATE:



Aw man, I really been enjoying the spring like weather. Been wearing shorts since last Thursday. Looks like I'm going to have go back into hibernation again. sigh
Quoting 83. blizzard1024:

With satellites we can see these storms so much better and get better wind estimates than years past.


Among other things.

Quoting 83. blizzard1024:
To say climate change is causing hurricanes to get stronger, is a stretch.


False. Increased thermal energy and water vapor mean more energy for storms to tap into. That doesn't imply more storms, but does imply that any storms that form will have plenty of energy to tap into..

Quoting 83. blizzard1024:
This is an area of much uncertainty in the meteorological community. Shear and larger scale wind patterns could negatively impact hurricanes too.


The uncertainty is related to the number of storms, and it is climatological uncertainty. Climate models don't have the resolution to effectively model small scale features, so only give a general sense of what future tropical weather might be like. The current consensus points to fewer storms, but what storms do form would be larger and more powerful due to the larger amount of available energy.

Quoting 83. blizzard1024:
This is scare mongering to get the general public's attention of an issue that is minor to most people.


No it isn't. It's a scientific conclusion that points to a future concern that we would be incredibly stupid to ignore.

Quoting 83. blizzard1024:
Its hard to scare people with 1-2C of warming.


That's because in general people are scientifically illiterate and have absolutely no concept of scale.

To illustrate, a 1 megaton warhead releases 4.18x10^15 joules of energy. To raise JUST the atmosphere by 1 C, it requires 5.95x10^21 joules. So it would take 1,423,444 nuclear warheads, or a little over 200 times the US nuclear arsenal, to achieve this. And that's not including the additional energy required to bring the oceans up by 1C.

Furthermore, that would be a one time thing, while the 1C caused by warming would be persistent. If you added in the entire global nuclear arsenal and the entire global electrical output, you still wouldn't even come close to the energy necessary to raise just the atmosphere by 1C.

Getting an idea of the scope we're talking about yet?

Quoting 83. blizzard1024:
So stuff like this is proposed. Just like the whole arctic amplification non-sense. If it warms overall, winter are going to get milder.


You can't build an cogent argument based on a half-assed personal interpretation of the science. Milder winters aren't going to happen everywhere, and they aren't even a good thing if they do. Simple counter examples are those areas that depend on snowpack/glaciers/etc. for their water.

The arctic amplification isn't nonsense, as we've clearly been experiencing the effects of it. It's also basic thermodynamics. As temperature differentials between air masses decrease, the stability of typical seasonal patterns decrease along with it. Instead of strong jets keeping air masses in place, you get weak jets allowing air masses to meander. The results are what we have seen over the past few years, with a warm arctic and cold continents.
Quoting 89. riverat544:

Solar activities have been declining slightly since a peak in the 1950s. They did increase in the first half of the 20th century which had an effect on temperature.

Changes in water vapor in the atmosphere are strictly controlled by temperature. Humans have no ability to affect the level of water vapor in the atmosphere except very locally where the effects quickly die out.

CO2 has been increasing in the atmosphere for over 200 years now. Every little increment we add adds a bit of warming.

So despite solar activity declining temperatures are still increasing. Unless you can come up with something no one has thought of yet CO2 is the primary cause.


Sunspot activity has been declining since the 1950s. Even in the decline the activity has been higher than 1850's or early 1900's. The trend has been for greater sun spot activity. 

Given the thermal inertia of the ocean, there will be considerable lag between sun spot increases and earth warming. Ditto for sun spot die off and earth cooling. 
However sun spots are not the cause so:    1) Reduce carbon emissions
  2) Cool the earth - albedo changes - reflective particles, creating fresh snow, cummulus stratus clouds, tinfoil roofs. etc, etc.   3) Pull carbon out of the air with algae, plants or by chemical means. 

  The chances of NASA scientists being right about Solar Cycle 24 and a similar or weaker Cycle 25 will not affect global warming. Global warming is all C02. 


   Other weather predictions of another Dalton minimum are offSee:  http://www.vencoreweather.com/blog/2016/2/1/ 1245-pm-weakest-solar-cycle-in-more-than-a-century -now-heading-towards-next-solar-minimum


Quoting 96. oldnewmex:

Small earthquakes a few minutes apart, causing the Christmas tree to sway, leaving some "icicle" ornaments swinging for awhile. 5.7 on the Richter scale, between Bridgeport, CA and Hawthorne, NV.
Earthquake Map


Things that go bump in the night huh?

Models still flopping but now leaning your way on the cold nw storms........inside slider.......hope ya get some more snow!
Quoting 93. washingaway:


Thanks for your post. I have arthritis and I do know that the weather here on earth has an effect on me. However, it is by far worst in the winter. I've notice that cold weather causes the pain to increase. I also notice that the changes in air pressure also causes pain.

I read the article, but I am skeptical. First, it mentions "Intriguing scientific discovery" but from then on it states suggest this and that. In addition, the data used comes from one place, Olmsted County, Minnesota. Now rheumatoid arthritis is not hereditary, but genes can increase your risk of getting the disease and does run in families. So you have to look at some history of Olmsted and the gene pool. As for as the 10 year solar cycle and the county data. If its in the gene pool one might expect to a see spike in arthritis every decade. Then there's the question; is the sun causing rheumatoid arthritis or merely aggravating it? I would be more inclined to accept that it aggravates. I would like to see data charts and data for from a wider range.


I know someone that moved from South Florida to northwest Texas because of his wife's arthritis. Her arthritis is much better in low humidity.
He was not happy about having to leave South Florida to live in far northwest Texas (Blizzards, Tornadoes, Dust Storms, etc), but he'll do anything to help his wife.
I believe they chose N.W. Texas (as their low humidity location) because they have family in that area.
Quoting 104. Xyrus2000:



Now that was a can of science whoop-ass! Nice.
Quoting 107. Sfloridacat5:



I know someone that moved from South Florida to northwest Texas because of his wife's arthritis. Her arthritis is much better in low humidity.
He was not happy about having to leave South Florida to live in far northwest Texas (Blizzards, Tornadoes, Dust Storms, etc), but he'll do anything to help his wife.
I believe they chose N.W. Texas (as their low humidity location) because they have family in that area.


That guy must really love his wife. Surrprising that the cold doesn't hurt her though. For me it feels like all my joints are rusty and need oiling.
Quoting 109. washingaway:


That guy must really love his wife. Surrprising that the cold doesn't hurt her though. For me it feels like all my joints are rusty and need oiling.


Yeah, I had never thought of humidity. I know that low pressure can really get the joints aching, but I didn't know about humidity.
Quoting 110. Sfloridacat5:



Yeah, I had never thought of humidity. I know that low pressure can really get the joints aching, but I didn't know about humidity.

For me it's not so much high pressure low pressure but the rapid change between the two. Although I would say high pressure hurts more. Cold hurts a lot.
Hi Washingaway,

I also went to Pubmed, which is my "go-to" site for biological info, but mostly the abstracts I found on solar weather and health were written by researchers in Eastern Europe. I'm not familiar with those institutions there, so I didn't know how valid any such abstract might be. It looks like a subject that isn't studied much in western Europe or the US.
I think the Weather Channel has a "Pain Index". Haven't watched or visited thier website in years. I may look at that and see what they base it on, and also see if it's consistent with my pain.
Oh, and also to show I'm not closed minded I am going to monitor solar flares and such to see if it could be a culprit.
Quoting 113. washingaway:

I think the Weather Channel has a "Pain Index". Haven't watched or visited thier website in years. I may look at that and see what they base it on, and also see if it's consistent with my pain.


Here's a site that has a "pain index."
Link

"Predict your joint pain level based on the local weather.

Enter Your Zip Code (based on my zip code my conditions are "good" today)
go
People with arthritis often claim they can predict the weather, based on their joint pain level, and with good reason. Studies show a variety of weather factors can increase pain, especially changes. Watch for any changes in

Barometric pressure (especially falling)
Temperature (especially lowering)
A study from Tufts University in 2007 found that every 10-degree drop in temperature corresponded with an incremental increase in arthritis pain. In addition, relatively low barometric pressure, low temperatures and precipitation can increase pain. Researchers aren%u2019t sure why this happens. They suspect certain atmospheric conditions increase swelling in the joint capsule.

Source: The Arthritis Index is based on a proprietary forecast by the meteorologists at www.AccuWeather.com."
Quoting 116. Sfloridacat5:



Here's a site that has a "pain index."
Link

"Predict your joint pain level based on the local weather.

Enter Your Zip Code (based on my zip code my conditions are "good" today)
go
People with arthritis often claim they can predict the weather, based on their joint pain level, and with good reason. Studies show a variety of weather factors can increase pain, especially changes. Watch for any changes in

Barometric pressure (especially falling)
Temperature (especially lowering)
A study from Tufts University in 2007 found that every 10-degree drop in temperature corresponded with an incremental increase in arthritis pain. In addition, relatively low barometric pressure, low temperatures and precipitation can increase pain. Researchers aren%u2019t sure why this happens. They suspect certain atmospheric conditions increase swelling in the joint capsule.

Source: The Arthritis Index is based on a proprietary forecast by the meteorologists at www.AccuWeather.com."


Thanks
Quoting 115. OKsky:

Live CO2 emissions of the European electricity production


Interesting. I'm surprised France is so high with all the nuclear power.
From 2012

AP December 2, 2012, 4:44 PM

Carbon dioxide emissions rise to 2.4 million pounds per second




WASHINGTON The amount of heat-trapping pollution the world spewed rose again last year by 3 percent. So scientists say it's now unlikely that global warming can be limited to a couple of degrees, which is an international goal.

The overwhelming majority of the increase was from China, the world's biggest carbon dioxide polluter. Of the planet's top 10 polluters, the United States and Germany were the only countries that reduced their carbon dioxide emissions.

Last year, all the world's nations combined pumped nearly 38.2 billion tons of carbon dioxide into the air from the burning of fossil fuels such as coal and oil, according to new international calculations on global emissions published Sunday in the journal Nature Climate Change. That's about a billion tons more than the previous year.

Nature still sucking up considerable carbon dioxide
UN climate chief: Climate change initiatives lack support
Post-Sandy, Dems push for climate change action
The total amounts to more than 2.4 million pounds of carbon dioxide released into the air every second.

Because emissions of the key greenhouse gas have been rising steadily and most carbon stays in the air for a century, it is not just unlikely but "rather optimistic" to think that the world can limit future temperature increases to 2 degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit), said the study's lead author, Glen Peters at the Center for International Climate and Environmental Research in Oslo, Norway.

Three years ago, nearly 200 nations set the 2-degree C temperature goal in a nonbinding agreement. Negotiators now at a conference under way in Doha, Qatar, are trying to find ways to reach that target.

The only way, Peters said, is to start reducing world emissions now and "throw everything we have at the problem."

Andrew Weaver, a climate scientist at the University of Victoria in Canada who was not part of the study, said: "We are losing control of our ability to get a handle on the global warming problem."

In 1997, most of the world agreed to an international treaty, known as the Kyoto Protocol, that required developed countries such as the United States to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by about 5 percent when compared with the baseline year of 1990. But countries that are still developing, including China and India, were not limited by how much carbon dioxide they expelled. The United States never ratified the treaty.

The latest pollution numbers, calculated by the Global Carbon Project, a joint venture of the Energy Department and the Norwegian Research Council, show that worldwide carbon dioxide levels are 54 percent higher than the 1990 baseline.

The 2011 figures for the biggest polluters:

1. China, up 10 percent to 10 billion tons.

2. United States, down 2 percent to 5.9 billion tons

3. India, up 7 percent to 2.5 billion tons.

4. Russia, up 3 percent to 1.8 billion tons.

5. Japan, up 0.4 percent to 1.3 billion tons.

6. Germany, down 4 percent to 0.8 billion tons.

7. Iran, up 2 percent to 0.7 billion tons.

8. South Korea, up 4 percent to 0.6 billion tons.

9. Canada, up 2 percent to 0.6 billion tons.

10. South Africa, up 2 percent to 0.6 billion tons.

© 2012 The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

120. OKsky
Quoting 118. TechnoCaveman:



Interesting. I'm surprised France is so high with all the nuclear power.


Dude... is this like a "bit" you are doing or something?
France has one of the lowest rates on that map.
I love some Jaun Atkins and think the Chauvet caves are full of the most beautiful art ever created, I dig your esthetic, so if you are in fact trolling please give me a break. :D


6 Protons

6 Electrons

6 Neutrons

Doom Patrick, doom everywhere'...





Quoting 119. Patrap:

© 2012 The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.



Rut roh
Quoting 115. OKsky:

Live CO2 emissions of the European electricity production

Interesting link. Thank you! And yes, Germany is still a dirty coal hole :-(
Quoting 121. Patrap:


Ugh.. terrible picture. Here, this one's slightly better:
Crowded Fort Myers Beach today, December 28th. Local hotels just loved the warm December we had this year. Temperatures in the 80s almost everyday. Well, we did hit 91 one day.
It appears that the blog exists again.
100% Of US Warming Is Due To NOAA Data Tampering

This level of disinformation is manufactured not only to sway public opinion, but to influence legislators. They won't have the time or capacity to understand the true nature of material like that, 'undecided votes' are easily swayed .
Quoting 126. SunnyDaysFla:

It appears that the blog exists again.

Still broken though. Aloha!
These Are the 10 Most Important Climate Stories of 2016

Climate Central
Warmer oceans provide more potential energy but to release that energy requires cold air aloft as well. I think it is important to remember that tropospheric warming is accompanied or offset by stratospheric cooling which increases lapse rates but only in the strongest cyclones with the tallest cells in their eye walls. Less-vigorous cyclones may suffer but the big ones get stronger. Sound like a plausible physical mechanism? We need to tie the statistics to weather on the ground, somehow.
Oh wow, who ever is trying to fix the blog is making things worse. This is a complete mess now. Nothing is where should be.
Quoting 127. MontanaZephyr:

100% Of US Warming Is Due To NOAA Data Tampering

This level of disinformation is manufactured not only to sway public opinion, but to influence legislators. They won't have the time or capacity to understand the true nature of material like that, 'undecided votes' are easily swayed .

Militantly ignorant people elect militantly ignorant legislators, who then encourage people in their militant ignorance.
I just got Rainbowed again.

The comments back there in 2005 are getting good too.

133. Patrap
1:11 AM GMT on December 29, 2016
0 +
I just got Rainbowed again.


You're not the Lone Ranger. Funny how an 11 year old page pops up.
Fixing these issues must be like over hauling your transmission while driving on the 405.
First time in a few days that I have had the +, flag, and collapse icons on the page. I was not MIA, I was in limbo. I could get on halfway but no messages out. Nothing exciting happened anyways....
Quoting 136. PedleyCA:

First time in a few days that I have had the +, flag, and collapse icons on the page. I was not MIA, I was in limbo. I could get on halfway but no messages out. Nothing exciting happened anyways....


Yes, when I switched back to the NWS forecast, I was back in business. Bestforecast, no go.
Quoting 137. Snacker2:



Yes, when I switched back to the NWS forecast, I was back in business. Bestforecast, no go.


I toggled to NWS from Best Forecast and it changed to 7 day forecast instead of 10 days, Both worked though...
139. vis0
at zilly blog
Too sad. Debbie Reynolds, mother of Carrie Fisher, passed away today.
141. DDR
Good evening21 C and raining for most of the day with an uptick in showery activity the last 2 hours here in Trinidad,thanks to la nina.Given the current forecast,by this time tomorrow some low lying places maybe under water.
142. MahFL
Quoting 140. GeoffreyWPB:

Too sad. Debbie Reynolds, mother of Carrie Fisher, passed away today.


Indeed, glad I am not a famous person, eek.....
I did not realize Debbie was the co-star in Singin' in the Rain.
Regarding solar activity/geomagnetic storming, and health matters: there is quite a bit of research floating around - mostly (although not exclusively ) of Russian origin as they more or less pioneered Heliobiology. Here are a couple of links: http://www.intechopen.com/books/rheology-new-conce pts-applications-and-methods/heliogeophysical-aspe cts-of-rheology-new-technologies-and-horizons-of-p reventive-medicine; https://www.google.com.au/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s &source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwjB_tb1j ZbRAhUMpZQKHQ4lCtIQFggZMAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Foap.on u.edu.ua%2Farticle%2Fdownload%2F83971%2F79409&usg= AFQjCNEcMgs4QD-ri0lWr3_nImRFevuv2g

There was some work by Japanese scientists, dating from around the mid-1930s, that found a correlation between solar activity and the viscosity of water, if my memory serves me, given that I've lost the details, and a quick internet search has not found anything - but it will be there somewhere and I'll post the link when I eventually find it ...
I am about ready for 2016 to end, with all of the famous deaths it has been taking this year.
Quoting 83. blizzard1024:

With satellites we can see these storms so much better and get better wind estimates than years past. To say climate change is causing hurricanes to get stronger, is a stretch. This is an area of much uncertainty in the meteorological community. Shear and larger scale wind patterns could negatively impact hurricanes too. This is scare mongering to get the general public's attention of an issue that is minor to most people. Its hard to scare people with 1-2C of warming. So stuff like this is proposed. Just like the whole arctic amplification non-sense. If it warms overall, winter are going to get milder.

I agree.
148. vis0
3,  2,  1,  0 ,  -1  Happy new....... | washingtonpost (27.5KB)
Quoting 127. MontanaZephyr:

100% Of US Warming Is Due To NOAA Data Tampering

This level of disinformation is manufactured not only to sway public opinion, but to influence legislators. They won't have the time or capacity to understand the true nature of material like that, 'undecided votes' are easily swayed .


I thought that title was satire at first. Sigh.
150. vis0

Quoting 147. hotroddan:


I couldn't have stated that any better. Thank You.
2016's super warm Arctic winter 'extremely unlikely' without climate change, scientists say | washingtonpost (27.4KB)

As toQoute47  saying it any better,  THAT was as to comment 83 using old skeptic logic.  So of course you couldn't say it better 'cause that is the same re-re-repeated lines used  every time NEW STUDIES show the globe is warming.  Out comes the same $keptic replies that are 7 year old reasoning using 12 to 80+ year old studies.

 If climate/GW skeptics keep going back far enough you'll be able to post something like,

"PROOF  the globe is not warming - cause a flat planet cannot warm up without countries expanding thus falling off the edge, see India is still there just south of Florida.
Smearing time, I like that. I got some time to smear today. Stop smearing your time on video games. Funny how time smears by.
Two of my comments got the boot. What did I do?
Jurupa Valley, CA

Mid 70's, maybe incliment for the New Years...
Quoting 104. Xyrus2000:



Among other things.



False. Increased thermal energy and water vapor mean more energy for storms to tap into. That doesn't imply more storms, but does imply that any storms that form will have plenty of energy to tap into..



The uncertainty is related to the number of storms, and it is climatological uncertainty. Climate models don't have the resolution to effectively model small scale features, so only give a general sense of what future tropical weather might be like. The current consensus points to fewer storms, but what storms do form would be larger and more powerful due to the larger amount of available energy.



No it isn't. It's a scientific conclusion that points to a future concern that we would be incredibly stupid to ignore.



That's because in general people are scientifically illiterate and have absolutely no concept of scale.

To illustrate, a 1 megaton warhead releases 4.18x10^15 joules of energy. To raise JUST the atmosphere by 1 C, it requires 5.95x10^21 joules. So it would take 1,423,444 nuclear warheads, or a little over 200 times the US nuclear arsenal, to achieve this. And that's not including the additional energy required to bring the oceans up by 1C.

Furthermore, that would be a one time thing, while the 1C caused by warming would be persistent. If you added in the entire global nuclear arsenal and the entire global electrical output, you still wouldn't even come close to the energy necessary to raise just the atmosphere by 1C.

Getting an idea of the scope we're talking about yet?



You can't build an cogent argument based on a half-assed personal interpretation of the science. Milder winters aren't going to happen everywhere, and they aren't even a good thing if they do. Simple counter examples are those areas that depend on snowpack/glaciers/etc. for their water.

The arctic amplification isn't nonsense, as we've clearly been experiencing the effects of it. It's also basic thermodynamics. As temperature differentials between air masses decrease, the stability of typical seasonal patterns decrease along with it. Instead of strong jets keeping air masses in place, you get weak jets allowing air masses to meander. The results are what we have seen over the past few years, with a warm arctic and cold continents.


First of all, 1C of warming is well within the bounds of the Holocene climate variations. In fact, 6000-8000 years before present, the Arctic was 2-4C warmer based on pollen sample cores and a more northerly tree-line than today. So to say that we are putting the equivalent of so many nuclear warheads into the atmosphere is really not relevant and it not a good way to communicate climate change to the public. It was warmer before during the Holocene Optimum.

Second, hurricane intensity is not only driven by ocean temperatures. There is wind shear, MCS and MCCs from land masses (like Africa) and mid to high level water vapor that are all important in determining how strong a hurricane gets. Climate models as you state just can't do this. Our current observing system allows us to much more accurately get an estimate of max winds and lower pressures versus 50 years ago so the data is skewed. See Landsea 2010. To make a conclusion that global warming is making hurricanes stronger like Dr Masters states is premature.

The Arctic amplification "theory" is counter to atmospheric science when I learned it 20 years ago, yes I do have an MS and BS in atmospheric science. It is well known that when the Earth warms or cools, the Arctic sees the largest changes. The Arctic will warm more than the midlatitudes decreasing baroclinicity which in turn decreases storminess and storm intensity. When there are a lot of closed lows farther south it is the negative phase of the Arctic Oscillation and North Atlantic Oscillation. This was the case in the colder 1960s and 70s. The only way that you could even see something that leads to more and slower moving waves, is if the Rossby radius of deformation is smaller due to decreased static stability. BUT, if the warming occurs from greenhouse gases, then the stability actually increases which is counter to that idea. Additionally, the warm oceans and cold continents also is counter to the enhanced greenhouse effect which warms the land more than the oceans. You can't have it both ways. I remember in the late 1990s when we saw a string of very positive AO or NAO patterns that the going theory was that global warming will lead to a stronger AO / NAO pattern and milder winters. Now that we have seen some negative NAO/AO winters climate scientists are now blaming this on global warming too. This ruins their credibility and the public just doesn't listen.

