Jump to content


Getting an "Insecure Connection" warning for Exisle? No worry

Details in this thread

1st White Christmas in 86 years

Climate Change Science Weather

  • Please log in to reply
68 replies to this topic

#61 Delvo

Delvo
  • Islander
  • 9,273 posts

Posted 31 December 2004 - 08:30 AM

That's completely different. There have always been plenty of other indicators that that earthquake could happen at that place at any time: smaller earthquakes and tsunami from the same place, paleontological evidence of prior tsunami crashes along the same coast, geological formations throughout the area showing clearly what processes create such events. Undoubtably there have been 9.0 earthquakes with just the same kind of tsunami there, which just didn't harm so many people because so many people weren't there before, so that one qualifier you just added there is so irrelevant it's just silly.

California's tornados as shown in the movie would be completely unprecedented and have no prior secondary indications at all. One rare case of a weak F1 does not make it a place where tornadoes build up like what was shown. There's no history of EITHER more powerful tornadoes OR more than one of them at a time, nevermind the COMBINATION of those two things, which is even rare even in Tornado Alley. Being on the coast instead of in the middle of a continent, it doesn't have the climate to generate tornadoes' kind of storms. Full of tall, steep hills and mountains instead of miles of relative flatness, it doesn't have the terrain to allow the wind to move in the right way over the landscape, so even a really severely powerful storm coming over that area would take a different form, not a tornadic one. What was shown in that scene was about as realistic as a tsunami hitting Kansas City.

The comparison is so ridiculous I'm amazed anyone even thought of it and tried it. I guess it shows either how far some people are willing to bend truth for political points they want to make, or how dismally unaware some people are of even the most basic physical processes.

#62 Nonny

Nonny

    Scourge of Pretentious Bad Latin

  • Islander
  • 31,142 posts

Posted 31 December 2004 - 10:37 AM

Norville, on Dec 29 2004, 10:29 AM, said:

Mr.Calgary said:

I'm sure everyone will laugh as hard when we include Clinton's integrity, to family and country. Yes?
Why does *everyone* assume that if one doesn't like Bush, one must've adored Clinton? Pffft. :rolleyes:

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I'd like to know the answer to that one too!  

Nonny
Posted Image


The once and future Nonny

"Give a man a gun and he can rob a bank, give a man a bank and he can rob the world." Can anyone tell me who I am quoting?  I found this with no attribution.

Fatal miscarriages are forever.

Stupid is stupid, this I believe. And ignorance is the worst kind of stupid, since ignorance is a choice.  Suzanne Brockmann

All things must be examined, debated, investigated without exception and without regard for anyone's feelings. Diderot

#63 Chipper

Chipper

    Give it up

  • Islander
  • 5,202 posts

Posted 01 January 2005 - 03:50 PM

Well, considering that currenlty, up in NY, we've got like 50+ degree weather in the middle of December, I'd say its pretty damn warm around here.
"Courtesy is how we got civilized. The blind assertion of rights is what threatens to decivilize us. Everybody's got lots of rights that are set out legally. Responsibilities are not enumerated, for good reason, but they are set into the social fabric. Is it such a sacrifice to not be an a**hole?"

- Jenny Smith on Usenet, via Jid, via Kathy

#64 Delvo

Delvo
  • Islander
  • 9,273 posts

Posted 01 January 2005 - 04:05 PM

In a thread in the Beach about the Christmas snowsorms, I posted an image taken from a weather website, which mapped snow depths day by day. On Christmas, you could see clearly that there was no snow accumulated by or falling on Christmas (the day of the record storms in some places) in places where Christmas is practically always white, from Pennsylvania just downwind of Lake Erie, on up the Appalachians and into Maine and bits of southeastern Canada.

#65 Spectacles

Spectacles
  • Awaiting Authorisation
  • 9,632 posts

Posted 01 January 2005 - 04:34 PM

Quote

On Christmas, you could see clearly that there was no snow accumulated by or falling on Christmas (the day of the record storms in some places) in places where Christmas is practically always white, from Pennsylvania just downwind of Lake Erie, on up the Appalachians and into Maine and bits of southeastern Canada.

Yeah, and I'm bummed. I like snow. I prefer it to 50 degree, rainy days.

Anyway, back to the topic, global warming doesn't mean that every location on the entire planet is warming day by day, if I understand it correctly. A freak snowstorm in South Alabama doesn't negate the possibility (some say probability) that global warming is occurring.

