General Climate Discussion

[john9001]

can i quote a college professor, " if your model does not give you the results you were looking for, change your model".

[airguard]

Have fun Morons....
Guess I'm to lazy to read so many pages .....
I hope we all drown in happiness.

[lazs2]

ok moron...  have fun drowning in your angst and fear.

lazs

[Angus]

Originally posted by lazs2
ok moron...  have fun drowning in your angst and fear.

lazs

Well, that's why you have a gun collection and a bolt lock, right?

SHOOT THE GW!!!!

[Airscrew]

Originally posted by crockett
I'm amazed this thread is still going. I'm not going to read 45 pages of it either. The topic has probably turned into half a dozen diffrent topics by now.

actually it has stayed pretty much on topic, except for it started out about Global Warming in the summer, but now its winter so the topic is Global Climate changing/shifting...no hurricanes to point at so now we can blame the cold and the snow... in winter ...

[Jackal1]

Originally posted by Airscrew
actually it has stayed pretty much on topic, except for it started out about Global Warming in the summer, but now its winter so the topic is Global Climate changing/shifting...no hurricanes to point at so now we can blame the cold and the snow... in winter ...

Don`t forget the global leaf falling in the fall.

[Curval]

"actually it has stayed pretty much on topic, except for it started out about Global Warming in the summer, but now its winter so the topic is Global Climate changing/shifting...no hurricanes to point at so now we can blame the cold and the snow... in winter ..."

LOL

That is the silliest thing I've heard on these boards...especially since THIS  has been brought up many times and yet you guys refuse to acknowledge it.

The site is the United States Environmental Protection Agency's site.  It is THEY who refer to the term Global Climate Change.

It is likewise HILARIOUS that many here will say that hundreds of years of statistics are to be ignored because in the grand scheme of things the time-frame is a *blip* and yet if it snows alot for a few weeks the same people will say it means that GW is a myth.

[Holden McGroin]

Originally posted by MORAY37
Serious issues in logic stream there, Holden.  

I find it quite interesting that many predictions made by those inept climatologists are seemingly coming to fruition...  Namely, large extremes in weather.

There was a man named Kreskin (sp) who made predictions on many things.

Several came true.  He did it by making so many predictions that he just had to be correct on some of them.

When I make a prediction based upon Newtons Universal law of Gravitation, I can be correct within 99.99999% 99.99999% of the time.
This theory works this well on anything with mass.  Pretty good.

Hurricane models for 2007 predicted the Cont US was to be hit with a couple cat 5, and a few smaller category storms last season.  Pretty poor.

That is a serious issue in the logic you used, comparing the theory of gravity to climate models.  

I can predict that ... lets see ... in 2008, drought will continue in Ethiopia this next year, Western Australia will continue to be dry, The Amazon basin will flood, and in late autumn, Southeren California will experience wildfire.  Lets see how many come true.  Large extremes in weather have always happened.  The last time a record setting temperature, rainfall, or drought occured, that was a weater extreme.

I am glad to have this continuing non-debate with you.

[Curval]

Originally posted by Holden McGroin
Hurricane models for 2007 predicted the Cont US was to be hit with a couple cat 5, and a few smaller category storms last season.  Pretty poor.

Two cat 5 storms hit land in 2007....first time that has EVER happened.  They struck just to the South of the Continental US.  There were quite a few named storms too...but I guess because they didn't hit the US they didn't happen?

[lazs2]

curval.. the only thing about the climate that is constant is that it changes.

No year was ever the same as any other...  never.. no year was ever average.

sooo..   whenever the weather is off the average one way or the other... that is now our fault?  

Would that not mean that every time is is good that is our accomplishment too?

So far.. this natural warming period we have enjoyed for a few decades has been very very very good to us..  are you saying it has all been our doing?

That coming out of the ice age was our "fault"?   fine with me.

no hurricanes... our fault.. more hurricanes... our fault.. "normal" amount of hurricanes...  some sort of glitch.

doom and gloom for next year?  well.. can't predict that.. doom and gloom for 50 years away unless we send a check?   for certain.    

good weather..  enjoy it.   it will get cold soon enough.

Here.. it was global warming that gave us our summer that was...well.. mild but dry.. no snow pack!!! end of the world!!!  drought and plague caused by global warming!!!!

This week..  storm rolls in (weaker than some in the past but stronger than others) and lo and behold!!!!   snow pack is restored.

So is all this our fault?   which part?  the good parts or the bad parts?

If we can't predict what will happen next year or in five years then maybe we don't even know all the particulars?   Maybe it is too complex and maybe.. we simply can't do anything about it?