The basic fact is this...the increase in greenhouse gases has led to about 2-3 W/m2 of extra downwelling of IR radiation. The total greenhouse effect is about 324 w/m2. So a mere 1% increase in the total greenhouse effect is enough to throw our climate off the rails?? We wouldn't be here if this was the case. Some other cosmic or volcanic event of the past would have made our planet like Venus or Mars. Earth's climate is stabilized by water and water vapor and clouds. This is common sense and another reason why this whole climate change argument is a waste of tax payer funding. These funds would be better served studying how to predict the climate for the seasons and even interannual variability.
We all have been dealing with the problems that the blog has been having. I post two jokes about the frustration of getting "rainbowed" and they get taken down. They were jokes! Come on, a picture of an angry rainbow pony?
Blocked from comments by WU for almost all week, got rainbowed, couldn't work on my blog, deleted my history and cookies and then read "Do not delete your cookies" when I tried troubleshooting... etc. I just got back to "normal". I hope.
Hello everybody and I hope you had a Merry Christmas. Ours was rainy, and all the snow turned to mud. But we went to Ann Arbor to visit friends and relatives, for a few days, and had a very nice time.
Back home in Chicagoland now, and all the snow has melted. It's too warm... Magnolia buds are swelling prematurely. The roller-coaster ride is continuing. Next week it will be cold again, but New Year's will be fairly warm.
quote 154. blizzard1024 ...

I'm in awe that you're smarter than most scientists. Congratulations! :-J
washingaway- I plussed your rainbow pony. I did. But according to my favorites, I am now living in Belarus, near Chernobyl.

I can not be held responsible for what I might post these days. The rads, man.... the cesium rads.
Quoting 128. washingaway:


Still broken though. Aloha!


Guten tag!

Really????
The world has gone mad. With all the terrible things going on in this world I cannot grasp how anyone could feel offended or threatened by a rainbow pony.
Quoting 161. PedleyCA:


Really????


same here. also it says "guten tag" and then my real name! (Well at least that part is gone now.)
Worse things could have happened....
Models still flip flopping but 00 GFS has a cold 540 Low hugging the west coast into Soo Cal and then east whereas earlier runs had a inside slider going south thru sierra's,Nevada, and into Arizona. First storm coming from ULL SW of California. This will be interesting.........stay tuned.........both storms of light to moderate variety. Let's see if it can pull some tropical moisture up........calling for a 1/4' TO 1/2" For my mountain location.

First Storm 552mb ULL that opens up into a trof when approaching Soo Cal


http://www.wrh.noaa.gov/FXC/make_img.php?wfo=sgx& iname=WeatherStory1&size=1

2nd storm from the North a cold 540 ULL from the north




Both storms expected to be light to moderate rainfall totals, followed by possible weak short wave trofs with possible showers early next week. Let us see what model wins the battle. After 5 days of no rain, these possible storms will be real good for the area.
Quoting 161. PedleyCA:


Really????


I hear Prague is a very nice city to visit!
Quoting 160. ChiThom:



Guten tag!

BonJour and Hola
Quoting 161. PedleyCA:


Really????

It's like playing whack-a-mole trying to get rid of those. All I learned from WU today is that it's snowing in Sofia...

And washingaway...at least your posts made a brief appearance...I had a couple that never made it that far.
Quoting 166. HurricaneHunterJoe:



I hear Prague is a very nice city to visit!


Site is held together with bailing wire....


An upper level low pressure system will move into the area from the southwest and bring moderate rain Thursday night through Friday night. Snow levels will be high with this system with a chance of a few inches of snow above 7,500 feet. Another colder low pressure system will move in from the northwest for another chance of rain over the holiday weekend.
Just wait for them to fix that. Waste of time to change anything, it will just revert.
Quoting 115. OKsky:

Live CO2 emissions of the European electricity production

Nice site. Definitely bookmarked that one. Thanks for sharing!


An upper level low pressure system will move into the area from the southwest and bring moderate rain Thursday night through Friday night. Snow levels will be high with this system with a chance of a few inches of snow above 7,500 feet. Another colder low pressure system will move in from the northwest for another chance of rain over the holiday weekend.
Well tomorrow's a new day. Maybe some of these issues will be gone by then.

Headed to bed. Goodnight everyone.
Quoting 162. washingaway:

The world has gone mad. With all the terrible things going on in this world I cannot grasp how anyone could feel offended or threatened by a rainbow pony.

fwiw, my favorite post of the day :)
Quoting 118. TechnoCaveman:



Interesting. I'm surprised France is so high with all the nuclear power.


Did not realize that fissile material had that affect on Cavemen.
Quoting 154. blizzard1024:


First of all, 1C of warming is well within the bounds of the Holocene climate variations. In fact, 6000-8000 years before present, the Arctic was 2-4C warmer based on pollen sample cores and a more northerly tree-line than today. So to say that we are putting the equivalent of so many nuclear warheads into the atmosphere is really not relevant and it not a good way to communicate climate change to the public. It was warmer before during the Holocene Optimum.

One thing you have to take into account when you're talking about the climate 8000 years ago is the state of the Milankovitch Cycles. The changes in Milankovitch Cycles doesn't have much effect on a scale of a few centuries but when you start getting over 1000 years the effect becomes noticeable. 8000 years ago they were near a peak for insolation as the last glaciation came to an end. Since that time the insolation has been declining as the Milankovitch Cycles retreat from that peak. That is shown in the slow decline in temperatures over the past 8000 years. It's only in the past 100 or so years that we've seen a sharp increase in temperatures. You can't attribute that to the conditions that created a warmer arctic 8000 years ago without factoring in the change in insolation due to Milankovitch Cycles over that time period.
Good morning, everyone.

Snow-Capped Summits in Hawaii
NASA Earthobservatory, December 29, 2016
Quoting 171. PedleyCA:

Just wait for them to fix that. Waste of time to change anything, it will just revert.
testing
I just looked at the Wikipedia page of Typhoon Nock-ten and apparently the storm has been upgraded to a Cat 5 by JTWC. So Nock-ten has been the eighth Category 5 tropical cyclone of 2016...

The satellite presentation at peak was certainly worth of Cat 5 status:

DR Congo floods leave 50 dead in Boma
BBC, 1 hour ago
At least 50 people have died and thousands have been left homeless after severe flooding in the south-west of the Democratic Republic of Congo. Torrential rain caused the Kalamu river, which flows through the city of Boma, to burst its banks on Tuesday. ...

Australia: Savage thunderstorms leave widespread damage across Melbourne suburbs
December 29 2016 - 8:57PM
Hundreds of homes across Melbourne have been damaged by severe thunderstorms, many suffering partial ceiling collapses after guttering and downpipes couldn't cope with the intense rain. ...
Doc..it looks like the FIX has worked, this is the first time I could post in 4 long days...thanks for this fix.
Warning of 'collapse' of buildings in Siberia's permafrost cities in next 35 years
By The Siberian Times reporter, 28 December 2016
Threat to Salakhard and Anadyr could come even sooner - by the mid-2020s - as thaw of frozen ground is forecast to have 'devastating' impact. ...
More with maps and pics see link above.
And then 2 days later....

Mongering fer a Gulf Coast Blizzard always!
Quoting 180. Carnivorous:

I just looked at the Wikipedia page of Typhoon Nock-ten and apparently the storm has been upgraded to a Cat 5 by JTWC. So Nock-ten has been the eighth Category 5 tropical cyclone of 2016...

It's still difficult to figure out final numbers of Nock-ten's (Nina's) toll:
'Nina' leaves P681M agri, infra damage—NDRRMC
ABS-CBN News, Posted at Dec 29 2016 03:31 PM
The NDRRMC has also confirmed 9 fatalities related to Nina and are still verifying 10 more reported deaths while 10 more people are still missing, Marasigan said.


IFRC launches Emergency Appeal for Philippines as humanitarian toll of Typhoon Nock-Ten mounts

by IFRC | International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (IFRC), Thursday, 29 December 2016 12:08 GMT

Nina is most devastating typhoon in Albay after Reming
December 29, 2016

Quezon under state of calamity
Inquirer.net, 01:34 PM December 29th, 2016
Yay! I can finally log on! The site was giving me problems all week. Anyways, thanks for the blog Doctors!
189. bwi
Cold snap
Got here after escaping the rainbow...Looks like Houston is cooling off a bit after 5 straight days with temperatures in the lower 80s and a few records broken.
This should help future forecasting efforts...

Swarms of robots may soon be deployed to the center of hurricanes

Quoting 184. barbamz:

Warning of 'collapse' of buildings in Siberia's permafrost cities in next 35 years
By The Siberian Times reporter, 28 December 2016
Threat to Salakhard and Anadyr could come even sooner - by the mid-2020s - as thaw of frozen ground is forecast to have 'devastating' impact. ...
More with maps and pics see link above.

It would have been more impressive if it were 35 months.
Quoting 189. bwi:

Cold snap


One good thing about this kind of maps is that they are colorful.
Quoting 177. riverat544:


One thing you have to take into account when you're talking about the climate 8000 years ago is the state of the Milankovitch Cycles. The changes in Milankovitch Cycles doesn't have much effect on a scale of a few centuries but when you start getting over 1000 years the effect becomes noticeable. 8000 years ago they were near a peak for insolation as the last glaciation came to an end. Since that time the insolation has been declining as the Milankovitch Cycles retreat from that peak. That is shown in the slow decline in temperatures over the past 8000 years. It's only in the past 100 or so years that we've seen a sharp increase in temperatures. You can't attribute that to the conditions that created a warmer arctic 8000 years ago without factoring in the change in insolation due to Milankovitch Cycles over that time period.


This is a valid point. But it doesn't matter the cause of the warmer climate. The point is that it was warmer in the Arctic and there is evidence that sea ice was seasonal and guess what? The polar bears and other wildlife survived!! Imagine that. A warmer world is not necessarily a bad thing. Our climate so far is warming about 1-2C per century which is not out of the bounds of the Holocene and much less than the period between 20000 years BP and 10000 Years BP when there was often sudden shifts in climate when the glaciers were melting. We live in pretty calm times relative to back then....
Quoting 176. daddyjames:



Did not realize that fissile material had that affect on Cavemen.


Told my wife "We have come a long way, baby" - she smiled and got the male chauvinist sarcasm.
Its not the science, technology, stock market, nor age, but the people.
What do people want - a nice place to live.
What makes one pile of dirt different from another? Weather. Its why there are coconut and palm trees in Ireland but the Brits drink beer instead of wine (due to maunder minimum) Why weather helped create the story of Frankenstein.
Sadly fissile material electricity "that's too cheap to meter" went the same way as Tesla's "free broad cast power" and then was seen as "too risky" in the United States.
Quoting 157. ChiThom:

quote 154. blizzard1024 ...

I'm in awe that you're smarter than most scientists. Congratulations! :-J


That's not true. The unfortunate thing is that politics have corrupted climate science so that many very smart people are infected by groupthink, and know that if you don't have research or blogs that proves increases in CO2 is leading to some kind of problem you don't get published, don't get your PhD , lose your job etc. These people have to make livings too. The activists have hijacked this field. This whole site is owned by the Weather Channel which once was owned by NBC a very left leaning news organization. Dr Masters, by reading his stuff is very very intelligent IMO. But he has to tow the line on global warming or else he probably could lose his job. Or maybe he was hired for his beliefs in global warming. But, if he changes his mind and starts writing pieces that are counter to the global warming narrative he could lose his job. I am sure he doesn't want that. Many meteorologists and climate scientists are in this same boat. Where I work, I can't speak out against global warming in an official capacity or I could lose my job. I can only speak out on my own behalf with an alias...blizzard1024. That is the way things are. True science is choked off by politics.

Until there is more balance and politics gets out of the way, we will never really learn about our natural climate system as CO2 is blamed for everything. We still don't fully understand the glacial-interglacial cycles. Climate scientists are at a loss to explain the 100,000 year periodicity seen that last several cycles vs the 40,000 periodicity over a million years ago. Until we understand our natural climate are system better, I don't think we can put increasing CO2, a minor trace gas, into proper context. You need lots of positive feedbacks to have doubling CO2 to be a problem, otherwise it just doesn't do that much alone, maybe 1C....
Quoting 196. blizzard1024:




When you get near a relevant or in-context fact, please let us know. Your unsubstantiated opinions, out of context facts, and picked cherries are very nearly, but not quite, interesting.
Quoting 196. blizzard1024:



That's not true. The unfortunate thing is that politics have corrupted climate science so that many very smart people are infected by groupthink, and know that if you don't have research or blogs that proves increases in CO2 is leading to some kind of problem you don't get published, don't get your PhD , lose your job etc. These people have to make livings too. The activists have hijacked this field. This whole site is owned by the Weather Channel which once was owned by NBC a very left leaning news organization. Dr Masters, by reading his stuff is very very intelligent IMO. But he has to tow the line on global warming or else he probably could lose his job. Or maybe he was hired for his beliefs in global warming. But, if he changes his mind and starts writing pieces that are counter to the global warming narrative he could lose his job. I am sure he doesn't want that. Many meteorologists and climate scientists are in this same boat. Where I work, I can't speak out against global warming in an official capacity or I could lose my job. I can only speak out on my own behalf with an alias...blizzard1024. That is the way things are. True science is choked off by politics.

Until there is more balance and politics gets out of the way, we will never really learn about our natural climate system as CO2 is blamed for everything. We still don't fully understand the glacial-interglacial cycles. Climate scientists are at a loss to explain the 100,000 year periodicity seen that last several cycles vs the 40,000 periodicity over a million years ago. Until we understand our natural climate system better, I don't think we can put increasing CO2, a minor trace gas, into proper context. You need lots of positive feedbacks to have doubling CO2 to be a problem, otherwise it just doesn't do that much alone, maybe 1C....
Quoting 196. blizzard1024:



That's not true. The unfortunate thing is that politics have corrupted climate science so that many very smart people are infected by groupthink, and know that if you don't have research that proves increases in CO2 is leading to some kind of problem you don't get published, don't get your PhD etc. These people have to make livings too. The activists have hijacked this field. Until there is more balance we will never really learn about our natural climate system as CO2 is blamed for everything. We still don't fully understand the glacial-interglacial cycles. Climate scientists are at a loss to explain the 100,000 year periodicity seen that last several cycles vs the 40,000 periodicity over a million years ago. Until we understand our natural climate are system better in my eyes, I don't think we can put increasing CO2, a minor trace gas, into proper context. You need lots of positive feedbacks to have doubling CO2 to be a problem, otherwise it just doesn't do that much alone, maybe +1C....
It is nice to get a differing view that is not deleted immediately. Thanks.
Quoting 197. Misanthroptimist:


When you get near a relevant or in-context fact, please let us know. You're unsubstantiated opinions, out of context facts, and picked cherries are very nearly, but not quite, interesting.


Please explain yourself. I have been in this field for over 25 years and I have seen this whole climate change debate from its beginning. I know a lot of PhDs and PhD candidates who would vouch for everything I have said below and these people are way smarter than I....
Quoting 199. Kenfa03:

It is nice to get a differing view that is not deleted immediately. Thanks.

Did you know that hurricanes are actually a form of beet soup? How's that for a differing view?!
Quoting 199. Kenfa03:

It is nice to get a differing view that is not deleted immediately. Thanks.


I am new to this forum, they actually delete opinions? Isn't that censorship? Wow.
Quoting 201. Misanthroptimist:


Did you know that hurricanes are actually a form of beet soup? How's that for a differing view?!


Posts like this should be deleted....
Quoting 200. blizzard1024:



Please explain yourself. I have been in this field for over 25 years and I have seen this whole climate change debate from its beginning. I know a lot of PhDs and PhD candidates who would vouch for everything I have said below and these people are way smarter than I....

What you have seen or think you have seen is of no relevance to the topic of AGW/CC (nor of any interest to me). However, what you can substantiate with valid evidence, if anything, is very much relevant (and interesting to me). So, I repeat: When you get near a relevant, In-context fact please let me know.

Making vague claims of politicization of the science without presenting substantive supporting evidence is nothing but rhetorical bushwah.

Drawing conclusions from partial, non-relevant statistical similarities is nothing but rhetorical bushwah...or gross misunderstanding. If it's the latter, then I apologize and encourage you to find out why your claims about the climate 8000 years ago aren't relevant to the current situation in the way you are presenting those claims.

Claiming that "CO2 is blamed for everything" is more rhetorical bushwah. It's untrue. If you don't know that, then you should.

Implying that because not everything is known, then nothing is known is...you guess it...rhetorical bushwah.

Now, if you'll excuse me, I have to go and invent the bushwah-hog. Doing this with a scythe takes too much time.
Quoting 200. blizzard1024:



Please explain yourself. I have been in this field for over 25 years and I have seen this whole climate change debate from its beginning. I know a lot of PhDs and PhD candidates who would vouch for everything I have said below and these people are way smarter than I....
Names, or they don't exist. Thanks!
#196 - blizzard1024

"...This whole site is owned by the Weather Channel which once was owned by NBC a very left leaning news organization. Dr Masters, by reading his stuff is very very intelligent IMO. But he has to tow the line on global warming or else he probably could lose his job. Or maybe he was hired for his beliefs in global warming. But, if he changes his mind and starts writing pieces that are counter to the global warming narrative he could lose his job..."

Unsubstantiated allegations are often flagged. How about you back up some of your sweeping statements?
Quoting 196. blizzard1024:



That's not true. The unfortunate thing is that politics have corrupted climate science so that many very smart people are infected by groupthink, and know that if you don't have research or blogs that proves increases in CO2 is leading to some kind of problem you don't get published, don't get your PhD , lose your job etc. These people have to make livings too. The activists have hijacked this field. This whole site is owned by the Weather Channel which once was owned by NBC a very left leaning news organization. Dr Masters, by reading his stuff is very very intelligent IMO. But he has to tow the line on global warming or else he probably could lose his job. Or maybe he was hired for his beliefs in global warming. But, if he changes his mind and starts writing pieces that are counter to the global warming narrative he could lose his job. I am sure he doesn't want that. Many meteorologists and climate scientists are in this same boat. Where I work, I can't speak out against global warming in an official capacity or I could lose my job. I can only speak out on my own behalf with an alias...blizzard1024. That is the way things are. True science is choked off by politics.

Until there is more balance and politics gets out of the way, we will never really learn about our natural climate system as CO2 is blamed for everything. We still don't fully understand the glacial-interglacial cycles. Climate scientists are at a loss to explain the 100,000 year periodicity seen that last several cycles vs the 40,000 periodicity over a million years ago. Until we understand our natural climate are system better, I don't think we can put increasing CO2, a minor trace gas, into proper context. You need lots of positive feedbacks to have doubling CO2 to be a problem, otherwise it just doesn't do that much alone, maybe 1C....
Just stop. You're making a fool of yourself.

Over the years a lot of anti-science types--people just like yourself--have come to this forum and done the same as you've done here: accused Dr. Masters of being a coward, a corrupt sell-out, and a paid government shill. Many of them have, like you, tried to play the argument-from-authority card. And every one of them has, like you, pasted the exact same Gish Gallop of laughable and thoroughly debunked anti-science nonsense.

And they've all failed. Every one. Because, much as ideologues and partisan hacks might try to pretend otherwise, science and truth always win out in the end.

So, again: please just stop.
Quoting 200. blizzard1024:



Please explain yourself. I have been in this field for over 25 years and I have seen this whole climate change debate from its beginning. I know a lot of PhDs and PhD candidates who would vouch for everything I have said below and these people are way smarter than I....


How big are your hands?
Quoting 202. blizzard1024:



I am new to this forum, they actually delete opinions? Isn't that censorship? Wow.

This is a blog about science. Deleting pseudo-scientific drivel is undoubtedly censorship...and necessary. I am glad such posts are deleted. I would be equally glad if posts about the Tampa 2 defense were deleted. Neither are relevant on a science blog.

And just because it needs to be said, the First Amendment applies to government censorship and is inapplicable to things like blogs or even public gatherings. On any blog you are basically in the host's house. S/he gets to make the rules. Those that dislike those rules...well, there's no shortage of blogs on the internet.
Quoting 208. Snacker2:



How big are your hands?

Thread winner for succinctness alone! :-)
Quoting 203. blizzard1024:



Posts like this should be deleted....

Isn't that censorship? Wow.
Quoting 194. blizzard1024:



This is a valid point. But it doesn't matter the cause of the warmer climate. The point is that it was warmer in the Arctic and there is evidence that sea ice was seasonal and guess what? The polar bears and other wildlife survived!! Imagine that. A warmer world is not necessarily a bad thing. Our climate so far is warming about 1-2C per century which is not out of the bounds of the Holocene and much less than the period between 20000 years BP and 10000 Years BP when there was often sudden shifts in climate when the glaciers were melting. We live in pretty calm times relative to back then....

No one is arguing that natural shifts in climate haven't happened and won't happen in the future. The major point is that humans are likely accelerating it to the extent that our current lifestyle and economics will be disrupted far earlier and likely faster than what would happen naturally.
(This statement may go unnoticed. It's a personal reminder in time and space)
I think Earth is engendering a lot of steam ('spirit' for the religious and 'actual steam' for the rest who may have gotten a cold/flu from dry air). I intend to use this abbriviation for 'The 2017 Year': E Year (Earthshealing Year).
Happy E Year everyone!
Quoting 185. PensacolaDoug:


Very close, maybe a little snow or ice in the future.
Quoting 202. blizzard1024:



I am new to this forum, they actually delete opinions? Isn't that censorship? Wow.