In fact, those who argue against the possibility seem to say that (a) it isn't happening and (b) it is happening only because the planet goes through warming-cooling cycles. So, it is and is not happening.

It seems to me that warming-cooling cycles have been documented. So has the greenhouse effect. Therefore, if we're in a natural warming trend, we might compound its effects if we don't do something to lessen our production of ___ (mind went blank), which adds to the warming. If we compound the effects, we might indeed be facing more than your natural climate change.

Does that sound logical or am I missing something? (And I ain't a climatologist, so I may well be missing something.)
"Facts are stupid things." -Ronald Reagan at the 1988 Republican National Convention, attempting to quote John Adams, who said, "Facts are stubborn things"

"Although health care enrollment is actually going pretty well at this point, thousands and maybe millions of Americans have failed to sign up for coverage because they believe the false horror stories they keep hearing." -- Paul Krugman

#66 tennyson

tennyson
  • Islander
  • 6,173 posts

Posted 01 January 2005 - 06:35 PM

Carbon dioxide is the primary greenhouse agent and the worry is centered on humanity's addition of carbon dioxide to the atmosphere faster than the existing natural cycles can absorb it back into its reseviors.
"Only an idiot would fight a war on two fronts. Only the heir to the throne of the Kingdom of Idiots would fight a war on twelve fronts."

— Londo, "Ceremonies of Light and Dark" Babylon-5


#67 Spectacles

Spectacles
  • Awaiting Authorisation
  • 9,632 posts

Posted 01 January 2005 - 08:41 PM

Ah, thanks, Tennyson. I knew it was carbon something and thought it was carbon dioxide, but I feared making an ass outta myself.

So...if I understand it correctly, the carbon dioxide we're producing acts as kind of a blanket, trapping heat. So...if it's a naturally hot summer day and your AC is not functioning, you wouldn't throw another blanket on the bed or put on a sweater unless you wanted to court heat exhaustion.

In other words, it's possible to acknowledge that the planet goes through warming/cooling cycles, that we're probably in a warming period now, and still think it's unwise to ignore what we might do to add to the naturally occuring heat.
"Facts are stupid things." -Ronald Reagan at the 1988 Republican National Convention, attempting to quote John Adams, who said, "Facts are stubborn things"

"Although health care enrollment is actually going pretty well at this point, thousands and maybe millions of Americans have failed to sign up for coverage because they believe the false horror stories they keep hearing." -- Paul Krugman

#68 tennyson

tennyson
  • Islander
  • 6,173 posts

Posted 01 January 2005 - 09:19 PM

In a nutshell, the mix of gases in the atmosphere allow visible light through the atmosphere where it is absorbed by the ground and then reradiated as infared radiation(i.e. heat). Carbon dioxide and certain other gases such as methane preferentially absorb this reradiation, preventing this energy from escaping into space, thus increasing the overall energy level of the various cycles on the planet.
In my understanding the essential question is, "How much influence have human activities had on this process?" since the warming trend has been established about as well as it can be at our level of technical expertise.
"Only an idiot would fight a war on two fronts. Only the heir to the throne of the Kingdom of Idiots would fight a war on twelve fronts."

— Londo, "Ceremonies of Light and Dark" Babylon-5


#69 Ogami

Ogami
  • Islander
  • 2,976 posts

Posted 02 January 2005 - 10:26 AM

Tennyson wrote:

In my understanding the essential question is, "How much influence have human activities had on this process?" since the warming trend has been established about as well as it can be at our level of technical expertise.

That's an excellent question, considering what we now know about the methane emissions by termites, cows, not to mention the greenhouse gases dumped out by volcanic eruptions. For instance, we the following about 1991's eruption of Mount Pinatubo:

Quote

Nearly 20 million tons of sulfur dioxide were injected into the stratosphere in Pinatubo's 1991 eruptions, and dispersal of this gas cloud around the world caused global temperatures to drop temporarily (1991 through 1993) by about 1F (0.5C).
http://wrgis.wr.usgs...sheet/fs113-97/

Here are some wonderful NASA pictures and descriptions of the eruption:

http://earthobservat..._pinatubo2.html

The bottom line is that until man's effect on the environment is more fully known, we should not call for a shutdown of western industry and civilization. I understand that is not what posters are calling for on this message board, but I can only request that those posters take a better look at the global environmental organizations' openly stated goals and agenda. It's not merely protecting spotted owls and albino sea cucumbers.

-Ogami



Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: Climate Change, Science, Weather

0 user(s) are browsing this forum

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users