You've been a member since 2008?

Yobio is that you!??
"Potentially"

And potentially I'm going to win the lottery Saturday night. Yes! There is a chance💲💲💲💲
Quoting 206. LAbonbon:

#196 - blizzard1024

"...This whole site is owned by the Weather Channel which once was owned by NBC a very left leaning news organization. Dr Masters, by reading his stuff is very very intelligent IMO. But he has to tow the line on global warming or else he probably could lose his job. Or maybe he was hired for his beliefs in global warming. But, if he changes his mind and starts writing pieces that are counter to the global warming narrative he could lose his job..."

Unsubstantiated allegations are often flagged. How about you back up some of your sweeping statements?

Forget it, past redemption. iList.
Quoting 203. blizzard1024:



Posts like this should be deleted....


There's a select group on here that could say the stupidest or even hateful comments and they won't get deleted.
Quoting 216. luvtogolf:

"Potentially"

And potentially I'm going to win the lottery Saturday night. Yes! There is a chance💲💲💲💲

And the Patriots are potentially going to win the Super Bowl. You know, it's just possible that not all potentials are equal.

Could have knocked me over with a feather when I found that out...well, potentially.
Quoting 218. luvtogolf:



There's a select group on here that could say the stupidest or even hateful comments and they won't get deleted.

Unfortunately. But we have the iList for them.
Quoting 212. LAbonbon:


No one is arguing that natural shifts in climate haven't happened and won't happen in the future. The major point is that humans are likely accelerating it to the extent that our current lifestyle and economics will be disrupted far earlier and likely faster than what would happen naturally.


"The major point is that humans are likely accelerating it to the extent that our current lifestyle and economics"...That is where I disagree. Our current lifestyle is at the pinnacle of humanity and its based on cheap energy. I am all for alternative fuels and renewables once the market can support them. I am not for world poverty like the current global paradigm that keeps cheap energy from Africa and other developing nations. These people have a rough and short life. It was like that in American in the 1700s and 1800s before coal and oil. I don't want to go back there.

If you are so conscious then why don't you stop using fossil fuels? Stop driving your car, heating or air conditioning your house. Go back to candles for light. Stop eating meat. Grow your own food. See how you like that and report back to us.
Quoting 218. luvtogolf:



There's a select group on here that could say the stupidest or even hateful comments and they won't get deleted.

Citation needed.
Quoting 215. ILwthrfan:



You've been a member since 2008?

Yobio is that you!??


I am a "member" because I have a weather station that has been online since 2008. I haven't commented until very recently. This is typical of such climate change forums, many leftists who are intolerant of other's viewpoints.
Misanthroptimist - "Now, if you'll excuse me, I have to go and invent the bushwah-hog. Doing this with a scythe takes to much time."

Where do you guys come up with this stuff? I'm still chuckling...This one is up there with washingaway's consternation over the state of the world and removal of his angry rainbow pony.

11F and freezing fog here in Salt Lake City. Lots of snow still on the ground, and more on the way this weekend. Freezing fog is fascinating to me...
Quoting 221. blizzard1024:



"The major point is that humans are likely accelerating it to the extent that our current lifestyle and economics"...That is where I disagree. Our current lifestyle is at the pinnacle of humanity and its based on cheap energy. I am all for alternative fuels and renewables once the market can support them. I am not for world poverty like the current global paradigm that keeps cheap energy from Africa and other developing nations. These people have a rough and short life. It was like that in American in the 1700s and 1800s before coal and oil. I don't want to go back there.

If you are so conscious then why don't you stop using fossil fuels? Stop driving your car, heating or air conditioning your house. Go back to candles for light. Stop eating meat. Grow your own food. See how you like that and report back to us.

So...humans aren't likely accelerating it (warming) because our lifestyle is at the pinnacle of humanity and based on cheap FF? I'm not saying for sure that there is a logical problem there...but there's a logical problem there.

I'll leave the rest of your misconceptions and logical fallacies for others to dissect.
Quoting 223. blizzard1024:



I am a "member" because I have a weather station that has been online since 2008. I haven't commented until very recently. This is typical of such climate change forums, many leftists who are intolerant of other's viewpoints.

Only when those viewpoints are disinformation or nonsense. Being intolerant of those things is just good citizenship and good for science.
Quoting 221. blizzard1024:



"The major point is that humans are likely accelerating it to the extent that our current lifestyle and economics"...That is where I disagree. Our current lifestyle is at the pinnacle of humanity and its based on cheap energy. I am all for alternative fuels and renewables once the market can support them. I am not for world poverty like the current global paradigm that keeps cheap energy from Africa and other developing nations. These people have a rough and short life. It was like that in American in the 1700s and 1800s before coal and oil. I don't want to go back there.

If you are so conscious then why don't you stop using fossil fuels? Stop driving your car, heating or air conditioning your house. Go back to candles for light. Stop eating meat. Grow your own food. See how you like that and report back to us.

If you are anxious to bring the benefits of electricity to communities in Africa and India that are currently off the grid, then you should be happy to learn that today the cost of a solar installation at these places is 1/2 of what a connection to the grid would cost. And while we are on the subject of costs, what are the costs of worsening heat waves, storms, droughts, and sea level rise?
Quoting 221. blizzard1024:



"The major point is that humans are likely accelerating it to the extent that our current lifestyle and economics"...That is where I disagree. Our current lifestyle is at the pinnacle of humanity and its based on cheap energy. I am all for alternative fuels and renewables once the market can support them. I am not for world poverty like the current global paradigm that keeps cheap energy from Africa and other developing nations. These people have a rough and short life. It was like that in American in the 1700s and 1800s before coal and oil. I don't want to go back there.

If you are so conscious then why don't you stop using fossil fuels? Stop driving your car, heating or air conditioning your house. Go back to candles for light. Stop eating meat. Grow your own food. See how you like that and report back to us.

I can get behind the first part of your comment...but then you go on the attack. You know nothing about me, my lifestyle, my politics, or my knowledge of science. Why are you saying that in order to want to do something about global warming we have to turn into extremely self-sufficient vegetarian Luddites?

If you want to discuss science, fine. Making ridiculous statements and casting aspersions about fellow members and the owner of the blog will get you nowhere.
This is great news and should help to redeem the tired Sharknado movie franchise!
Roboticane?
:)
Quoting 191. fmbill:

This should help future forecasting efforts...

Swarms of robots may soon be deployed to the center of hurricanes


Quoting 224. LAbonbon:

Misanthroptimist - "Now, if you'll excuse me, I have to go and invent the bushwah-hog. Doing this with a scythe takes to much time."

Where do you guys come up with this stuff? I'm still chuckling...This one is up there with washingaway's consternation over the state of the world and removal of his angry rainbow pony.

11F and freezing fog here in Salt Lake City. Lots of snow still on the ground, and more on the way this weekend. Freezing fog is fascinating to me...

Wait and see what happens when there is a freezing fog with a slight breeze and there are trees and bushes around.
Quoting 224. LAbonbon:

Misanthroptimist - "Now, if you'll excuse me, I have to go and invent the bushwah-hog. Doing this with a scythe takes to much time."

Where do you guys come up with this stuff? I'm still chuckling...This one is up there with washingaway's consternation over the state of the world and removal of his angry rainbow pony.

11F and freezing fog here in Salt Lake City. Lots of snow still on the ground, and more on the way this weekend. Freezing fog is fascinating to me...

I'm in Central FL, so we have no weather. Assume warmish temps, high humidity, and a possibility of scattered showers...forever.

As to your question: Mom dropped me on my head when I was quite young. At least I hope she dropped me. She may have thrown me, though. Lord knows she hated a dirty diaper.
Hey Blizzard! You're beating your head against a wall. Don't waste the energy dude.
December 2016 on Pace to be in the Top Ten Warmest and Driest
across Portions of West Central and Southwest Florida

Link
Here in Fort Myers we are currently on pace for this December being the warmest on record. Friday and Saturday are expected to be cooler so that should drop the average a bit so it will end up being really close.
Quoting 227. ACSeattle:


If you are anxious to bring the benefits of electricity to communities in Africa and India that are currently off the grid, then you should be happy to learn that today the cost of a solar installation at these places is 1/2 of what a connection to the grid would cost. And while we are on the subject of costs, what are the costs of worsening heat waves, storms, droughts, and sea level rise?


There is absolutely NO proof that heat waves, storms, droughts, and sea level rise are getting worse from CO2 increases. NONE. Only from climate model projections which are pretty bad. I work with atmospheric models all the time and I can tell you that they are just not good enough to get to this level of detail. What you describe are individual storms, heat waves droughts etc which are not climate. Climate models can't predict this stuff and furthermore they are rife with uncertainities and misrepresentations of the climate system. They don't handle clouds well a major contributor to the global energy balance. They don't handle tropical convection well, another major contributor to the global energy balance and they don't have a proper handle on the water vapor feedback. I could go on... but you get the point. A warmer world likely would lead to more heat waves like in the 1930s but that was natural warming. The Little ice age ended in the 1800s. A gradual warming in the 1900s and early 2000s easily could explain all this without invoking a minor greenhouse gas.
Quoting 228. blizzard1024:



Pseudo science drivel?? You don't know what you are talking about. Totally brainwashed..... You want to shut down debate on climate science. This is censorship and old soviet-style tactics. You can say all the stupid things you want too. Go ahead, but you are making an a$$ out of yourself.

There is no scientific debate about climate science. The Earth is rapidly warming. That warming is caused primarily by increased CO2 (and other human activity). The increased CO2 is caused primarily by FF burning. Period. End of Story. Game over. Various other phrases indicating finality. Making believe that there is a scientific debate is more rhetorical bushwah.

Making believe that uncertainty about the AGW/CC effect on things like hurricanes or other local weather somehow undermines the above is, yep, rhetorical bushwah (and a fatal logical fallacy).

Now, there is some political debate over what (if anything) to do about that. I haven't weighed in on that. I will now: Doing nothing is suicidal foolishness.
Quoting 196. blizzard1024:



That's not true. The unfortunate thing is that politics have corrupted climate science so that many very smart people are infected by groupthink, snip


You seem very smart, so you're not immune...
Quoting 232. Misanthroptimist:


I'm in Central FL, so we have no weather. Assume warmish temps, high humidity, and a possibility of scattered showers...forever.

As to your question: Mom dropped me on my head when I was quite young. At least I hope she dropped me. She may have thrown me, though. Lord knows she hated a dirty diaper.

Hey, you've got a cold front coming through tonight :) Based on the Orlando forecast, the cool down looks to be temporary, though.

Quoting 233. PensacolaDoug:

Hey Blizzard! You're beating your head against a wall. Don't waste the energy dude.

Energy isn't the issue. It's the lack of valid evidence that undermines Blizzard's position.
Quoting 233. PensacolaDoug:

Hey Blizzard! You're beating your head against a wall. Don't waste the energy dude.

Yep. There's no more sense in this field anymore or me trying to make sense to these folks. Most american's don't care anyway and with Trump in office I hope he shuts this whole one-sided approach to climate studies down and allows for other views so we can learn more about our climate system. That is what science is supposed to be. Thanks dude. Happy holidays.
Quoting 223. blizzard1024:



I am a "member" because I have a weather station that has been online since 2008. I haven't commented until very recently. This is typical of such climate change forums, many leftists who are intolerant of other's viewpoints.
Finally a very intelligent, and knowledgeable poster who looks at both sides of the debate, someone who really understands what controls the science behind the climate change debate. It's like a breath of fresh air.
Quoting 234. Sfloridacat5:

December 2016 on Pace to be in the Top Ten Warmest and Driest
across Portions of West Central and Southwest Florida

Link
Here in Fort Myers we are currently on pace for this December being the warmest on record. Friday and Saturday are expected to be cooler so that should drop the average a bit so it will end up being really close.
Better hope this doesn't last thru the spring, as, folklore states that a warm and dry spring, lead to an active tropical season for South Florida.
Quoting 154. blizzard1024:



The basic fact is this...the increase in greenhouse gases has led to about 2-3 W/m2 of extra downwelling of IR radiation. The total greenhouse effect is about 324 w/m2. So a mere 1% increase in the total greenhouse effect is enough to throw our climate off the rails?? We wouldn't be here if this was the case. Some other cosmic or volcanic event of the past would have made our planet like Venus or Mars. Earth's climate is stabilized by water and water vapor and clouds. This is common sense and another reason why this whole climate change argument is a waste of tax payer funding. These funds would be better served studying how to predict the climate for the seasons and even interannual variability.



I'm just a lowly engineer who only took one thermal dynamics class years ago, but what you're saying doesn't make much sense to me. CO2 contributes roughly 22% of the total greenhouse effect IE downwelling of IR radiation which has increased from 280 ppm to over 400 ppm. CH4, N2O, O3, CFCs are responsible for roughly 16% and those concentrations have significantly increased. Water Vapor is responsible for the remaining 62%, no idea how much this has increased but I think it's safe to assume it has increased to some extent.

Any change in our planet's energy balance is going to change the planet's temperature. You say the increase is insignificant, but there is an increase all the same. Please calculate the planet's average temperature in 2100 when CO2 concentrations should be around 550-600 ppm if fossil fuels are continued to be used along with unchecked population growth. Please post your equations for the calculations as well so I can try to understand why you think this is insignificant.

If this is your field, as you claim, this should be the most basic of calculations for you.
Quoting 236. Misanthroptimist:


There is no scientific debate about climate science. The Earth is rapidly warming. That warming is caused primarily by increased CO2 (and other human activity). The increased CO2 is caused primarily by FF burning. Period. End of Story. Game over. Various other phrases indicating finality. Making believe that there is a scientific debate is more rhetorical bushwah.

Making believe that uncertainty about the AGW/CC effect on things like hurricanes or other local weather somehow undermines the above is, yep, rhetorical bushwah (and a fatal logical fallacy).

Now, there is some political debate over what (if anything) to do about that. I haven't weighed in on that. I will now: Doing nothing is suicidal foolishness.


I can pick apart EVERY single one of your views with real atmospheric science especially radiative transfer, global circulation patterns etc, but your mind is made up. Trump will hopefully bring some common sense back into this hijacked scientific field by shutting down the climate activists who are supposed to be scientists supported by us tax payers. Private entities can do what they want. But taxpayer funded climate science and any science for that matter has a duty to serve the people with the best science which includes the scientific method which has been largely abandoned in climate science. I am done now. I am not wasting any more time on you. I hope you have a great 2017 and I mean that. cheers.
Quoting 195. TechnoCaveman:


.
Sadly fissile material electricity "that's too cheap to meter" went the same way as Tesla's "free broad cast power" and then was seen as "too risky" in the United States.



Nuclear Power in the USA (Updated 22 December 2016)

The USA is the world's largest producer of nuclear power, accounting for more than 30% of worldwide nuclear generation of electricity.
The country's 100 nuclear reactors produced 798 billion kWh in 2015, over 19% of total electrical output. There are four reactors under construction.
Following a 30-year period in which few new reactors were built, it is expected that four more new units will come online by 2021, these resulting from 16 licence applications made since mid-2007 to build 24 new nuclear reactors.
Quoting 233. PensacolaDoug:

Hey Blizzard! You're beating your head against a wall. Don't waste the energy dude.


Its like that when you are going against an ever increasing amount of evidence.
Quoting 235. blizzard1024:



There is absolutely NO proof that heat waves, storms, droughts, and sea level rise are getting worse from CO2 increases. NONE. Only from climate model projections which are pretty bad. I work with atmospheric models all the time and I can tell you that they are just not good enough to get to this level of detail. What you describe are individual storms, heat waves droughts etc which are not climate. Climate models can't predict this stuff and furthermore they are rife with uncertainities and misrepresentations of the climate system. They don't handle clouds well a major contributor to the global energy balance. They don't handle tropical convection well, another major contributor to the global energy balance and they don't have a proper handle on the water vapor feedback. I could go on... but you get the point. A warmer world likely would lead to more heat waves like in the 1930s but that was natural warming. The Little ice age ended in the 1800s. A gradual warming in the 1900s and early 2000s easily could explain all this without invoking a minor greenhouse gas.

"Proof" is a philosophical rather than a scientific concept. Science doesn't "prove" things -it supports its claims with evidence. When new evidence is uncovered, science either changes, discards, or adds to its existing explanation of a phenomenon. So, no. There is no scientific proof of...well, anything. So, lack of proof obviously is no problem.

Our climate model predictions do well in some areas, less so in others. They've done a pretty good job projecting surface temperatures.

Climate change and droughts...floods...severe storms...sea level rise. So while there is no "proof" (and my explanation for why that is), there is plenty of evidence.

Your uncertainties, clouds, and tropical thunderstorms aren't nearly enough to support any doubt of AGW/CC reality. Nor are they nearly enough to mitigate the effects of AGW/CC. If they were, the world wouldn't have had three consecutive hottest years on record.
Climate science denial is as effective as the umbrella in Figure 11 (above).
.
Quoting 244. blizzard1024:



I am done now. I am not wasting any more time on you. I hope you have a great 2017 and I mean that. cheers.




Please don't leave before answering the question I posed to you. I want to see the equations you're using that indicate insignificant warming due to increased greenhouse gas concentrations. If you want anyone here to take you seriously, including myself, show us with actual evidence.

Show us your calculations if you are who you say you are. Leaving without doing so would indicate you're a fraud.
Quoting 244. blizzard1024:



I can pick apart EVERY single one of your views with real atmospheric science especially radiative transfer, global circulation patterns etc, but your mind is made up. Trump will hopefully bring some common sense back into this hijacked scientific field by shutting down the climate activists who are supposed to be scientists supported by us tax payers. Private entities can do what they want. But taxpayer funded climate science and any science for that matter has a duty to serve the people with the best science which includes the scientific method which has been largely abandoned in climate science. I am done now. I am not wasting any more time on you. I hope you have a great 2017 and I mean that. cheers.


You can pick apart my views with science? I guess you just haven't gotten 'round to it.

Trump will only accomplish making America a second-rate science nation. Europe, China, and Japan will now move to the forefront if Trump insists on following through on his brain-dead plans. The most he can hope to accomplish is slowing down the rate of our understanding. AGW/CC fact and theory will continue, unless someone can dethrone them through actual science. That won't happen.

Your bizarre taxpayer fairy tale is of no interest or relevance.
Quoting 223. blizzard1024:



I am a "member" because I have a weather station that has been online since 2008. I haven't commented until very recently. This is typical of such climate change forums, many leftists who are intolerant of other's viewpoints.


I am not leftist.

I did minor in Climatology, and majored in Earth Sciences from the University of Illinois.

I also have voted far more conservatively than liberally in my 16 years of voting.

Just about every "statement" you have posted today voicing your opinion in AGW is nearly 100% nonfactual.

You need to remember when your trying to deny the science of Climatology, you are in fact denying the foundation of the Greenhouse Gas theory, which is mathematically and scientifically proven in over a dozen different Sciences ( Helioseismology, Marine Biology, Geology, Chemistry, Glaciology, Oceanography, Archaeology, Physics, oh and Atmospheric Sciences.)

You don't have a single shred of academic research that has passed through the Scientific Process that even remotely supports anything you have claimed.

Ahhhhhh, but it's a liberal agenda....

Again I find it both hilarious and sad that people back peddle to this lack of logic.

Quoting 243. pipelines:



I'm just a lowly engineer who only took one thermal dynamics class years ago, but what you're saying doesn't make much sense to me. CO2 contributes roughly 22% of the total greenhouse effect IE downwelling of IR radiation which has increased from 280 ppm to over 400 ppm. CH4, N2O, O3, CFCs are responsible for roughly 16% and those concentrations have significantly increased. Water Vapor is responsible for the remaining 62%, no idea how much this has increased but I think it's safe to assume it has increased to some extent.

Any change in our planet's energy balance is going to change the planet's temperature. You say the increase is insignificant, but there is an increase all the same. Please calculate the planet's average temperature in 2100 when CO2 concentrations should be around 550-600 ppm if fossil fuels are continued to be used along with unchecked population growth. Please post your equations for the calculations as well so I can try to understand why you think this is insignificant.

If this is your field, as you claim, this should be the most basic of calculations for you.


Yes this is pretty basic. Since you are cordial I will...

For an increase in CO2 here is the equation...
dF = 5.35 ln(C/Co)

Where 'dF' is the radiative forcing in Watts per square meter, 'C' is the concentration of atmospheric CO2, and 'Co' is the reference CO2 concentration. Normally the value of Co is chosen at the pre-industrial concentration of 280 ppmv.

So if we double CO2, you get dF = 5.35 ln(2)
so dF= 5.35 x 0.69314718056 = 3.708337416 w/m2 of extra downwelling IR. The total greenhouse effect is about 324 w/m2 so this is a little over 1% increase. If you use the Stefan-Boltzmann equation, you can convert 3.7 w/m2 into a temperature change which is Power/Area = S-B constant x emissivity (close to 1) x T4 where Temperature is raised to the 4th power. So if you solve for T you get around 1.2C increase in global temperatures from doubling CO2. This could take centuries as the oceans store a lot of heat. Also 1C is not really that big a deal climate wise....
Name calling makes people like blizzard and Pensacola and Golf feel somehow "right". Its all they really have.
Quoting 244. blizzard1024:


I suggest that you have a discussion with ronnm about all that. (He is a free thinker around these parts)
Most scientists are interested in science so calling them "political" is a low blow, and false impression, sorry.
Quoting 252. blizzard1024:



Yes this is pretty basic. Since you are cordial I will...

For an increase in CO2 here is the equation...
dF = 5.35 ln(C/Co)

Where 'dF' is the radiative forcing in Watts per square meter, 'C' is the concentration of atmospheric CO2, and 'Co' is the reference CO2 concentration. Normally the value of Co is chosen at the pre-industrial concentration of 280 ppmv.

So if we double CO2, you get dF = 5.35 ln(2)
so dF= 5.35 x 0.69314718056 = 3.708337416 w/m2 of extra downwelling IR. The total greenhouse effect is about 324 w/m2 so this is a little over 1% increase. If you use the Stefan-Boltzmann equation, you can convert 3.7 w/m2 into a temperature change which is Power/Area = S-B constant x emissivity (close to 1) x T4 where Temperature is raised to the 4th power. So if you solve for T you get around 1.2C increase in global temperatures from doubling CO2. This could take centuries as the oceans store a lot of heat. Also 1C is not really that big a deal climate wise....


You've entirely left out feed backs. (See Shakespeare for appropriate "rub" comment.)

When feedbacks are included -as they must be- we end up around a 3C increase (give or take) for a doubling of CO2.
Quoting 176. daddyjames:



Did not realize that fissile material had that affect on Cavemen.


(smiles jokingly) Turned out to be a bad idea. We used glowing rocks to make food and light our caves for several years.
Then the mutations. A whole new bread with less facial and body hair and no bulging brow line took over the place.
At least that's the way its been for the past 40,000 years.
We think they are just a fad. We have been around far, far longer :)
Quoting 241. NativeSun:

Finally a very intelligent, and knowledgeable poster who looks at both sides of the debate, someone who really understands what controls the science behind the climate change debate. It's like a breath of fresh air.


Like that of a smoker stepping outside for a "breath of fresh air".
There is a dominate missing link about climate change that is so perplexed to say the least. It is a procedure that has many patents and and project names, for the classified operations of military and civilian use. We all can never truly discuss global warming, climate change without adding this white elephant into the equation. We all know what it is and the technology has always been there to use it, and has only gotten more advanced as each passing year. It will never be discussed here on a rational level because to admit too it's possibility, would agree to one of the biggest cover ups ever on all civilization. So we all beg to differ and throw scientific opinions at each other while trillions of dollars and countless human and animal lives are lost The climate is in turmoil and to call it a cycle is absolute denial just like that missing link we all can't discuss.
Quoting 256. TechnoCaveman:



(smiles jokingly) Turned out to be a bad idea. We used glowing rocks to make food and light our caves for several years.
Then the mutations. A whole new bread with less facial and body hair and no bulging brow line took over the place.
At least that's the way its been for the past 40,000 years.
We think they are just a fad. We have been around far, far longer :)


Ah, the price paid for not taking an existential threat seriously as evidence mounted. ;)
Quoting 258. frank727:

There is a dominate missing link about climate change that is so perplexed to say the least. It is a procedure that has many patents and and project names, for the classified operations of military and civilian use. We all can never truly discuss global warming, climate change without adding this white elephant into the equation. We all know what it is and the technology has always been there to use it, and has only gotten more advanced as each passing year. It will never be discussed here on a rational level because to admit too it's possibility, would agree to one of the biggest cover ups ever on all civilization. So we all beg to differ and throw scientific opinions at each other while trillions of dollars and countless human and animal lives are lost The climate is in turmoil and to call it a cycle is absolute denial just like that missing link we all can't discuss.


TechnoCaveman? We can talk about him. I don't think he would have a problem with that.
Well just checking back in.

I see everyone is still trying to outwit and out-science everyone else but guys...none of us are scientists..we may even know more than some scientists or meteorogists, but a comments section on a blog isn't the best place to shove your opinion in someone's face.
Quoting 261. JrWeathermanFL:

Well just checking back in.

I see everyone is still trying to outwit and out-science everyone else but guys...none of us are scientists..we may even know more than some scientists or meteorogists, but a comments section on a blog isn't the best place to shove your opinion in someone's face.
\

Speak for yourself - I am a scientist :P
Quoting 242. NativeSun:

Better hope this doesn't last thru the spring, as, folklore states that a warm and dry spring, lead to an active tropical season for South Florida.


This is the driest "dry season" since I moved to Fort Myers 20 years ago. We've had one brief shower in the past 80 days or so. I've never seen us go so many straight days without rain.
Quoting 218. luvtogolf:



There's a select group on here that could say the stupidest or even hateful comments and they won't get deleted.


You have any idea how many times I have been banned on here for taking "liberal positions"?
Every bit as much as you, so stop whining!

"There is absolutely NO proof that heat waves, storms, droughts, and sea level rise are getting worse from CO2 increases. NONE."

From NOAA (climate.gov), a good overview/intro on research as to whether extreme weather events were made more likely or more severe due to manmade global warming:

Extreme event attribution: the climate versus weather blame game

Author: Rebecca Lindsey
December 15, 2016

For more than a decade, scientists have been accumulating evidence that in some places, global warming is making several kinds of extreme weather events more likely or more intense. Heat waves? Check. Heavy downpours? Check. Deeper and more frequent high-tide flooding? Check.

These long-term trends apply to averages across groups of similar events, usually spread over large areas—a national increase in heavy rain events, for example—not necessarily to a specific event in a particular place. How much global warming may have affected an individual extreme event—Sandy, the California drought, thousand-year floods in West Virginia or Louisiana—is a separate and much harder question. Answering it is the goal of a field of climate science called extreme event attribution.

Each year since 2011, NOAA scientists have served as lead editors for a special issue of the Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society called "Explaining Extreme Events from a Climate Perspective." The issue is devoted to studies that attempt to determine the causes of a selection of the previous year's extreme events and to detect whether global warming and its side effects were among them. This year's report is being released today at a press event at the winter meeting of the American Geophysical Union. In collaboration with the report's editors, Climate.gov has put together this Q&A that digs into the details of this rapidly maturing branch of climate science. Full article

The report for 2016 was released this month; here is an overview of the report from NOAA: Scientists: Strong evidence that human-caused climate change intensified 2015 heat waves

The full 2016 attribution report is in this Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society (BAM) special report:Explaining Extreme Events from a Climate Perspective

This page also contains links to the attribution reports from 2011-2014.

(Dr. Masters and Dr. Rood have both posted about attribution studies. Unfortunately the WU search function for the blog is not working, so I can't easily link any at this time)

The web has quite a few other resources available as well. Google Scholar can easily provide links to original research.
Quoting 245. daddyjames:



Nuclear Power in the USA (Updated 22 December 2016)

The USA is the world's largest producer of nuclear power, accounting for more than 30% of worldwide nuclear generation of electricity.
The country's 100 nuclear reactors produced 798 billion kWh in 2015, over 19% of total electrical output. There are four reactors under construction.
Following a 30-year period in which few new reactors were built, it is expected that four more new units will come online by 2021, these resulting from 16 licence applications made since mid-2007 to build 24 new nuclear reactors.



All very true, but the 798 billion kWh must be larger. 798 billion / 8760 (hours in a year) is only 91 megawats. Way too small a number.
Progress is being made. It looks like all but 21 the 150 new coal fired plants have been cancelled. (Source: http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Category:Prop osed_coal_plants_in_the_United_States)
Though the operating plants have a combined power generation of 14,076 mega watts.

Nulcear generation is up .3% from the same month, October, as last year. (as per U.S. government)

http://www.eia.gov/electricity/monthly/update/arc hive/december2016/
Quoting 241. NativeSun:

Finally a very intelligent, and knowledgeable poster who looks at both sides of the debate, someone who really understands what controls the science behind the climate change debate. It's like a breath of fresh air.

I'm a fan of Calvin too ;)



Meanwhile.....


To add a link to a post, copy the URL, hit the 'chainlink' icon below the comment box, then paste it in the pop-up box that appears.
Quoting 253. ohiofog:

Name calling makes people like blizzard and Pensacola and Golf feel somehow "right". Its all they really have.


Your 19th post on here is intelligent and well thought through. Very nice!
Quoting 260. daddyjames:



TechnoCaveman? We can talk about him. I don't think he would have a problem with that.


Sure. Climate change is not too hard.
The cause of climate change is where I make people upset.
Then what to do about it has prompted either silence, economic warfare or "a military solution"
I'm game.
Quoting 269. luvtogolf:



Your 19th post on here is intelligent and well thought through. Very nice!


Really? Aren't you the cutest lil thing!

And yes, I freely admit your comments number is much larger than mine. You are clearly far superior and the "bigger" man.
Quoting 191. fmbill:

This should help future forecasting efforts...

Swarms of robots may soon be deployed to the center of hurricanes


This is really fascinating. I'm kind of stuck on how they can get something weighing 6.5 pounds to move around inside a hurricane.
Winter is cancelled.

Try the Thursday Trout.

: P
Quoting 252. blizzard1024:



... This could take centuries as the oceans store a lot of heat. Also 1C is not really that big a deal climate wise....



oceans "store a lot of heat". Not consistently. the rate at which they can capture carbon is decreasing.


not a big deal. ok. Go live on Miami Beach and report back in two years. Let us know if "big gov't" is doing anything too.


events in 2016 that made some headlines (according to "Quartz"):

1. Great Barrier Reef Coral dying
2. Deforestation in the Amazon escalated
3. "Polar Sea Ice" approximately the size of India beneath the 1981-2010 average.
4. Biggest glacier - Totten - off East Antartica has an ice shelf that is melting from below because of warm water. If the ice from the glacier meets the ocean = 11.5 feet of sea level rise.
5. "nuisance" flooding impacting US communities.
6. Coffee production will decline.
7. Getting hotter. Preliminary data through Oct. = 1.2 C above pre-industrial levels.

Also. There's multiple sources of AGW and non-AGW that contribute to "climate change"/"global warming"/"global cooling":



From: Link

You shouldn't fear to express your opinions, but you need to respect the actual data collection efforts made by scientists to formulate the hypotheses around different disciplines.

Your politicians are failing you. Also greed.






DoD Releases Report on Security Implications of Climate Change

DoD News, Defense Media Activity


WASHINGTON, July 29, 2015 — Global climate change will aggravate problems such as poverty, social tensions, environmental degradation, ineffectual leadership and weak political institutions that threaten stability in a number of countries, according to a report the Defense Department sent to Congress yesterday.

The Senate Appropriations Committee requested the report in conjunction with the Defense Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2015, asking that the undersecretary of defense for policy provide a report that identifies the most serious and likely climate-related security risks for each combatant command and the ways those commands integrate risk mitigation into their planning processes.

Fragile States Vulnerable to Disruption

The report finds that climate change is a security risk, Pentagon officials said, because it degrades living conditions, human security and the ability of governments to meet the basic needs of their populations. Communities and states that already are fragile and have limited resources are significantly more vulnerable to disruption and far less likely to respond effectively and be resilient to new challenges, they added.

“The Department of Defense's primary responsibility is to protect national security interests around the world,” officials said in a news release announcing the report’s submission. “This involves considering all aspects of the global security environment and planning appropriately for potential contingencies and the possibility of unexpected developments both in the near and the longer terms.

“It is in this context,” they continued, “that the department must consider the effects of climate change -- such as sea level rise, shifting climate zones and more frequent and intense severe weather events -- and how these effects could impact national security.”

Integrating Climate-Related Impacts Into Planning

To reduce the national security implications of climate change, combatant commands are integrating climate-related impacts into their planning cycles, officials said. The ability of the United States and other countries to cope with the risks and implications of climate change requires monitoring, analysis and integration of those risks into existing overall risk management measures, as appropriate for each combatant command, they added.

The report concludes the Defense Department already is observing the impacts of climate change in shocks and stressors to vulnerable nations and communities, including in the United States, the Arctic, the Middle East, Africa, Asia and South America, officials said.



Quoting 184. barbamz:

Warning of 'collapse' of buildings in Siberia's permafrost cities in next 35 years
By The Siberian Times reporter, 28 December 2016
Threat to Salakhard and Anadyr could come even sooner - by the mid-2020s - as thaw of frozen ground is forecast to have 'devastating' impact. ...
More with maps and pics see link above.

This is an article that really makes you sit up and take notice. Thank you so much for posting this. A couple of excerpts:

"The Russian-US analysis says a worst-case scenario could lead to a 75-95% 'reduction in bearing capacity throughout the permafrost region by 2050'."

"On average, the fastest changes are projected for Salekhard and Anadyr. There the bearing capacity has potential to decrease to critical levels by (the) mid 2020s. In Yakutsk and Norilsk the critical climate-induced decrease in bearing capacity is expected around (the) 2040s."

Bearing capacity (from Wiki)
Must reads for understanding the psychology, and ineffectiveness, of any further debates. I posted one of these before. Its all based in science:

A new brain study sheds light on why it can be so hard to change someone's political beliefs: Why we react to inconvenient truths as if they were personal insults.
. . . . these results are an intriguing step: The brain processes politically charged information (or information about strongly held beliefs) differently (and perhaps with more emotion) than it processes more mundane facts. It can help explain why attempts to correct misinformation can backfire completely, leaving people more convinced of their convictions.

How politics makes us stupid
But the More Information Hypothesis isn’t just wrong. It’s backwards. Cutting-edge research shows that the more information partisans get, the deeper their disagreements become.

This one weird trick will not convince conservatives to fight climate change: Clever new arguments are beside the point.

The vast bulk of our knowledge, we take on faith. Or to put it more charitably, we take on trust. We absorb what we know from trusted peers and authorities. Our trust in them is a kind of heuristic that allows us to navigate a wildly complex and uncertain reality, of which we will directly experience only a tiny fraction.
Having an understanding of the world and your place in it — an understanding shared by your tribe — feels like safety. It feels like control. Questions that unsettle that understanding are instinctively treated with skepticism or outright hostility.
Drunken Forest from melting permafrost.

Yeah, dats a real thing, but not like coke, it's a AGW thang.


Questions that unsettle that understanding are instinctively treated with skepticism or outright hostility.


We see dat daily here from a lot of those who filter every aspect of their waken lives thru it.

Truth is a pathless land, and one cannot get there thru ideology, religion, nor anything other than logic.

Werd'.
Quoting 252. blizzard1024:



Yes this is pretty basic. Since you are cordial I will...

For an increase in CO2 here is the equation...
dF = 5.35 ln(C/Co)

Where 'dF' is the radiative forcing in Watts per square meter, 'C' is the concentration of atmospheric CO2, and 'Co' is the reference CO2 concentration. Normally the value of Co is chosen at the pre-industrial concentration of 280 ppmv.

So if we double CO2, you get dF = 5.35 ln(2)
so dF= 5.35 x 0.69314718056 = 3.708337416 w/m2 of extra downwelling IR. The total greenhouse effect is about 324 w/m2 so this is a little over 1% increase. If you use the Stefan-Boltzmann equation, you can convert 3.7 w/m2 into a temperature change which is Power/Area = S-B constant x emissivity (close to 1) x T4 where Temperature is raised to the 4th power. So if you solve for T you get around 1.2C increase in global temperatures from doubling CO2. This could take centuries as the oceans store a lot of heat. Also 1C is not really that big a deal climate wise....



Where are you getting 1C from that? (3.7/(5.670373 *10^-8))^(1/4)= 90K which would be the temperature of an object receiving 3.7 m/w2 of energy that radiated all energy it received.

Not to mention, the Stefan Boltzmann law was created to measure radiation from a black body. Not exactly sure if it can be used in this way, I have seen no one else use this method to calculate temperature increases from increased Greenhouse gas concentrations. I remember using it to measure the temperature of earth, but that was by assuming all radiation that entered earth, left earth, the calculation was always too low because the atmosphere and the planet retain heat. Typically from what I've seen, a climate sensitivity figure is used to calculate increased temperatures dT = %u03BB*dF.

(eye of) Super Typhoon Meranti, Sept. 13. Source : Himawari-8, RAMMB-CIRA/JMA.
Quoting 154. blizzard1024:



First of all, 1C of warming is well within the bounds of the Holocene climate variations. In fact, 6000-8000 years before present, the Arctic was 2-4C warmer based on pollen sample cores and a more northerly tree-line than today.


First of all, no it isn't. How stupid do you think we are? A rapid 1C planetary warming over the course of 150 years requires a fundamental change in the dynamics of the system. Heat doesn't just magically appear out of the ether, especially in light of the fact there are clear physical and chemical explanations that directly implicate the cause.

Second, the mid Holocene Optimum (which is what you're referring to) was restricted to the arctic summer months. Changes in orbital dynamics increased insolation at the pole leading to warmer summers in the arctic and northern hemisphere. Those changes happened over the course of thousands of years, and since then the Earth (especially the northern hemisphere) had been cooling. Until recently of course.

Third, you're completely ignoring the fact that modern human civilization didn't exist during that time period. Our infrastructure, population centers, etc. were all built around 20th century climate norms. You'd have to be pretty naive to think that climate change, regardless of cause, would have no impact.

Quoting 154. blizzard1024:
So to say that we are putting the equivalent of so many nuclear warheads into the atmosphere is really not relevant and it not a good way to communicate climate change to the public. It was warmer before during the Holocene Optimum.


Non-sequitur. A warmer world thousands or millions of years ago has no bearing on how our modern world would cope in the face of rapid climate change. It was warmer in the Eocene. It was warmer in the Miocene. But 7 billion people weren't around then. Our population centers weren't around then. Our agricultural infrastructure wasn't around then. Do you see the flaw in this tired denier logic yet?

Further more, you and the general public gloss over something like 1C like it was nothing because you have no concept of scale. So I put it into terms of human technology equivalents to make it easy to understand. It is not nothing. It takes an incredible amount of energy to heat the planet by 1C, and that energy is now a permanent resident in our climate system. It's going to have impacts.

Quoting 154. blizzard1024:
Second, hurricane intensity is not only driven by ocean temperatures. There is wind shear, MCS and MCCs from land masses (like Africa) and mid to high level water vapor that are all important in determining how strong a hurricane gets. Climate models as you state just can't do this. Our current observing system allows us to much more accurately get an estimate of max winds and lower pressures versus 50 years ago so the data is skewed. See Landsea 2010. To make a conclusion that global warming is making hurricanes stronger like Dr Masters states is premature.


This is a tropical weather blog. We do have an idea of the factors that go into cyclogenesis, thanks in no small part to Dr. Masters frequent and informative posts on the topic.

More to the point, Landsea 2010 has nothing to do with the what Dr. M was discussing. Landsea was talking about the frequency of storms. It doesn't take a Ph.D to conclude that given our more accurate monitoring that the numbers of storms we find today are going to be skewed.

Dr. M is talking about the frequency of STRONG storms and how climate change can impact their formation and strength. That doesn't imply that there will be more storms in general. It implies that storms that do form have a higher likelihood of becoming potent due to warmer waters and higher atmospheric water vapor.

Again, you don't need a Ph.D to reach this conclusion. Unless your proposing that climate change is going to create a global shear belt that prevents storms from ever forming, then storms that do form in a warmer, moister environment are going to have a greater likelihood of becoming stronger. A warmer, moister environment is what is projected to occur in a warming world, and we are already seeing that show up in the meteorological record.

Quoting 154. blizzard1024:
The Arctic amplification "theory" is counter to atmospheric science when I learned it 20 years ago, yes I do have an MS and BS in atmospheric science.


No, it isn't "counter" to what you learned, and so far you haven't done a very convincing job of backing up your credibility.

Quoting 154. blizzard1024:
It is well known that when the Earth warms or cools, the Arctic sees the largest changes. The Arctic will warm more than the midlatitudes decreasing baroclinicity which in turn decreases storminess and storm intensity. When there are a lot of closed lows farther south it is the negative phase of the Arctic Oscillation and North Atlantic Oscillation. This was the case in the colder 1960s and 70s.


The Earth does not create or destroy heat. The weather patterns and ocean currents move heat around the system.

Along those lines, one of the factors in the 60's/70's was the immense amounts of sulfur dioxide being pumped into the atmosphere which acted to cool the planet. Once clean air regulations kicked in the sulfur dioxide levels in the atmosphere dropped rapidly allowing the greenhouse forcings to go back to work.

Quoting 154. blizzard1024:
The only way that you could even see something that leads to more and slower moving waves, is if the Rossby radius of deformation is smaller due to decreased static stability. BUT, if the warming occurs from greenhouse gases, then the stability actually increases which is counter to that idea.


This is the same tired line of BS that Judith Curry has pushed. The climate scientists over on Real Climate did a pretty thorough debunking of this line of reasoning a number of years ago.

Quoting 154. blizzard1024:
Additionally, the warm oceans and cold continents also is counter to the enhanced greenhouse effect which warms the land more than the oceans. You can't have it both ways.


Huh? O_o

The "enhanced" greenhouse effect says nothing about warming land more than the oceans. It refers to further decreasing the mean free path of longwave IR in an atmosphere in correspondence to an increase in greenhouse gases. It specifies increases in forcings, not where on the planet that energy winds up.

Given equal insolation, land ALWAYS warms (and cools) more rapidly than the ocean. That's basic physics. Oceans absorb. Land emits. Atmospheric temperatures over land respond almost immediately in response to an increase or decrease in insolation/forcing, while oceans respond more slowly.

Your statement is a false dichotomy.

Quoting 154. blizzard1024:
I remember in the late 1990s when we saw a string of very positive AO or NAO patterns that the going theory was that global warming will lead to a stronger AO / NAO pattern and milder winters. Now that we have seen some negative NAO/AO winters climate scientists are now blaming this on global warming too. This ruins their credibility and the public just doesn't listen.


You are remembering incorrectly unless you can specifically provide citations for scientific research that stated such conclusions. There is a considerable difference between idle conjecture and peer reviewed research.

Furthermore, your eagerness to throw out entire branches of established science going back over a century based on hearsay demonstrates that your degree isn't worth the paper it's printed on. You're making very large claims and providing no evidence to substantiate any of it.

Quoting 154. blizzard1024:
The basic fact is this...the increase in greenhouse gases has led to about 2-3 W/m2 of extra downwelling of IR radiation. The total greenhouse effect is about 324 w/m2. So a mere 1% increase in the total greenhouse effect is enough to throw our climate off the rails??


And the penultimate example to show you're a psuedoscience hack: discarding conservation of energy and the laws of thermodynamics.

A 1% increase in energy in a system at equilibrium will "throw it off the rails". Any increase in energy to a system in equilibrium will throw it off the rails. That additional forcing isn't a one time deal. It's a constant, persistent forcing adding 1% every second of every day of every year.

Quoting 154. blizzard1024:
We wouldn't be here if this was the case. Some other cosmic or volcanic event of the past would have made our planet like Venus or Mars.


Categorically false, completely unsubstantiated by any known physics, and countered by the paleoclimate record.

Quoting 154. blizzard1024:
Earth's climate is stabilized by water and water vapor and clouds. This is common sense and another reason why this whole climate change argument is a waste of tax payer funding.


Dude, do you even science?

Water vapor is not a self-sustaining greenhouse gas. The atmospheric lifetime of water vapor is on the order of days and is extremely dependent on atmospheric conditions. Without other longer lived greenhouse gases to act as stabilizers water vapor content would drop quite rapidly and plunge the Earth into a deep freeze. Your so-called met degree should provide you with enough background to work that one out.

Quoting 154. blizzard1024:
These funds would be better served studying how to predict the climate for the seasons and even interannual variability.


Why don't you get on the horn to the DoD and tell them their efforts to deal with long term climate impacts are all just a big waste of time and money. I'm sure you wouldn't be the first nor last crackpot to make that suggestion.
Quoting 266. TechnoCaveman:



All very true, but the 798 billion kWh must be larger. 798 billion / 8760 (hours in a year) is only 91 megawats. Way too small a number.
Progress is being made. It looks like all but 21 the 150 new coal fired plants have been cancelled. (Source: http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Category:Prop osed_coal_plants_in_the_United_States)
Though the operating plants have a combined power generation of 14,076 mega watts.

Nulcear generation is up .3% from the same month, October, as last year. (as per U.S. government)

http://www.eia.gov/electricity/monthly/update/arc hive/december2016/


We'll see what happens under the new administration. Further closing of coal powered plants may be delayed for a bit, a brief uptick in the coal industry. All in all, a last flicker of life in an industry, that in the long term, will decline. Not for any altruistic reasons, but for market reasons.
Quoting 266. TechnoCaveman:



All very true, but the 798 billion kWh must be larger. 798 billion / 8760 (hours in a year) is only 91 megawats. Way too small a number.
Progress is being made. It looks like all but 21 the 150 new coal fired plants have been cancelled. (Source: http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Category:Prop osed_coal_plants_in_the_United_States)
Though the operating plants have a combined power generation of 14,076 mega watts.

Nulcear generation is up .3% from the same month, October, as last year. (as per U.S. government)

http://www.eia.gov/electricity/monthly/update/arc hive/december2016/

So little hydro. Little or no fresh water should reach the Oceans unused.
Quoting 198. blizzard1024:



What a load of crap! If Dr. Master's motivation is purely money he could make a lot more if went over to the dark side. Oil companies would pay him handsomely. He might have even been appointed head of the DOE or the EPA.
Quoting 264. ILwthrfan:



You have any idea how many times I have been banned on here for taking "liberal positions"?
Every bit as much as you, so stop whining!


I guess that means you're not in the select group.
Relief Web.int - Dec 29.
IFRC launches Emergency Appeal for Philippines as humanitarian toll of Typhoon Nock-Ten mounts

(...) Philippine Red Cross emergency response teams on the ground in the worst affected areas estimate estimate that the storm left substantial humanitarian needs, affecting close to 600,000 people. In provinces such as Catanduanes, Marinduque, Camarines Sur and Albay, where the typhoon made landfall, high winds and heavy rains felled trees and power lines and caused landslides in some areas making roads impassable.

"Over 70,000 homes have been reported damaged or destroyed and we estimate that these numbers will only increase as we get a clearer picture of the situation. Local livelihoods have suffered losses with farm land flooded and damage to banana, coconut and abaca crops," says Patrick Elliott, Operations Manager for the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (IFRC) in Philippines. "Some of the most severely affected provinces are islands and reaching them is not easy. The logistics involved in delivering relief items will be challenging".

As well as conducting rapid needs assessments, Philippine Red Cross teams have been working in evacuation centres providing cooked meals to thousands of people who left their homes before the storm made landfall. Most are now returning to their communities. (...)
Quoting 278. daddyjames:


Am I the only one who read daddy's post and had to look up 'heuristic'? I am? ..sigh..

(And based on the definition, his post itself was heuristic.)
Quoting 287. PensacolaDoug:

I guess that means you're not in the select group.

I guess I'm not either, I got banned for responding to one of your anti climate rants not that long ago.
T-59 HRS REMAIN OF 2016


I got censored for posting a picture of a angry rainbow pony. There're adorable, even when there're angry.
December Storm # 5 for Soo Cal and # 6 over the holiday weekend(allegedly) Or was that 4and 5? Im losing track anymore but thats a good thing, it means it has been raining in Soo Cal!


An upper level low pressure system will move into the area from the southwest and bring moderate rain showers Friday and through Friday night. Snow levels will be high with this system with a chance of a few inches of snow above 7,500 feet. Another storm, much colder and stronger, will move in from the northwest for rain showers and significant snow in the mountains over the holiday weekend.
I see Doc's blog is back up and running somewhat I guess. The worst decision Doc made was having TWC take over the company and now IBM. And people wonder why IBM can't keep up with Microsoft.

BTW El-Nino is now on the way and appears to be trying to show itself over the next couple of months. Infact we could be dealing with atleast a moderate event by later 2017.

March


September
That forecast is more generous than the WU one. WU is .33 over 2 days..
Quoting 252. blizzard1024:



Yes this is pretty basic. Since you are cordial I will...

For an increase in CO2 here is the equation...
dF = 5.35 ln(C/Co)

Where 'dF' is the radiative forcing in Watts per square meter, 'C' is the concentration of atmospheric CO2, and 'Co' is the reference CO2 concentration. Normally the value of Co is chosen at the pre-industrial concentration of 280 ppmv.

So if we double CO2, you get dF = 5.35 ln(2)
so dF= 5.35 x 0.69314718056 = 3.708337416 w/m2 of extra downwelling IR. The total greenhouse effect is about 324 w/m2 so this is a little over 1% increase. If you use the Stefan-Boltzmann equation, you can convert 3.7 w/m2 into a temperature change which is Power/Area = S-B constant x emissivity (close to 1) x T4 where Temperature is raised to the 4th power. So if you solve for T you get around 1.2C increase in global temperatures from doubling CO2. This could take centuries as the oceans store a lot of heat. Also 1C is not really that big a deal climate wise....



So you start by incorrectly applying a simplification, then use that as justification for your claim? Then you one up that by reiterating that nonsensical and unsubstantiated claim that "1C isn't that much"?

The change in temperature is given by:

dT = lambda*dF

Where lambda is the climate sensitivity. According to AR5, the current range for lambda is between 2C and 4.5C with 3C being the most likely value for a doubling of CO2. That puts lambda at anywhere from 0.54 to 1.2°C/(W/m2). Let's assume the low end for the sake of argument to make it as favorable for your case as possible.

df = 5.35 * ln(C/Co)

Where C is current CO2 concentration and Co is the baseline. So for current CO2 levels:

dT = lambda*5.35*ln(404/280) = 1.96*lambda = 1.05C

Again, this is just a quick and dirty estimate for current conditions. Now for the future, the business as usual scenario has us reaching a full doubling by the end of the century.

dT = lambda*5.35*ln(2) = 3.7*lambda = 2.0C

And that's using the low end of lamda, and that's from the conservative estimates from the IPCC. Growing evidence indicates that the climate sensitivity is actually more towards the higher end, but we'll have to wait and see if the broader community accepts the research in the next IPCC.

The actual model results provide a much more realistic estimate of future climate conditions than this basic formula.
Quoting 296. PedleyCA:

That forecast is more generous than the WU one. WU is .33 over 2 days..


Might be much more where that came from as El-Nino starts to take shape. Seems to be gaining tracking with the SOI going consistently negative.
Quoting 231. ACSeattle:


Wait and see what happens when there is a freezing fog with a slight breeze and there are trees and bushes around.

Very cool...



Ya See, it begins like dis here stuff in the Great White North.

Wisconsin DNR: Climate change cause debatable

Environment The Associated Press · Madison, Wis. · Dec 29, 2016


The Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources has quietly removed language from its website that said humans and greenhouse gases are the main cause of climate change.

The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel reports the website now states the cause of climate change is debatable. Gone are sentences attributing global warming to human activities and rising carbon dioxide levels. Also gone is language saying that scientists agree the Great Lakes region will see longer summers and shorter winters, decreased ice cover and changes in rain and snow patterns if climate change continues.

• More: Climate coverage

The new language states: "As it has done throughout the centuries, the earth is going through a change. The reasons for this change at this particular time in the earth's long history are being debated and researched by academic entities outside the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources."

The blurb goes on to state that the DNR's responsibility is to manage Wisconsin's natural resources through whatever event presents itself and the staff is ready to adapt its strategies to protect lakes, waterways, plants and wildlife.

Most scientists agree burning fossil fuels has increased greenhouse gases and caused global warming. A 2014 United Nations report found that human influence on climate is clear. The report also found global warming is unequivocal and unprecedented.

Republican Gov. Scott Walker controls the DNR. He and his fellow Republicans have been critical of President Barack Obama's climate change initiatives. Republican Attorney General Brad Schimel joined other states in a 2015 federal lawsuit challenging limitations on power plant carbon emissions. The DNR has removed other online information about global warming since Walker took office, including a trove of information compiled by former Democratic Gov. Jim Doyle's global warming task force and a teaching guide on climate change. The agency turned that guide over to the University of Wisconsin-Stevens Point.

DNR spokesperson James Dick told the Journal Sentinel that the climate change language revisions "reflects our position on this topic that we have communicated for years, that our agency regularly must respond to a variety of environmental and human stressors from drought, flooding, wind events to changing demographics."

Joel Bammeier, president of the Chicago-based Alliance for the Great Lakes, said he doesn't understand why the DNR made the climate change revisions.

"To me, it looks like they are trying to cover up a debate that really isn't happening."

Paul Robbins, director of the University of Wisconsin-Madison's Nelson Institute for Environmental Studies said the revisions don't surprise him.

"When climate change gets so politicized" he said, "you can imagine agencies and its leaders haggling over wording."

Stay Informed
The news on your schedule from MPR News Update

Email Address*

Quoting 231. ACSeattle:


Wait and see what happens when there is a freezing fog with a slight breeze and there are trees and bushes around.


Does Utah have trees and bushes?
Quoting 240. blizzard1024:


Yep. There's no more sense in this field anymore or me trying to make sense to these folks. Most american's don't care anyway and with Trump in office I hope he shuts this whole one-sided approach to climate studies down and allows for other views so we can learn more about our climate system. That is what science is supposed to be. Thanks dude. Happy holidays.
You know what? I'd love to see the current administration offer up a bunch of research grants to people who want to prove anthropogenic global warming wrong. It would be just too funny to see them fail badly in their quest (or if they actually came up with something substantial I would be happy for the new information).

You complain about the politicization of climate science but as far as I can see that all came from one side of the argument. Why would any scientist ever push a view that they knew was wrong when they know that other scientists would be able show they were wrong? That's very detrimental to a scientific career. The quickest way to make a name for yourself in science is to overturn established science with new insights. Given the intense attention AGW has received over the past 25 or so years if there was even a glimmer of something that would substantially overturn current thinking there are enough brave scientists around to bring it to our attention. It's just beyond belief that the tens of thousands of scientists involved in studying climate related science are all in on a hoax pushing bad science. Too many people are involved for such a conspiracy to hold water over the past 25 years.
NWS warning on this strong line of storms, excessive Lighting and 55mph winds/possible damage...
Snow in New England...bet the skiers and snowboarders are happy :)


(Source)


(Source)

Quoting 240. blizzard1024:


Yep. There's no more sense in this field anymore or me trying to make sense to these folks. Most american's don't care anyway and with Trump in office I hope he shuts this whole one-sided approach to climate studies down and allows for other views so we can learn more about our climate system. That is what science is supposed to be. Thanks dude. Happy holidays.


bi·as /bīəs/
noun
1. prejudice in favor of or against one thing, person, or group compared with another, usually in a way considered to be unfair.
synonyms: partiality, partisanship, favoritism, unfairness, one-sidedness
verb
1. cause to feel or show inclination or prejudice for or against someone or something.
Quoting 302. daddyjames:



Does Utah have trees and bushes?

Indeed we do...trees and bushes!

Quoting 307. LAbonbon:


Indeed we do...trees and bushes!




wow. That is a beautiful picture. Happy its you and not me though ;)
I don't need a scientist to tell me when water is boiling. It's not hard to see and understand how an erupting volcano can change the earth's climate. It's not hard to imagine if you clump all the cars, trucks, boats, etc.. together and that it would be the size of a large volcano that is erupting 24/7. Some things become so obvious, for me anyway, that knowing the math is not required.
How much carbon dioxide is released each year?

Last year, all the world's nations combined pumped nearly 38.2 billion tons of carbon dioxide into the air from the burning of fossil fuels such as coal and oil, according to new international calculations on global emissions published Sunday in the journal Nature Climate Change.

Carbon dioxide emissions rise to 2.4 million pounds per second - CBS ...

www.cbsnews.com/.../carbon-dioxide-emissions-rise -to-24-million-pounds-per-second/


..Humans are terra forming a new Biosphere.

This is a very,very bad Idea.


Xyrus2000 - Thank you for for that contribution.

Science schools bias
following chris bertish sup feat and times have been tough for the adventurist. he posted a blog saying huge following seas & surfing the sup has been extremely frightning. luckily weather is forecast to get better. his medterm goal is 20n 30w. happy weather you all.
Quoting 301. Xandra:




Well I think I've hit my 'quota' for the day...time to stop multi-tasking and put my undivided attention on something a bit more productive...

Good blog though! Lots of info, science, some humor, conspiracy theories, and math (!) One of these days maybe I'll actually be able to read all the useful links you all post. (But understanding them all is another matter entirely...)

Have a wonderful day everyone!
Here's some fresh homemade bread for the lost and hungry time-travelers; come by and visit me in Belarus.



Here, we are still in a State of recovery for those Folks in the affected River Parishes.

Mid-August: Louisiana’s No-name Storm

"A slow-moving tropical disturbance that was never officially classified as a tropical depression meandered over Louisiana in mid-August, dumping colossal amounts of rain. The extreme record flooding that resulted caused 13 deaths and an estimated $10 - 15 billion in damage, making it the most expensive natural disaster in the U.S. in 2016. Some parts of Louisiana recorded more than 20" of rain in 48 hours, which qualifies as a 1-in-1,000 year rainfall event (having a 0.1 percent chance of occurring at a particular location in any given year), according to the NWS Lower Mississippi River Forecast Center. The highest rainfall total from the storm was 31.39” in Watson, Louisiana. The storm system carried near-record amounts of atmospheric moisture, drawn from the Gulf of Mexico and northwest Atlantic, where sea-surface temperatures (SSTs) were at near-record levels—more than 1°C (1.8°F) warmer than average. A fast-track climate change attribution study published one month after the storm found that climate change approximately doubled the chances for the type of heavy downpours that caused the devastating flood.

This was Louisiana’s second 20” deluge of the year; on March 8 - 12, an upper-level low pressure system stuck in place over Texas brought a flow of moist Gulf of Mexico air with record levels of atmospheric moisture for this time of year to Louisiana, resulting in widespread 1-in-200 year rainfall amounts of 15 - 20”. The storm killed five, and total damage in Louisiana and Texas was estimated at $1.5 billion by insurance broker Aon Benfield. "



That Mo available Water Vapor is making a HUGELY,Big, best, great again..difference in these ongoing and increasing events,globally.

Quoting 315. aquak9:

Here's some fresh homemade bread for the lost and hungry time-travelers; come by and visit me in Belarus.






Looks great proofing up dere comrade.
Quoting 315. aquak9:

Here's some fresh homemade bread for the lost and hungry time-travelers; come by and visit me in Belarus.





I would come visit, but I have been exiled by WU to Bulgaria...it's too cold to travel ;-)
Quoting 318. Greg01:


I would come visit, but I have been exiled by WU to Bulgaria...it's too cold to travel ;-)


Local Weather
Partly Cloudy
Annette Island, Alaska
38 °F


At least I landed in the correct country.
Quoting 315. aquak9:

Here's some fresh homemade bread for the lost and hungry time-travelers; come by and visit me in Belarus.





I find that bread to be offensive and threatening. Moderators!
Edited to fix a bad link, because I am technologically inept.

Link

My apologies if this has already been linked to... https://ir.citi.com/hsq32Jl1m4aIzicMqH8sBkPnbsqfnw y4Jgb1J2kIPYWIw5eM8yD3FY9VbGpK%2Baax

From the "leftist" corporation/bank Citibank, a report on the costs of doing nothing about climate change.

One interesting tidbit:

"Overall, we find that the incremental costs of action are limited (and indeed ultimately lead to savings), offer reasonable returns on investment, and should not have too detrimental an effect on global growth," the report's authors write. In fact, they found that the necessary investment, such as adding renewable energy sources and improving efficiency, might actually boost the global economy.
"We believe that that solution does exist," the report states. "The incremental costs of following a low carbon path are in context limited and seem affordable, the "return" on that investment is acceptable and moreover the likely avoided liabilities are enormous. Given that all things being equal cleaner air has to be preferable to pollution, a very strong "Why would you not?" argument begins to develop." - ThinkProgress.org
Quoting 315. aquak9:

Here's some fresh homemade bread for the lost and hungry time-travelers; come by and visit me in Belarus.





That looks so good.
ULL SW of California is next storm for Soo Cal if it moves NE as forecast by models........looks like it is just spinning it's wheels right now.........maybe the big trof seen further west will push it NE,

Quoting 303. riverat544:

You know what? I'd love to see the current administration offer up a bunch of research grants to people who want to prove anthropogenic global warming wrong. It would be just too funny to see them fail badly in their quest (or if they actually came up with something substantial I would be happy for the new information).

You complain about the politicization of climate science but as far as I can see that all came from one side of the argument. Why would any scientist ever push a view that they knew was wrong when they know that other scientists would be able show they were wrong? That's very detrimental to a scientific career. The quickest way to make a name for yourself in science is to overturn established science with new insights. Given the intense attention AGW has received over the past 25 or so years if there was even a glimmer of something that would substantially overturn current thinking there are enough brave scientists around to bring it to our attention. It's just beyond belief that the tens of thousands of scientists involved in studying climate related science are all in on a hoax pushing bad science. Too many people are involved for such a conspiracy to hold water over the past 25 years.


Bliz is the typical psuedoscientific denier. Comes in appearing like he has a clue, goes off the rails by denying basic science concepts, and when called out on it promptly falls back to idiotic conspiracy theories that wouldn't hold water even if you wrapped them in saran wrap, duct tape, and then dunked it in a vat of silicone.

And like all deniers,no amount of facts, reason, or logic will ever get through to them. They try to paint climate science as some big cabalistic mystery that you need to know a secret handshake and have a decoder ring just to gain access to, when in fact the science, data, code, etc. is right out in the open. There's no magical formula, or secret data manipulation, or mysterious fudge factor at play; a decent physics student can work through the derivation of the basic conclusions related to global warming in a couple sheets of notebook paper. The hard questions are trying to figure out what the consequences are. Whether or not it's warming as a result of human activity was answered a long time ago.
Bears Ears and Gold Butte: Obama creates two nature preserves
BBC, 4 hours ago
President Barack Obama has unilaterally designated two new "national monument" nature preserves in the western US states of Nevada and Utah.
The Bears Ears National Monument and the Gold Butte National Monument will protect areas rich in Native American artefacts from energy drilling. ...


Error!

There was a problem opening this user's Wunder Blog files. Please try again later or check the requested URL.


I thought I might have gotten banned. Never been banned before. Do they send you an email or something?

Quoting 297. Xyrus2000:



So you start by incorrectly applying a simplification, then use that as justification for your claim? Then you one up that by reiterating that nonsensical and unsubstantiated claim that "1C isn't that much"?

The change in temperature is given by:

dT = lambda*dF

Where lambda is the climate sensitivity. According to AR5, the current range for lambda is between 2C and 4.5C with 3C being the most likely value for a doubling of CO2. That puts lambda at anywhere from 0.54 to 1.2°C/(W/m2). Let's assume the low end for the sake of argument to make it as favorable for your case as possible.

df = 5.35 * ln(C/Co)

Where C is current CO2 concentration and Co is the baseline. So for current CO2 levels:

dT = lambda*5.35*ln(404/280) = 1.96*lambda = 1.05C

Again, this is just a quick and dirty estimate for current conditions. Now for the future, the business as usual scenario has us reaching a full doubling by the end of the century.

dT = lambda*5.35*ln(2) = 3.7*lambda = 2.0C

And that's using the low end of lamda, and that's from the conservative estimates from the IPCC. Growing evidence indicates that the climate sensitivity is actually more towards the higher end, but we'll have to wait and see if the broader community accepts the research in the next IPCC.

The actual model results provide a much more realistic estimate of future climate conditions than this basic formula.


You are incorrectly assuming the feedbacks to any forcing are positive. There is just as much body of evidence that feedbacks especially the water vapor feedback is negative or just neutral. The lamda you quote is the feedback parameter not a temperature. Since convection, and clouds play a huge role in the global energy balance and climate models don't handle these well, one can easily see scenarios that feedbacks are negative just as much as they could be positive in the model world. But positive feedbacks are less likelyin nature because the climate system would spiral out of control from any forcing. So my calculation was assuming a neutral feedback which means that the lamda parameter is unity, again lamda is not a temperature. So without any feedbacks, a doubling of CO2 in our atmosphere leads to around 1.2C of warming. That is solid science. The feedbacks are where all the debate is and this is what the climate sensitivity issue. The IPCC assumes high sensitivity. Other scientists don't. I agree with the latter.
Quoting 328. washingaway:

Error!
There was a problem opening this user's Wunder Blog files. Please try again later or check the requested URL.

I thought I might have gotten banned. Never been banned before. Do they send you an email or something?

Happening to me, too, in the last couple of days. No worries. Keep trying. :-)


287. PensacolaDoug

I guess that means you're not in the select group.




Introducing the wunderground.com Main Blog "Select Group" finalist for 2017.

Left to right,...

kotg,cb,patrap,xandra,yada,yada,yada'...

: P

Quoting 327. barbamz:

Bears Ears and Gold Butte: Obama creates two nature preserves
BBC, 4 hours ago
President Barack Obama has unilaterally designated two new "national monument" nature preserves in the western US states of Nevada and Utah.
The Bears Ears National Monument and the Gold Butte National Monument will protect areas rich in Native American artefacts from energy drilling. ...






In the middle of winter
The trees are bare and the bears are hibernating
The only sound in the forest
Is the sound of snow heard crashing to the ground
And in the middle of loving
I hope you'll find a place in your heart for them
They really can't do us any harm
It is only us who can do harm to them

But there's an animal that winter won't affect at all
He sits by fireplaces waiting for the winter's fall
He owns guns and oh you know he's got that gun in his hand
He's a man and oh he's got that precious thing in his hand

So in the middle of loving
I hope you'll find a place in your heart for them
When it's cold and the grass is gold
All the animals take shelter as they hide
And when an animal can't find shelter
Some time winter takes over and he dies

But there's an animal that winter won't affect at all
He sits by fireplaces waiting for the winter's fall
He owns guns and oh you know he's got that gun in his hand
He's a man and oh he hold's that precious life in his hand








Quoting 328. washingaway:

Error!

There was a problem opening this user's Wunder Blog files. Please try again later or check the requested URL.


I thought I might have gotten banned. Never been banned before. Do they send you an email or something?




Trust me, you would know if you got banned. The WU blogs have been a mess for a while.
Quoting 326. Xyrus2000:



Bliz is the typical psuedoscientific denier. Comes in appearing like he has a clue, goes off the rails by denying basic science concepts, and when called out on it promptly falls back to idiotic conspiracy theories that wouldn't hold water even if you wrapped them in saran wrap, duct tape, and then dunked it in a vat of silicone.

And like all deniers,no amount of facts, reason, or logic will ever get through to them. They try to paint climate science as some big cabalistic mystery that you need to know a secret handshake and have a decoder ring just to gain access to, when in fact the science, data, code, etc. is right out in the open. There's no magical formula, or secret data manipulation, or mysterious fudge factor at play; a decent physics student can work through the derivation of the basic conclusions related to global warming in a couple sheets of notebook paper. The hard questions are trying to figure out what the consequences are. Whether or not it's warming as a result of human activity was answered a long time ago.


You have this soooo wrong. You are equating the entire complex global climate system to something as simple as basic physics that a student can derive on a couple sheets of paper? YOU are ignorant of how the atmosphere works and are calling me a "psuedoscientific denier"??? This is so laughable. wow. I am done wasting my time here. My posts probably will get censored anyway I suppose since I am not towing the line. Censorship in the USA....go figure.
Quoting 334. blizzard1024:



You have this soooo wrong. You are equating the entire complex global climate system to something as simple as basic physics that a student can derive on a couple sheets of paper? YOU are ignorant of how the atmosphere works and are calling me a "psuedoscientific denier"??? This is so laughable. wow. I am done wasting my time here. My posts probably will get censored anyway I suppose since I am not towing the line. Censorship in the USA....go figure.



Hmmmmmm... so now you are a victim.... you haven't been censored. you haven't been banned. sounds like you wish you were to give yourself a reason to bail out of this hole you are in.
Solar Farms Expected to Outpace Natural Gas in U.S.
Climate Central, Dec 27, 2016
2016 is shaping up to be a milestone year for energy, and when the final accounting is done, one of the biggest winners is likely to be solar power.
For the first time, more electricity-generating capacity from solar power plants is expected to have been built in the U.S. than from natural gas and wind, U.S. Department of Energy data show. ...
Quoting 328. washingaway:

Error!

There was a problem opening this user's Wunder Blog files. Please try again later or check the requested URL.


I thought I might have gotten banned. Never been banned before. Do they send you an email or something?




You're not a true blogger until you've been banned. Just look at it as "being dunced". I've been banned a number of times.
Quoting 320. washingaway:


I find that bread to be offensive and threatening. Moderators!
ok as soon as its baked we will snatch it up
Quoting 337. Grothar:



You're not a true blogger until you've been banned. Just look at it as "being dunced". I've been banned a number of times.
you have never been banned tazed a little yes but not banned
Quoting 285. Uragani:


So little hydro. Little or no fresh water should reach the Oceans unused.


Yea, so little hydro and geothermal. Friends have been investing in GeoTerm companies of southern California but ... progress is slow. So far no one blames geotermal for global warming.
The many dams produce such a small fraction. The change in western US weather has put lake mead at risk.
Trash burning is also negligent.
California creates biogas from a sewer plant but that is less than a twenty megawatts.
Solar is not listed even though people are building their own solar farms.
Fusion has made some progress but, sadly no.

Wood and other waste still works. I know it sounds primitive. There are over 220 plants in the US making over 7 gigawats (7,462 MW) (Source: http://biomassmagazine.com/plants/listplants/bioma ss/US/ )

I think it was a German city that switched over to wood, created jobs, jump started their economy and now teaches others how to do the same.
Quoting 335. ohiofog:




Hmmmmmm... so now you are a victim.... you haven't been censored. you haven't been banned. sounds like you wish you were to give yourself a reason to bail out of this hole you are in.


Blizzards have a way of covering up stuff..a lot.

hmmm good bread aquak i made a stew in mine



Sideglance to current European weather: While western and central Europe remains under the reign of a massive high (like most time in December) with another smog alert in Paris, there is an ongoing outbreak of severe winter weather with strong winds, rains and massive snow in the eastern Mediterranean, Balkan, Turkey and Black Sea area:


Current airmasses showing the large area of unsettled winter weather (purple and red color = cold air).

Here just some reports from Turkey:

Massive power blackouts hit Istanbul
Hurriyet, Thursday, December 29, 2016
The Energy and Natural Resources Ministry made a statement following the blackout, stating that it was related to a downpour. "Downpour and storms caused a temporarily malfunction on electricity lines," said the statement. The ministry also stated that the blackout hit the Marmara provinces of Adapazar and Kocaeli. ...

Snow, storms hit Turkey, at least 2 killed in floods
Hurriyet, Thursday, December 29, 2016

More news, pics and videos see SevereWeatherEurope (facebook).
Quoting 339. KEEPEROFTHEGATE:

you have never been banned tazed a little yes but not banned


I most certainly was. Not permanently, but once for 11 hours and once for a couple hours and I don't remember the other one. Once was for posting a picture of the 3 stooges, one for a one line quote of Churchill's and the other was that they mistakenly thought I was talking about a blogger when I wasn't. I did get an apology though.
A generation from now, when the fallout of AGW has displaced millions, cost untold trillions, the powers that are derailing action now will be seen as one of histories great evils. They will be derided and recorded as the leading cause of a world that is unable to feed and protect the world's most vulnerable to climate change. History will not be kind to this profit over truth agenda. These top of the food chain billionaires and guilty corporations are not capable of shame.
Quoting 345. Grothar:



I most certainly was. Not permanently, but once for 11 hours and once for a couple hours and I don't remember the other one. Once was for posting a picture of the 3 stooges, one for a one line quote of Churchill's and the other was that they mistakenly thought I was talking about a blogger when I wasn't. I did get an apology though.


I call them tases ya twice once in error
you will never be banned
well unless ya go all mad or somem


by the way happy new year too ya well in 2 days anyway 55hrs remain of 2016
Went outside it feels like someone left the refrigerator door open. I've gotten so accustomed to the warm weather as of late that I forgot its still winter.
From Xandra's quote of Dietrich Bonhoeffer in comment 301:

Never again will we try to persuade the stupid person with reasons, for it is senseless and dangerous.


Wikipedia:
Dietrich Bonhoeffer (German: [ˈdiːtʁɪç ˈboːnhœfɐ]; 4 February 1906 – 9 April 1945) was a German Lutheran pastor, theologian, anti-Nazi dissident, and key founding member of the Confessing Church. His writings on Christianity's role in the secular world have become widely influential, and his book The Cost of Discipleship became a modern classic.

Apart from his theological writings, Bonhoeffer was known for his staunch resistance to the Nazi dictatorship, including vocal opposition to Hitler's euthanasia program and genocidal persecution of the Jews.[2] He was arrested in April 1943 by the Gestapo and imprisoned at Tegel prison for one and a half years. Later he was transferred to a Nazi concentration camp. After being associated with the plot to assassinate Adolf Hitler, he was quickly tried, along with other accused plotters, including former members of the Abwehr (the German Military Intelligence Office), and then executed by hanging on 9 April 1945 as the Nazi regime was collapsing.
Quoting 349. washingaway:

Went outside it feels like someone left the refrigerator door open. I've gotten so accustomed to the warm weather as of late that I forgot its still winter.

where is it, you are?
Quoting 355. PedleyCA:


where is it, you are?

New Orleans, oh wait, let me verify that with WU.
I liked being rainbowed better than being told the blog does not exist. Sigh.
Here's where US tornado activity stands at the end of 2016. October to December counts are preliminary pending event reports from the NCEI which won't be completed until April. Those listed as EFUs are tornadoes that touched down (reported by someone) but did not produce noticeable damage. These tornadoes were rated EF0s in the past, but apparently that's changing this year (although it's not consistent across WFOs yet, some still list them as EF0).

Quoting 347. DeepSeaRising:

I am the final generation or so it was told to me by my long since passed grandfather
Quoting 329. blizzard1024:

You are incorrectly assuming the feedbacks to any forcing are positive. There is just as much body of evidence that feedbacks especially the water vapor feedback is negative or just neutral.



The lamda you quote is the feedback parameter not a temperature. Since convection, and clouds play a huge role in the global energy balance and climate models don't handle these well, one can easily see scenarios that feedbacks are negative just as much as they could be positive in the model world.



But positive feedbacks are less likelyin nature



because the climate system would spiral out of control from any forcing.


Um, your last statement is correct. It would spiral out of control, it has before, and will again given our current trajectory. But, well, it was good while it lasted.

Quoting 334. blizzard1024:


This is so laughable. wow. I am done wasting my time here.


So long, and thanks for all the fish.
Quoting 357. SunnyDaysFla:

I liked being rainbowed better than being told the blog does not exist. Sigh.

I agree. At least the comments are entertaining. I particularly liked comment 109 by Grothar. Something to the effect of: Oh great I'm stuck back in time with Pensacoladoug.
Why Was Climate Change Language Stripped From DNR Web Page?
Edits Are Not First Politicized Changes On State Websites From Walker Administration, Writer Says
By Scottie Lee Meyers, Wednesday, December 28, 2016, 3:15pm
References to climate change, rising temperatures and the human activities that cause them have been removed recently from a Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources web page.
The revisions were caught by James Rowen, a former reporter and editor at the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel who now blogs about state politics. ...

More see link above.

With this good night from Germany. If you like to look at some astounding photos, go to the link below and click especially the first pic:
Check out these amazing fog photos from Qatar

13 hours ago byShabina S. Khatri, Photos
Quoting 334. blizzard1024:



You have this soooo wrong. You are equating the entire complex global climate system to something as simple as basic physics that a student can derive on a couple sheets of paper? YOU are ignorant of how the atmosphere works and are calling me a "psuedoscientific denier"??? This is so laughable. wow. I am done wasting my time here. My posts probably will get censored anyway I suppose since I am not towing the line. Censorship in the USA....go figure.

The data shows that thermometers are impervious to your rants. Is your third from last sentence a New Years resolution? I hope it is, and I hope you are a person who keeps his promises.
removed comment
I like fish...

(waves at Notorious DJ)
Quoting 366. aquak9:

I like fish...

(waves at Notorious DJ)


I like bread . . .

{waves wildly back at water puppy}
Quoting 291. pipelines:


I guess I'm not either, I got banned for responding to one of your anti climate rants not that long ago.
C'mon man! You know I'm not anti-climate. I'm definitely pro-climate.
I told ya Blizz! You came in here and kicked a hornets nest!
Quoting 349. washingaway:

Went outside it feels like someone left the refrigerator door open. I've gotten so accustomed to the warm weather as of late that I forgot its still winter.

Looks like you cooled down a little with the front that went through...(not much, but still, if you're warm-blooded, it counts)

Quoting 358. TropicalAnalystwx13:

Here's where US tornado activity stands at the end of 2016. October to December counts are preliminary pending event reports from the NCEI which won't be completed until April. Those listed as EFUs are tornadoes that touched down (reported by someone) but did not produce noticeable damage. These tornadoes were rated EF0s in the past, but apparently that's changing this year (although it's not consistent across WFOs yet, some still list them as EF0).



By the way, I've updated the monthly lists for 2016 for anyone who wants to read up on individual tornadoes this year:

List of United States tornadoes from January to March 2016
List of United States tornadoes from April to May 2016
List of United States tornadoes from June to August 2016
List of United States tornadoes from September to December 2016
#360 dj
So long, and thanks for all the fish.


Every time Pat offers phish...I think of that book :)
From The Huffington Post:

Republicans, Climate Change, And The New Reality



[...]

We’re now entering a period where the U.S. military’s 22nd Century weapons technology is in the hands of those whose mentality hasn’t really left the Bronze Age. Say what you will about the deficiencies among the Democratic leadership (and there are many), at least the Democrats are trying to remain in the fact-based world and accept the validity of scientific inquiry

“The challenge to authority that science presents,” writes Shawn Otto in The War on Science (2016), “is one of the many reasons why it has flourished in free, democratic societies, and why those same societies have fallen when they have turned their backs on the freedom science requires in favor of authoritarianism.” (p. 52)

Climate change is real. Facts matter. Ketchup is not a “vegetable side dish.” Nuclear missiles are not “peace keepers.” Sending prisoners to be tortured in foreign lands is not “extraordinary rendition.” African-American youths are not “super-predators.” Torture is not “enhanced interrogation.” The estate tax is not a “death tax.” War is not peace. Freedom is not slavery. Ignorance is not strength.

Who knows what the propaganda function of the State will look like under President Trump? But whatever it becomes it will have the newest most technologically advanced tools at its disposal to twist facts and alter “reality.” We haven’t seen anything yet.

Click here to read full article.
Quoting 327. barbamz:

Bears Ears and Gold Butte: Obama creates two nature preserves

Thanks for posting this. Here's a news article on Bears Ears from our local paper, The Salt Lake Tribune. It's a bit more in-depth, includes a map, and discusses the area more in terms of tribal interests (Hopi, Navajo, Ute and Zuni). (And like so many local papers, sometimes the best part is the comments section.)

Obama declares Bears Ears National Monument in southern Utah
Quoting 345. Grothar:



I most certainly was. Not permanently, but once for 11 hours and once for a couple hours and I don't remember the other one. Once was for posting a picture of the 3 stooges, one for a one line quote of Churchill's and the other was that they mistakenly thought I was talking about a blogger when I wasn't. I did get an apology though.


I have been banned about the same number of times.

Unlike you, I earned them outright. ;)
Quoting 329. blizzard1024:



You are incorrectly assuming the feedbacks to any forcing are positive.


No, actually I'm not. The AR5 IPCC report has a substantial section regarding climate feedbacks, as well as a convenient summary section listing the highlights.

Quoting 329. blizzard1024:
There is just as much body of evidence that feedbacks especially the water vapor feedback is negative or just neutral.


No, actually there isn't. Water vapor results in a positive feedback loop. This has been the subject of multiple studies (including published research by Soden, Khiel, Evans, and others) and all of them conclude the same thing. Cloud formation will in no way provide enough counterbalance to the increased forcing provided by increased water vapor in a warming world. In fact, it's the increase in water vapor that provides that added boost to CO2's impacts.

Quoting 329. blizzard1024:
The lamda you quote is the feedback parameter not a temperature.


No, it really isn't. The lambda parameter is defined as climate sensitivity. For ease of reference, and for an extensive list of research that has gone into determining this parameter, see here.

Quoting 329. blizzard1024:
Since convection, and clouds play a huge role in the global energy balance and climate models don't handle these well, one can easily see scenarios that feedbacks are negative just as much as they could be positive in the model world.


What? Climate models do handle convection, and provide extensive metrics on regional/global cloud formation, albedo, densities, etc. Have you ever even cracked open a GCM output file before? Have you even bothered to take a look at the implementation details? The IPCC has a whole section dedicated to modeling that you would greatly benefit from reading.

And no, they don't point to a negative feedback induced by increased water vapor. Not a single one. Nor would such a result even make sense except to someone who naively associates cloud formation with just water vapor.

There is no peer reviewed research or modeling result that indicates cloud albedo scales at nearly the rate needed to counteract the additional forcing that occurs from increased water vapor. There's plenty of cranks and crank sites that make that claim though.

Quoting 329. blizzard1024:
But positive feedbacks are less likelyin nature because the climate system would spiral out of control from any forcing.


And there you go again making a completely baseless claim. Positive feedbacks don't "spiral out of control". Positive and negative feedbacks remain in place until the system reaches a new equilibrium state. If what you claimed were true, then Earth would have become Venus a billion years ago as the positive feedbacks that gave rise to our balmy atmosphere from icy beginnings would have spiraled out of control long before we ever got here.

Quoting 329. blizzard1024:
So my calculation was assuming a neutral feedback which means that the lamda parameter is unity, again lamda is not a temperature.


And again, you have expressed remarkable ignorance about what lambda is and how it is derived. Lambda is derived by assuming natural forcings are neutral so the impacts of greenhouse gases can be quantified. I never once claimed lambda was temperature, nor will you find it referred to in any literature as being so. Lambda is climate sensitivity, given in units of °C/W/m^2.


Quoting 329. blizzard1024:
So without any feedbacks, a doubling of CO2 in our atmosphere leads to around 1.2C of warming.


So if you ignore the science, make baseless assumptions, misapply concepts, and so on you wind up with a completely pointless answer that in no way reflects reality. I'm sorry, but how can this hypothesis of yours be considered anything more than a sad joke? Honestly I've seen Watts put more though into his nonsense.

Quoting 329. blizzard1024:
That is solid science.


It's solid alright. Don't forget to flush.

Quoting 329. blizzard1024:
The feedbacks are where all the debate is and this is what the climate sensitivity issue. The IPCC assumes high sensitivity. Other scientists don't. I agree with the latter.


You really should read the IPCC reports before making claims about what they say. The IPCC doesn't "assume" a high sensitivity. They provide scenarios that range from low sensitivity to high sensitivity and err on the low side for "most likely".

The only "scientist" I'm aware who makes a claim even remotely similar to yours (lambda is 1) is Spencer, and he hasn't been taken seriously in years.

Nuche Indigenous Peoples Day


Regina Lopez-Whiteskunk speaks about the proposed Bears Ears National Monument.

Bearsearscoalition.org


Quoting 327. barbamz:

Bears Ears and Gold Butte: Obama creates two nature preserves
BBC, 4 hours ago
President Barack Obama has unilaterally designated two new "national monument" nature preserves in the western US states of Nevada and Utah.
The Bears Ears National Monument and the Gold Butte National Monument will protect areas rich in Native American artefacts from energy drilling. ...




Hey Doug, did you read the report that 8 years of Obama vacations cost us $85m. Im stunned...
380. bwi
That big high in southern Alaska that's been progged now for days looks like it's taking shape. Should force a cold spell in the western U.S. first, then maybe spreading east via a storm over the Great Lakes later next week. I don't really expect much more than a typical polar cold front, but we only had one big cold blast in December, so maybe if January gets off with some cold air we'll eventually get some snow in the mid-atlantic.

381. bwi
And, just like that, the 18z GFS starts to understand my logic!

Quoting 334. blizzard1024:



You have this soooo wrong. You are equating the entire complex global climate system to something as simple as basic physics that a student can derive on a couple sheets of paper?


Way to fail reading comprehension Bliz. I said nothing of the sort. I said a basic climate model demonstrating the effects of greenhouse gases can be derived in a couple sheets of paper. Ahrennius did as much back in the 1890's without so much as a calculator to help.

A full scale GCM requires millions of lines of code and thousands of algorithms working with terabytes of data across thousands of compute nodes. I know because of worked on them.

Quoting 334. blizzard1024:
YOU are ignorant of how the atmosphere works and are calling me a "psuedoscientific denier"???


Yes, I'm calling you a denier because you are throwing out over a century's worth of well established research across multiple branches of science just because it doesn't agree with your bias. Yet instead of diving into the research to find out what's so compelling as to make thousands of scientists agree and searching for the crack that would earn you a Nobel, you fall back to insults, baseless claims, and conspiracy.

You're not being skeptical. You're being willfully ignorant, and that is the hallmark of a denier.

Quoting 334. blizzard1024:
This is so laughable. wow. I am done wasting my time here. My posts probably will get censored anyway I suppose since I am not towing the line. Censorship in the USA....go figure.


Your posts aren't getting censored. They're getting downvoted. When you receive enough downvotes they lose visibility. They're still visible if people want to click on them, but typically people don't because posts are usually downvoted for a reason.

You made the mistake that the people on this board lack the intellectual capacity, curiosity, and capability to see through your weak arguments, obvious falsehoods, and thinly veiled conspiracies. That kind of BS may work on sites like WUWT, but you will find no succor for that kind of crap here. A number of us have been debunking and tearing apart nonsense like this on here for years. You aren't the first, the best, or the last that will attempt to bring such nonsense here but you're sadly mistaken if you think no one's going to take you task.
Quoting 379. luvtogolf:

Hey Doug, did you read the report that 8 years of Obama vacations cost us $85m. Im stunned...


And thanks for my free Socialist VA Healthcare for life too.

Much appreciated breaux.

New Orleans Project Legacy Opens

The Southeast Louisiana Veterans Health Care System's new Veterans medical center in New Orleans will be among the highest-performing VA medical centers across all VA missions (health care, research and education). The first patients will receive care in the medical center on December 5, 2016. The 1.6 million square feet medical center will open in phases throughout 2017. Once fully activated, the tertiary care regional referral medical center will serve a projected 70,000 enrolled Veterans from our 23-parish catchment area and across the Gulf coast with an anticipated 550,000 annual visits.
The new medical center was designed with input from our Veterans during the entire process, ensuring that the facility put patients at the center of everything we do and keeping safety our top priority. The medical center will serve Veterans and their families with a full range of health care services and programs 24/7 with 120 medicine/surgery beds, 20 acute psychiatric beds and 60 community living center beds. Visitation will be available 24/7 to our inpatient rooms with comfortable areas for family members and visitors.
The facility is designed to meet the full array of VA missions - education, research, national emergency preparedness and assistance. The research program is set to have 140 projected protocols.




: P
Quoting 379. luvtogolf:

Hey Doug, did you read the report that 8 years of Obama vacations cost us $85m. Im stunned...
That sounds like a lot until you consider that Trump has already cost the taxpayers more than that--and he's still three weeks from taking office.

Now that's stunning.
For those folks that aren't aware, yet may be interested, IPCC's Fifth Assessment Report ("AR5") is freely available. It is in four parts, divided by subject:

IPCC Fifth Assessment Report

The 'Physical Science Basis' Report portion of AR5 includes a Summary for Policy Makers that is relatively easy to read (not as technical as the overall report).
Again the trending observations Globally are all falling into the worse case range of the assessments.


The Global warming continues,...

unabated.




Quoting 349. washingaway:

Went outside it feels like someone left the refrigerator door open. I've gotten so accustomed to the warm weather as of late that I forgot its still winter.
You wouldn't like it much here in Salem, OR next week. It looks like we might have a white New Years Day on Sunday with up to an inch of snow. Then it's going to get clear and cold with highs Monday to Thursday around 29F and lows around 17F. We don't get a cold snap like that every year.
10 million a year for a 747 and a Marine One Sikorsky, all the limos, C-17's,,fuel.









That is a Hugely, bigly, make America great again, economic savings in any ledger.



Try the Halibut.

as nancy reagan put it: presidents don't get vacations, they get changes of scenery.

Quoting 388. Patrap:

10 million a year for a 747 and a Marine One Sikorsky, all the limos, C-17's,,fuel.









That is a Hugely, bigly, make America great again, economic savings in any ledger.



Try the Halibut.


Quoting 329. blizzard1024:



You are incorrectly assuming the feedbacks to any forcing are positive. There is just as much body of evidence that feedbacks especially the water vapor feedback is negative or just neutral. ...
It looks to me like you are confusing water vapor with clouds. More water vapor in the atmosphere will always retain more heat and cause warming. Clouds depending on the type and where and when they are located can have a positive or negative effect on warming. The latest research I'm aware of from a couple years ago is that overall clouds have a neutral to slightly positive effect on global temperatures. As you point out there is a lot of uncertainty regarding clouds but very little uncertainty about the effects of water vapor.
Quoting 388. Patrap:


Try the Halibut.




Wrong kinda fish

Quoting 379. luvtogolf:

Hey Doug, did you read the report that 8 years of Obama vacations cost us $85m. Im stunned...
I'll start worrying about things like that when you start paying attention to the same thing for Republican Presidents.
Quoting 369. PensacolaDoug:

I told ya Blizz! You came in here and kicked a hornets nest!
And probably sent a lot of them home a little more humble. Is it getting cold up their, as I do like all this warm weather we are having, but a little cold weather is nice every now and then.
Quoting 384. Neapolitan:

That sounds like a lot until you consider that Trump has already cost the taxpayers more than that--and he's still three weeks from taking office.

Now that's stunning.
To compare apples to apples and oranges to oranges (which would be the fair comparison) you're saying Trump has already spent 85 mill of taxpayer money on vacations?
Quoting 381. bwi:

And, just like that, the 18z GFS starts to understand my logic!


You will be highly disappointed.This winter looks like it will suck in the mid-atlantic with a pretty terrible pattern.
Quoting 395. PensacolaDoug:

To compare apples to apples and oranges to oranges (which would be the fair comparison) you're saying Trump has already spent 85 mill of taxpayer money on vacations?

Doug - just wondering, you have a problem with the President heading home for the holidays? Doesn't seem unreasonable to me.



Trump's NYC trip costs taxpayers


About 1,450,000 results (0.79 seconds)

Quoting 398. Patrap:

Trump's NYC trip costs taxpayers

About 1,450,000 results (0.79 seconds)




Grab some deep fried popcorn and a bucket of gumbo Pat. This show hasn't even got started yet!
Quoting 399. Xyrus2000:



Grab some deep fried popcorn and a bucket of gumbo Pat. This show hasn't even got started yet!



SEASON-TO-DATE PRECIPITATION
----------------------------
Normals are Today Oct 01- Oct 01- Oct 01- Oct 01-
1981-2010 Dec 29 % of Dec 29 % of Dec 29 Sep 30
Averages 2016 normal 2015 normal normal normal
------------------------- ----- ------------ ----------- ---------------
Campo 0.00 4.60 114 2.95 73 4.04 15.73
Fullerton Airport 0.00 5.48 151 1.05 29 3.63 13.88
John Wayne Airport 0.00 5.82 153 1.22 32 3.80 13.3
Los Angeles International 0.00 3.98 115 1.24 36 3.46 12.82
Long Beach Airport 0.00 4.70 141 1.00 30 3.34 12.26
Oceanside Airport 0.00 4.49 124 2.17 60 3.62 13.66
Ontario Airport 0.00 4.68 122 2.12 55 3.83 15.04
Palm Springs Airport 0.00 1.57 90 0.19 11 1.75 5.74
Ramona Airport 0.00 6.13 158 3.53 91 3.88 16.04
Rancho Bernardo 0.00 4.47 MM 3.41 MM MM MM
Riverside Airport 0.00 4.40 167 1.17 44 2.63 12.40
San Diego Lindbergh Field 0.00 3.71 124 2.85 95 2.99 10.34
Thermal Airport 0.00 1.52 195 0.43 55 0.78 3.20

MM = Missing Data

Today's precipitation totals are since midnight, except for Rancho Bernardo,
which has a 24-hour total ending at 4 PM PST/winter (5 PM during PDT/summer).

This product was created: 4:59 PM PST 29 Dec 2016

Running somewhat ahead so far at these various locations in Soo Cal
Quoting 194. blizzard1024:



This is a valid point. But it doesn't matter the cause of the warmer climate. The point is that it was warmer in the Arctic and there is evidence that sea ice was seasonal and guess what? The polar bears and other wildlife survived!! Imagine that. A warmer world is not necessarily a bad thing. Our climate so far is warming about 1-2C per century which is not out of the bounds of the Holocene and much less than the period between 20000 years BP and 10000 Years BP when there was often sudden shifts in climate when the glaciers were melting. We live in pretty calm times relative to back then....
It does matter what causes a warmer climate. There are qualitative differences in the warming caused by increased greenhouse gases as opposed to warming caused by changes in insolation from Milankovitch Cycles. Among the most obvious is increased greenhouse gases cause stratospheric cooling while increased insolation would cause stratospheric warming.

1 or 2 degrees C per century is incredibly fast compared to other temperature changes in the Holocene. Consider that the total warming to go from full glaciation to the current interglacial was about 4C but that happened over 10,000+ years which is a change rate of about 0.04C per century. A change rate of 1-2C per century will be difficult for the natural systems that humans are dependent on to adapt to.
Quoting 390. riverat544:

It looks to me like you are confusing water vapor with clouds. More water vapor in the atmosphere will always retain more heat and cause warming. Clouds depending on the type and where and when they are located can have a positive or negative effect on warming. The latest research I'm aware of from a couple years ago is that overall clouds have a neutral to slightly positive effect on global temperatures. As you point out there is a lot of uncertainty regarding clouds but very little uncertainty about the effects of water vapor.


You are not entirely correct on this. Water vapor in the lower and middle troposphere actually cools the upper troposphere. You need to increase water vapor in the upper troposphere to enhance the greenhouse effect. Clouds are a wildcard. So is water vapor because the high altitudes how so little and depend on convective processes, upper level jet stream patterns, cyclogenesis etc. These are not handled well by climate models and furthermore water vapor is hard to measure at high altitudes for the sake of getting long term trends...
Quoting 397. kestrel68:


Doug - just wondering, you have a problem with the President heading home for the holidays? Doesn't seem unreasonable to me.


Me neither. Go re-read the thread.
What is the solution for climate change?
Anything telling or stands out about this sounding in San Diego? I have not a clue(even after following instructions on how to read them)

Quoting 405. scott39:

What is the solution for climate change?
Assuming it is man-made....Population control.
I don't doubt Trumps security costs are high. Trump Derangement Syndrome is rampant. Even on these pages.
Quoting 407. PensacolaDoug:

Assuming it is man-made....Population control.
I believe it's both man-made and the natural progression of the Earth dying. Population control would slow it down a bit, but wouldn't stop it. Great minds have all the answers but
no substantial results.
Quoting 408. PensacolaDoug:

I don't doubt Trumps security costs are high. Trump Derangement Syndrome is rampant. Even on these pages.


Don't you love the way they try and redirect away. Did you know Obama has now pardoned more criminals than the previous eleven presidents combined. That's giving our law enforcement officers and judicial system the middle finger. But he supports climate change so we'll just ignore the crap he's done for us over the past 8 years.


come on over sink my Iowa hakuryu or taiho have some fun its a blast

my screen name is xXDoomBuggyXx
Quoting 410. luvtogolf:



Don't you love the way they try and redirect away. Did you know Obama has now pardoned more criminals than the previous eleven presidents combined. That's giving our law enforcement officers and judicial system the middle finger. But he supports climate change so we'll just ignore the crap he's done for us over the past 8 years.


Actually we wholeheartedly applaud and support his efforts over the last eight years.
As we hear so often: He won. Get over it.
Not sure what presidents' vacations, security details, or executive pardons have to do with the blog topic, tropical weather, weather in general, climate change, science, the environment, or science policy. Talk about directing people away from the subject(s) at hand...

If you know someone's derailing the blog, there's no reason to join them...jmo...
Quoting 401. HurricaneHunterJoe:

Hey Joe, can you post the link for the precip info? I can't figure out the headers. Thanks!
Quoting 408. PensacolaDoug:

I don't doubt Trumps security costs are high. Trump Derangement Syndrome is rampant. Even on these pages.

You don't think the cost has anything to do with providing security for a guy who lives in a skyscraper on 5th Ave in Manhattan?
Politics need to be taken out of the scientific studies of Climate change. Put the Science geeks in a room and let their minds meld without politicians.
Quoting 414. LAbonbon:


Hey Joe, can you post the link for the precip info? I can't figure out the headers. Thanks!


Here ya go

Link
It was 77 degrees here in Mobile yesterday and now it is a cold as a well diggers butt here in Mobile. Then Saturday the trend starts again with 4 days in a row in the 70's. Somethin is goin on....
Wow. I feel like I have been on a 96 hr. ban. I have been able to read the comments, but not to make my own comments. I began to feel weak. A weakness known as "envy", of the ones that were still able to comment here.

I see that my "Recent Cities" was to Moss Town, Bahamas. I must have been kidnapped and taken to the Bahamas? What a terrible place to be taken and then to have no memory of this actually happening.
Quoting 412. daddyjames:



Actually we wholeheartedly applaud and support his efforts over the last eight years.
As we hear so often: He won. Get over it.


Applaud the debt doubling during Obama. Applaud 12 more killed in Chicago Christmas weekend and 753 this year - mostly African American. That's one big zero from our for the African American community from our president. I could go on and on but he supports climate change so it doesn't matter.
They don't call it programming fer nuttin do dey now?

Jeesum,..





Is climate change generating stronger, more frequent typhoons?
Thanks to ocean warming, over the past 40 years tropical cyclones in East and Southeast Asia have increased – both in strength and frequency, say scientists.

By Joseph Dussault, Staff SEPTEMBER 6, 2016


Warming waters are producing increasingly powerful typhoons, according to a new study from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.

Ocean warming has already left a clear mark on marine biodiversity, causing coral bleaching and altered animal behavior. But a new study, published Monday in the journal Nature Geoscience, emphasizes the impact of warming waters on coastal communities. In the last 40 years, researchers say, tropical cyclones in East and Southeast Asia have increased – both in strength and frequency – as a result of the climatological trend.

“It is a very, very substantial increase,” lead author Wei Mei, a professor of marine sciences at UNC, told the Guardian. “We believe the results are very important for east Asian countries because of the huge populations in these areas. People should be aware of the increase in typhoon intensity because when they make landfall these can cause much more damage.”

Both “typhoon” and “hurricane” refer to rotating storm systems that form over tropical waters – the only difference is location. Hurricanes strike the Atlantic Ocean, while typhoons occur in the Pacific Ocean. Both can devastate island and coastal communities with heavy rains and winds surpassing 74 mph.

Warm surface water can worsen the effects of these storms. When a system approaches land, it picks up heat from coastal waters, adding energy which fuels the storm further.

“If you have warming coastal water, it means that typhoons can get a little extra jolt just before they make landfall,” Kerry Emanuel, an MIT meteorologist who wasn’t involved in the study but provided data to researchers, told the Verge. “And that's obviously not good news.”

Using data from Hawaiian and Japanese weather centers, Dr. Mei and his colleagues compared recent warming against the development of Pacific storms. The team found that typhoons in East and Southeast Asia have intensified by nearly 15 percent since the 1970s, which translates to a 50 percent rise in potential destructive power. Researchers also found that the annual proportion of typhoons that reach category 4 and 5, which can reach wind speeds of more than 150 mph, has more than doubled.

Ocean warming has already left a clear mark on marine biodiversity, causing coral bleaching and altered animal behavior. But a new study, published Monday in the journal Nature Geoscience, emphasizes the impact of warming waters on coastal communities. In the last 40 years, researchers say, tropical cyclones in East and Southeast Asia have increased – both in strength and frequency – as a result of the climatological trend

Warm surface water can worsen the effects of these storms. When a system approaches land, it picks up heat from coastal waters, adding energy which fuels the storm further.

“If you have warming coastal water, it means that typhoons can get a little extra jolt just before they make landfall,” Kerry Emanuel, an MIT meteorologist who wasn’t involved in the study but provided data to researchers, told the Verge. “And that's obviously not good news.”

Using data from Hawaiian and Japanese weather centers, Dr. Mei and his colleagues compared recent warming against the development of Pacific storms. The team found that typhoons in East and Southeast Asia have intensified by nearly 15 percent since the 1970s, which translates to a 50 percent rise in potential destructive power. Researchers also found that the annual proportion of typhoons that reach category 4 and 5, which can reach wind speeds of more than 150 mph, has more than doubled.


RESEARCH: ALLISON TERRY, ELIZABETH BARBER; GRAPHIC: JAKE TURCOTTE
But is this worsening trend a function of climate change? Possibly, but it’s hard to say.

Recommended: Hurricane season: Five ways to get ahead of coming storms
The new study is based on just 40 years of data, which isn’t enough to confirm a long-term climatological cause. That’s why Mei and colleagues chose to focus on a regional warming trend, rather than the global one.

“We want to give the message that typhoon intensity has increased and will increase in the future because of the warming climate,” Mei said. “Understanding intensity change is very important for disaster preparation.”

But climate models do predict that Earth’s oceans, including the northwest Pacific, will continue to warm in coming years. So whether or not climate change has already caused stronger tropical storms, it likely will in the future.

Quoting 417. kestrel68:


You don't think the cost has anything to do with providing security for a guy who lives in a skyscraper on 5th Ave in Manhattan?



apparently his wife and son aren't going to live in the WH and trump himself will be spending a lot of time in NYC, so the cost of securing that location is gonna be really, really high. this isn't W's ranch, so it's gonna cost a ton.
Quoting 423. luvtogolf:



Applaud the debt doubling during Obama. Applaud 12 more killed in Chicago Christmas weekend and 753 this year - mostly African American. That's one big zero from our for the African American community from our president. I could go on and on but he supports climate change so it doesn't matter.


Debt doubling under Obama? Isn't Congress (Republican controlled for the past 6 years) responsible for determining the budget?

Problems in Chicago? Well, that is for the local authorities there to contend with.
So nothing was Obamas fault but everything is Trumps fault. I can only laugh at the ignorance.
What was it SAR used to post when one of those way-off-topic posts appeared? AFLAC! Was that it?
Quoting 428. luvtogolf:

So nothing was Obamas fault but everything is Trumps fault. I can only laugh at the ignorance.


Glad to see that you finally came to your senses, and that you can laugh at your own foibles.
pssssst',..

dis guy?



Key House GOPer Introduces Bill With Major Cuts To Social Security

A key House Republican on the issue of Social Security introduced a bill Thursday that would impose major cuts to the program. The bill, the Social Security Reform Act of 2016, was introduced by Rep. Sam Johnson (R-TX), the chair of the House Ways and Means subcommittee on Social Security.

It would, among other things, gradually raise the retirement age from 67 to 69 on Americans 49 or younger at the present. It would change the formula that determines the size of a retiree's initial payments. And it would switch the program to a less generous formula for raising payments according to cost of living increases.

Big picture, the most concerning element for many experts is that its approach to make the program more solvent rest entirely on cuts, and does not raise revenues for the Social Security Trust Fund, as some bipartisan proposals have. Across the political spectrum, solutions for long term solvency range from cuts-only approaches like Johnson's bill to plans that achieve 75-year solvency by raising the current income cap on social security taxes.

"Ultimately, we are going to need something that's a little more balanced between benefits saving and revenue changes in order to get a proposal that could pass Congress and get approved by the president," said Shai Akabas, director fiscal policy at the Bipartisan Policy Center.

The cuts in the bill lean more heavily on high income-earners, but most workers would see cuts — some of them drastic — if Johnson's bill became law.

The initial cuts come in the form of the two-year retirement age increase, which according to Paul Van de Water, a senior fellow at the left-leaning Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, amounts to a seven percent cut each year.

The changes to the formula to determine the initial benefit — known as the Primary Insurance Amount (PIA) — are more complicated and involve multiple moving parts. In general though, they negatively impact higher earners the most.

"The change in the formula, it's structured so that it produces the largest decreases on benefits for the people with the highest pre-retirement earnings," Van de Water said.

Almost all beneficiaries, however, would see reductions as time went on when compared to current law, due to the legislation's use of a less generous inflation metric.

"That's another cut in benefits, and one that grows the longer the person is on the benefit rolls," Van de Water said.

Some low wage earners — particularly those who have participated in the workforce the longest — are shielded from these cuts due to an increase minimum benefit the legislation includes that acts as a floor for those at the bottom of the scale.

A letter from the Social Security Administration's Chief Actuary gives a more concrete picture of what the legislation would like if implemented. On the low end of the scale, for retirees who have been in the workforce the longest, a 65-year-old who made an average of $12,280 (according to an established formula called AIME) after being in the workforce for 30 years would see his benefits increase by 9 percent when he retired in 2030, as compared to the current law. A 65-year-old retiree at the earning level who was only in the workforce for 20 years would see 19 percent decrease, however, in 2030. That cut would be 32 percent, if the 65-year-old was retiring in 2050.

Up the earning scale, the reductions continue. A 65-year-old middle-income earner, someone who earned an average of $49,121 after 44 years in the workforce, would see a reduction in her benefits of 11 percent when she retired in 2030, compared to the current law. The amount of reduction would increase the longer she stayed on the rolls: when she was 75 years old, for instance, the reduction would be 14 percent compared to current law, and 16 percent when she was 85 years old.

And the cuts get more severe the later a middle-income earner is retiring. If a 65-year-old at that earning level retired in 2050, her benefits would be 17 percent less than current law. By the time that retiree was 75 years old, they would be 19 percent less, and when she was 85, 22 percent less.

A 65-year-old at the top of the scale, a $118,500 average earner, would see his benefits cut by 25 percent when he retired in 2030, compared to the current law, and that reduction would grow to 55 percent compared to current law by the time the retiree was 85 years old. Likewise, those cuts get larger the longer the law is in place. The 65 year-old at the top of scale who retires in 2050 will see a 43 percent cut in his benefits, compared to current law, that will grow to a 74 percent reduction by the time he is 85.

Additionally the Johnson's bill makes some notable cuts to spousal benefits, while introducing some means-testing provisions.

The Republican proposal comes as GOP lawmakers are in the midst of figuring out a plan to implement an Obamacare repeal, which, according to health policy experts stands to kick millions of their insurance. Hints that Republicans may consider Medicare privatization were met with a swift rebuke by Democrats, who vowed to go to war over the program. Many pointed out that President-elect Donald Trump campaigned on protecting social safety net programs.

Likewise, Democrats were quick to condemn the GOP Social Security overhaul proposal. Even before most news outlets had picked up on the legislation, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) put out a statement slamming Johnson's bill.

“Slashing Social Security and ending Medicare are absolutely not what the American people voted for in November," Pelosi said. "Democrats will not stand by while Republicans dismantle the promise of a healthy and dignified retirement for working people in America.”

Quoting 426. schwankmoe:



apparently his wife and son aren't going to live in the WH and trump himself will be spending a lot of time in NYC, so the cost of securing that location is gonna be really, really high. this isn't W's ranch, so it's gonna cost a ton.

Amazingly, it looks like part of that cost is going to be the US Secret Service paying Donald Trump $1.5 million a year to rent a floor of the Trump Tower. Hopefully, I'm not the only person feeling uneasy about that.


NOV 15 2016, 6:11 PM ET
Keeping Trump Tower Safe Will Be an 'Unprecedented Challenge'
by CYNTHIA MCFADDEN, ANNA R. SCHECTER and TRACY CONNOR


Trump Tower has long been a magnet for millionaires, a mecca for tourists, and a monument to one man's need to put his name on everything.

Now that its owner-occupant has been elected president, the 58-story glass tower smack-dab in the heart of Manhattan is something new: a headache for the Secret Service and the NYPD.

And with Donald Trump reportedly thinking about commuting between his Fifth Avenue penthouse and the White House, it could turn into a full-blown migraine.

"It's an unprecedented challenge," said William Bratton, who was New York City's police commissioner until two months ago.

"You are in one of the busiest cities in the world, on one of the busiest streets in the world, and one of the most well-known buildings in the world."

Image: US-VOTE-TRUMP
People are screened by security before Vice President-elect Mike Pence arrives at Trump Tower in New York for meetings with President-elect Donald Trump November 15, 2016. TIMOTHY A. CLARY / AFP - Getty Images
Jonathan Wackrow, who was a Secret Service agent on three presidential details, said he has no doubt the agency and the NYPD can meet the challenge.

"Trump Tower will be secure. Period. That's not even a question," he said. "The bigger issue here is the impact that those security measures will have on the people of New York."

Other presidents have used retreats — the compound in Kennebunkport, Maine, or the ranch in Crawford, Texas, for the Bushes — but they were in easily protected locations.

Trump Tower, on the other hand, has hundreds of tenants in 263 apartments, according to its website. That's on top of 26 floors of offices and a five-story public atrium with stores ranging from Starbucks to Gucci.

Trump has not left the building since Thursday, and SWAT teams, barricades and sand-filled trucks are already fixtures — along with protesters. The sky above it is a no-fly zone until the inauguration at least.

"It's like living in the White House," said resident Rachel Adjmi Kaimowitz, who voted for Trump but isn't thrilled about all the new security in her building.

"It's distracting, it's nerve-wracking, it's a big problem."

Law enforcement agencies are meeting this week to discuss plans for securing the skyscraper going forward. Possible scenarios include closing lanes on Fifth Avenue, home to Tiffany's and other world-famous retailers, NBC New York reported.

Image:
A woman under an umbrella pulls her suitcase on Fifth Avenue by police barricades outside the Trump Tower building in New York, Tuesday, Nov. 15, 2016. Richard Drew / AP
New Yorkers can also expect to see restrictions on the side streets, bomb-sniffing dogs on the sidewalks and security booths popping up around the building, Bratton said. When there are large demonstrations, a section of Fifth Avenue may be shut down altogether, he said.

All of it takes money, but how much is unclear. A senior NYPD official said the costs will be "very significant." and another source estimated the price tag will be tens of millions of dollars.

In a statement, the Secret Service said it has a long relationship with the NYPD "involving large-scale complex security operations."

"We will continue to apply creative problem solving with our partners to achieve the highest level of security with the least amount of public impact," the agency said.

Kaimowitz is already thinking of getting far away from Trump and his tower.

"Every time you have guests that come in you have to have them check in at a certain area and there's Secret Service all over," she said. "I'm renting now and I'm considering not renting when my lease runs out. I think the people who own apartments are probably anxious to sell but they're not going to find anybody."

But Frederic Bouin, 57, who has been living in the tower since 1990, has no complaints about the security lockdown.

"It's great," he said. "It's the most secure building in the world."
pssst...Notorious...if you keep quoting comments that end up getting removed, you may end up censored or banned yourself. This has happened to me more than once...

BUT, I applaud your Sisyphean efforts ;)
The story is BS completely. Securing Trump Tower is a nightmare. Closing the Airspace above is not feasible, nor securing the Subway under the city street. Then the Nightmare of Helo-ing in during weather..,those alone plus the logistical requirements are overwhelming and well,not secure in any sensible way.



Is there any moderation left on this blog?

The political BS has gone on long enough, if it has to do with weather or AGW great if it has to do with anything else it is just nonsense. The side you are on which ever it is will never convince the other you are right so stop wasting time and energy.

I think I speak for many with this statement.

If your side lost I am happy

If your side won I am sad

It is a dismal state of affairs in this country, on both sides

Quoting 422. Some1Has2BtheRookie:

Wow. I feel like I have been on a 96 hr. ban. I have been able to read the comments, but not to make my own comments. I began to feel weak. A weakness known as "envy", of the ones that were still able to comment here.

I see that my "Recent Cities" was to Moss Town, Bahamas. I must have been kidnapped and taken to the Bahamas? What a terrible place to be taken and then to have no memory of this actually happening.


I thought of it as WU Purgatory. Just had to be cleansed of all my weather related sins before being let in.
438. MahFL
Quoting 432. kestrel68:


Amazingly, it looks like part of that cost is going to be the US Secret Service paying Donald Trump $1.5 million a year to rent a floor of the Trump Tower. Hopefully, I'm not the only person feeling uneasy about that.




For GW Bush they built quarters for the Secret Service at his Crawford ranch, it turned out to be cheaper than renting rooms in nearby hotels and having the shifts rotate in, remember US Presidents are protected 24/7 until they die.
Quoting 434. LAbonbon:

pssst...Notorious...if you keep quoting comments that end up getting removed, you may end up censored or banned yourself. This has happened to me more than once...

BUT, I applaud your Sisyphean efforts ;)


Sisyphus always intrigued me, he never decided to stop;
The point of it lay in the trying and not in attaining the top
Granted, he didn't have much of a choice,
But neither do you & neither do I
Quoting 438. MahFL:



For GW Bush they built quarters for the Secret Service at his Crawford ranch, it turned out to be cheaper than renting rooms in nearby hotels and having the shifts rotate in, remember US Presidents are protected 24/7 until they die.

I don't recall GWB collecting rent as part of that deal. Maybe I'm wrong?

Quoting 405. scott39:

What is the solution for climate change?


There is no "solution"

One of the most liked "solutions" is a tax on carbon. There is an economic theory, or observation that is known as the tragedy of the commons. It finds its roots in England. There estates, and there were lands held in common. Or, no one owned them. The people that existed on them were know as commoners. The tragedy was that as no one owned the land, no one protected and improved it.


This is what is happening with the atmosphere today. While some countries, states and even cities attempt to protect the local environment, no one is responsible on the whole.

The idea of the carbon tax is that it places a value on the atmosphere as a whole, and on a more practical level encourages other forms of energy usage other than carbon based energy.

It is my belief, and I follow emerging tech very closely, that we are moving away from carbon based energy about as fast as we possibly can.

There is some good news here, and some bad.

First the good. The technology needed to go to 100 percent renewable solar and wind, is at hand. By the end of the decade the internal combustion will be riding off into the sunset, not because of carbon taxes, not because of regulations, but because the electric car will be a better, faster, cheaper more reliable alternative.

Additionally, grid scale storage systems will hit the magic number of 100 dollars per kilowatt hour, (deployed) by the end of the decade, (36 months, and this is a gutsy call as I will probably still be alive and people can hold me to these predictions) With grid scale storage, or behind the meter storage, or both, we can move away from the real bad plants, the coal and the gas turbine peaking plants. Also, in many places, like Hawaii, the economics are so compelling that solar + storage is already in use and is displacing the grid. This will be wide spread across all areas of the world that use diesel fuel for primary electricity production. (I wonder how wind turbines would handle the cold of Fairbanks, they get thier energy from diesel because there is no gas pipeline to Fairbanks.)

Now the bad news.

The rate of advances in all of the technologies to get us to zero is pretty much fixed. We can throw more money at the problem, but pretty quickly you hit the laws of diminishing returns. The fact is, it take time to build the knowledge to do the things we are doing. Adding more money has about the same effect as over watering and over fertilizing a plant. You just make a muddy stinking mess.

Additionally, we can't just quit using carbon based energy, we literally eat oil. No oil, no food, no food, somebody has to leave the planet. At this time there is only one way for that to happen and very few are volunteering.

Finally, the climate is changing, not only is it changing, if every human on the planet was caught up in the rapture tommorow, it would still continue to change. And. . .the changes that are taking place today, were actually caused by the carbon that was put into the air some years back. (I don't know how long the tail is.) So the changes you see going forward will be greater based on the higher rates of carbon being put into the air, and the higher absolute amount of carbon in the air.

What can you do? First, don't buy ocean front property, especially in southern Florida, for that matter, I would avoid Florida completely. Second, because of the way the Gulf Stream affects the tide height along the eastern seaboard of the United States, I would avoid ocean front property along that coast as well. The west coast of the U.S. will not have the same problems, partially because they don't have the Gulf Stream and partially because of the elevation change on the west coast. It isn't as flat.

Second, live close to work. It really isn't that expensive, and if you walk to work you gain less weight and just generally feel better about yourself and you reduce your carbon foot print.

Third, insulation. Build or rebuild your house so it is tight. Foam insulation in the attic and walls, double paned vinyl windows, and good tight doors.

These are the three best things you can do.

There are many other exotic things that can be done, buy a Tesla, put up a battery plus storage system, put in a solar water heater, use split packs instead of central air conditioners. Build a containerized farm. Take up free lance hydroponic gardening, cut down on the consumption of beef. And so on.

In the mean time, remember, the heat content of the earth is rising, but it does not produce linear effects in the weather. In other words, Florida will not necessarily see highs 4 degrees higher because of global warming, it may see highs 15 or 20 degrees higher, or it might see highs 10 or 15 degrees lower. The same in North Dakota, just because the climate has warmed 4 degrees, this doesn't mean the lows for the winter will go from -20 to -16, they might go from -20 to 0, or they might go from -20 to - 35.

We know it will change faster, but we don't know who all the winners and losers will be, except Florida and Louisiana, those two are in for a rough ride, and Florida will gets the worst first. But, will Texas have massive multi decade drought? Well, it did have a bad drought, then some awesome floods. California, will it dry up and burn up? Well the cards have all ready been dealt, there will be major wild fires, and my (purely inductive reasoning guess) guess is that it will have some awesome floods and mudslides.

Cheers
Qazulight


6 Protons

6 Electrons

6 Neutrons

Doom Patrick, doom everywhere'...











1 ping
Quoting 411. KEEPEROFTHEGATE:



come on over sink my Iowa hakuryu or taiho have some fun its a blast

my screen name is xXDoomBuggyXx


Enough wid da navy pr0n. :D
#441 - Qazulight - if I could plus your post more than once I would. Ever consider doing a blog on this topic? Love the way you presented your thoughts.
Quoting 441. Qazulight:


What can you do? First, don't buy ocean front property, especially in southern Florida, for that matter, I would avoid Florida completely.
Cheers
Qazulight


Florida retirees in 2100.

Let's keep things simple, no math required.

This is bad. Even if it didn't cause GW (which it does) it's unhealthy and ugly.


This is good, healthy and if you try you might see some art to it.

You see things don't have to be complicated.


Quoting 441. Qazulight:



I knew I was going to have to change my name one day to Washedaway.
Quoting 434. LAbonbon:

pssst...Notorious...if you keep quoting comments that end up getting removed, you may end up censored or banned yourself. This has happened to me more than once...

BUT, I applaud your Sisyphean efforts ;)


You gotta love somebody who can use Sisyphean in a sentence. Better than a Pyrrhic victory. :)
Quoting 422. Some1Has2BtheRookie:

Wow. I feel like I have been on a 96 hr. ban. I have been able to read the comments, but not to make my own comments. I began to feel weak. A weakness known as "envy", of the ones that were still able to comment here.

I see that my "Recent Cities" was to Moss Town, Bahamas. I must have been kidnapped and taken to the Bahamas? What a terrible place to be taken and then to have no memory of this actually happening.

Don't feel bad. According to my favorites, I now live in Belarus. It used to have playgrounds and roses, but there was this nuclear accident- -
I have learned many things in my life. The one thing that has been standing out lately is; there are many many people who are nowhere near as intelligent as thier education would imply.
452. MahFL
Quoting 447. washingaway:







When the wind blew in from the east, people in the UK would call the police thinking there was a gas leak or something, because pollution like that drifted over the North Sea from eastern Europe and it stunk.
Good morning abroad with a warm WOW:
Norway's December weather as warm as summer
The Local (Norway), 30 December 2016, 10:00 CET+01:00
This winter's mild weather in Norway set a new record on Thursday night. In the town of Sunndalsøra in Møre og Romsdal county, the thermostat reached 18.1C (=64.6F), the highest temperature ever recorded in Norway this late in December. That's also significantly higher than the average temperature of the summer months. The Sunndalsøra observation centre recorded average monthly temperatures of 13.6C in June, 15.8C in July and 14.1C in August. ...
Hoping this goes through...good morning(yesterday) from Pointe Mouillee in Michigan. Was a great day to run.




Link


What's missing from this pic is the piles of dead bald eagles and other birds underneath them.
There is a yin and a yang, to everything.
Quoting 430. daddyjames:



Glad to see that you finally came to your senses, and that you can laugh at your own foibles.


I'm rubber and you're glue....
Quoting 451. washingaway:

I have learned many things in my life. The one thing that has been standing out lately is; there are many many people who are nowhere near as intelligent as thier education would imply.

I agree with this. However, you misspelled "their".
Quoting 455. PensacolaDoug:



What's missing from this pick is the piles of dead bald eagles and other birds underneath them.
There is a yin and a yang to everything.
Oh, this "argument" again? Yes, wind turbines in the US kill somewhere around a quarter-million birds every year, which is regrettable, though it should be noted that they're getting safer all the time due to bird-friendly redesign. At the same time, collisions with cellphone and radio antennas kill around 7 million birds every year, and domestic cats kill between 1.5 and 3.7 billion--with a 'b'--each year. On top of that, hundreds of US bird species are at far greater risk from climate change than they are from wind turbines that can mitigate that change. (And I won't even get into the fact that fossil fuels cost taxpayers and consumers roughly $5.3 trillion--with a 't'--every year.)

That's some "yin" and "yang", init?
Quoting 455. PensacolaDoug:



What's missing from this pic is the piles of dead bald eagles and other birds underneath them.
There is a yin and a yang to everything.


I would honestly take a few dead birds than to have the biosphere full of sick animals.


Quoting 455. PensacolaDoug:



What's missing from this pic is the piles of dead bald eagles and other birds underneath them.
There is a yin and a yang to everything.


How many bald eagles will survive runaway global warming?

How big is this pile of dead bald eagles? Wind turbines kill between 214,000 and 368,000 birds annually — a small fraction compared with the estimated 6.8 million fatalities from collisions with cell and radio towers and the 1.4 billion to 3.7 billion deaths from cats.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/business/2014 /09/15/wind-turbines-kill-fewer-birds-than-cell-to wers-cats/15683843/

What exactly is your beef with wind turbines? I feel you have inflated concerns. Is it because its a renewable resource and right wing hate media has conditioned listeners against sensible dialogue towards energy policy?
Quoting 455. PensacolaDoug:



What's missing from this pic is the piles of dead bald eagles and other birds underneath them.
There is a yin and a yang, to everything.

Then photoshop them in, mate. If you want to fabricate your truth, fabricate it!

Also, even cats (did you note the 'b' there in that other post? Won't help, counting system of so many people consisting of the four numerals one, two, unfathomly many, doesn't exist) don't extinct the birds.

Three makes for a pretty pic. Here is the reality.
get over it doug. love wind power. birds will learn fast about the dangers. there like rats. kill one the next one wont take the bait.
The take away from my yin and yang post was not that I'm anti wind energy. I'm not. It is that there is always a price to pay. It's usually un-anticipated.
Quoting 463. islander101010:

get over it doug. love wind power. birds will learn fast about the dangers. there like rats. kill one the next one wont take the bait.


That's not how it works.
I could have posted pics of dead bald eagles beneath the towers. How many of those are killed by house cats Nea?
Quoting 464. PensacolaDoug:

The take away from my yin and yang post was not that I'm anti wind energy. I'm not. It is that there is always a price to pay. It's usually un-anticipated.

Some prices are larger than others. But how to compare with only the set of numerals one, two, unfathomably many, doesn't exist?
Quoting 464. PensacolaDoug:

The take away from my yin and yang post was not that I'm anti wind energy. I'm not. It is that there is always a price to pay. It's usually un-anticipated.
Behind Door #1: a few hundred thousand dead birds, and the view from Trump's Scottish golf course sullied.

Behind Door #2: $5.3 trillion dollars, tens of thousands of direct human deaths, and the potential end of civilization as we know it.

Think carefully before choosing...
Re: 461

It's incoherent.
Quoting 466. PensacolaDoug:

I could have posted pics of dead bald eagles beneath the towers. How many of those are killed by house cats Nea?

Yeah, pics or it didn't happen. So it would be the latter.

Bald eagles kill cats. Good riddance :D :D
Re: 470
There's your "fake news".
For the record. I don't give a whit about Trump's view.
Oh, puh-leez:













Oh, wait. It's all about the love of birds, isn't it? Well then:

Re:473

There is a lot of ugliness out there.

Quoting 474. PensacolaDoug:

Re:473

There is a lot of ugliness out there.


Very true, but why do you even bother with all these post, it just falls on deaf ears, and blind posters. They will all learn the truth one day, and correcting overpopulation is the solution to the problem, not ruining our economy, with some silly carbon tax.
Quoting 454. RunningTrauma:

Hoping this goes through...good morning(yesterday) from Pointe Mouillee in Michigan. Was a great day to run.




Link

Gorgeous photo!
I have the european city problem.
JeffMasters has created a new entry.
Quoting 471. PensacolaDoug:

Re: 470
There's your "fake news".

Second time I say this on this blog: I tend to have back-up for every statement I make.
Last time.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3563928/E agle-cam-catches-cat-fed-eaglets.html

Even if it's the Daily Fail in this case.
480. vis0

Quoting 458. Neapolitan:

Oh, this "argument" again? Yes, wind turbines in the US kill somewhere around a quarter-million birds every year, which is regrettable, though it should be noted that they're getting safer all the time due to bird-friendly redesign. At the same time, collisions with cellphone and radio antennas kill around 7 million birds every year, and domestic cats kill between 1.5 and 3.7 billion--with a 'b'--each year. On top of that, hundreds of US bird species are at far greater risk from climate change than they are from wind turbines that can mitigate that change. (And I won't even get into the fact that fossil fuels cost taxpayers and consumers roughly $5.3 trillion--with a 't'--every year.)

That's some "yin" and "yang", init?
One day an idea  (posted on another (German) site now closed** where i left clues how to use holographic screw-like turbine inflow control.   Ions and other {statically recharged) influences via (you guessed it) the ml-d creates will pass by these holographic like inflow control "propellers" thus generating energy via there interaction (one can add ADs to the holographic spin that changes as the speed changes (that i left on LIVEjournal).    i've left enough clues as to LEDs, laser colours and angles  for that idea to already be tested maybe they are in some hidden Labs. 
 Sadly certain flies will still be affected by these holographic inflow designs but then one can consider those flies as a reward to the Bald eagle and other birds to munch on )i like crunchy termites ate them as a kid while in PS116 Manhattan as that was considered the public school for UN parents for grades K-6, so all sorts of worldwide delicacies where shared ) .     BTW yes this is how i was hoping the TESLA cars eventually would power themselves but that i'm sure most (all 5 of ya)  read on my old blogs and knew that. (in reverse this is what can be used to read gaseous pockets under certain rock formations to predict earthquakes ...at least 72 hrs before). Hopefully thier are others as nutty as i that will figure these things out.

**(search the OLD sevenloads servers, look for the same guy - had 3 user names -
that left clues how to use Teflon on kneecaps and forearms with
micro-wheels to land those body wing costumes as the developer was on
sevenload years ago, the kneecap portion also had brakes that worked by
closing ones legs thus applying pressure on the brake controls situated
on the backside of ones knees.)

(tell me also i misspelled it)

of course i am a nut so read on.

CAN SOMEONE HELP ME, I'M STUCK [HOW DID I GET CLUE ALL OVER ME]
Quoting 479. cRRKampen:


Second time I say this on this blog: I tend to have back-up for every statement I make.
Last time.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3563928/E agle-cam-catches-cat-fed-eaglets.html

Even if it's the Daily Fail in this case.
I was referring to your assertion that wind turbines don't kill eagles.
Quoting 481. PensacolaDoug:

I was referring to your assertion that wind turbines don't kill eagles.

I did not make that assertion.
But you made the assertion wind turbines kill eagles and you asserted that you 'could post pictures' of dead bald eagles (suggesting stacks of them) below turbines. To that I called you out with a standard internet phrase.

So: pics, or it didn't happen.
So the Dutch killed off their bald eagle population about four centuries ago. Windmills. Yuck.
Wind TRUMPS Oil,everytime folks.

Semper Fi'
Quoting 483. cRRKampen:

So the Dutch killed off their bald eagle population about four centuries ago. Windmills. Yuck.


we nearly killed off the bald eagle here in the US decades ago. must have been all the wind turbines we just started putting up recently.