If we don't understand it maybe we should spend more time trying to understand and less time trying to panic people and do something about what we don't understand.

lazs

[Curval]

Originally posted by lazs2
curval.. the only thing about the climate that is constant is that it changes.

No year was ever the same as any other...  never.. no year was ever average.

sooo..   whenever the weather is off the average one way or the other... that is now our fault?  

Would that not mean that every time is is good that is our accomplishment too?

So far.. this natural warming period we have enjoyed for a few decades has been very very very good to us..  are you saying it has all been our doing?

That coming out of the ice age was our "fault"?   fine with me.

no hurricanes... our fault.. more hurricanes... our fault.. "normal" amount of hurricanes...  some sort of glitch.

doom and gloom for next year?  well.. can't predict that.. doom and gloom for 50 years away unless we send a check?   for certain.    

good weather..  enjoy it.   it will get cold soon enough.

Here.. it was global warming that gave us our summer that was...well.. mild but dry.. no snow pack!!! end of the world!!!  drought and plague caused by global warming!!!!

This week..  storm rolls in (weaker than some in the past but stronger than others) and lo and behold!!!!   snow pack is restored.

So is all this our fault?   which part?  the good parts or the bad parts?

If we can't predict what will happen next year or in five years then maybe we don't even know all the particulars?   Maybe it is too complex and maybe.. we simply can't do anything about it?

If we don't understand it maybe we should spend more time trying to understand and less time trying to panic people and do something about what we don't understand.

lazs

Where did I blame the US for anything lazs?

I like your last paragraph though...I think you are absolutely right.  How does this fit in with your adamant denial that GW or climate change exists though?

[lazs2]

curval... I have never said that we are not in a normal warming trend or that the climate does not "change"..   the only constant is change.

we have never had 2 years in a row that were the same or... even "average"  hell.. there has never even been an "average" week I bet.

So who takes the blame?  well.. in the past.. we simply said...  "you can't do anything about the weather"   now.. in our arrogance and ignorance.. we claim that we can change the climate of the globe...

But of course.. only for the worst.. everything we do is bad.. if the weather is nice...    it is in spite of us...if it is bad... it is because of us.

Truth is.. it has been nothing but.... very very good for everyone... you have to really dig to be upset.. or.. you have to go to a computer and "predict" gloom out far enough that you won't get caught..  say a couple of decades.. that way... anything you do.. will be given credit for the natural cooling cycle we are about to enter.

lazs

[Curval]

Lazs

Rightly or wrongly there is a huge debate on global warming/climate change.  Your own EPA highlights its existance.

You say this in one breath "If we don't understand it maybe we should spend more time trying to understand and less time trying to panic people and do something about what we don't understand." and then in the very next post you say this:  "in our arrogance and ignorance.. we claim that we can change the climate of the globe".  [Meaning clearly that you do not think mankind can change the weather...right?]

Which is it?

Do you want to even TRY to understand it...or do you just want to keep honking "It's the sun stupid"?  That isn't trying to understand anything.

[Holden McGroin]

Originally posted by Curval
Two cat 5 storms hit land in 2007....first time that has EVER happened.  They struck just to the South of the Continental US.  There were quite a few named storms too...but I guess because they didn't hit the US they didn't happen?

ACTUAL COLORADO STATE  PRESS RELEASE

DENVER   April 3, 2007 -

EXTENDED RANGE FORECAST OF ATLANTIC SEASONAL HURRICANE ACTIVITY AND U.S. LANDFALL STRIKE PROBABILITY FOR 2007 :
We have increased our forecast for the 2007 hurricane season, largely due to the rapid dissipation of El Niño conditions. We are now calling for a very active hurricane season. Landfall probabilities for the 2007 hurricane season are well above their long-period averages.  

The probability of U.S. major hurricane landfall is estimated to be about 140 percent of the long-period average. We expect Atlantic basin Net Tropical Cyclone (NTC) activity in 2007 to be about 185 percent of the long-term average.

Hitting Nicaragua qualifiys as making this prediction accurate?

"The 2007 Atlantic hurricane season produced the predicted number of named storms, but the combined number, duration and intensity of the hurricanes did not meet expectations,” said Gerry Bell, Ph.D., lead seasonal hurricane forecaster at NOAA’s Climate Prediction Center. “The United States was fortunate this year to have fewer strong hurricanes develop than predicted. Normally, the climate patterns that were in place produce an active, volatile hurricane season.”  

The climate patterns predicted for the 2007 hurricane season – an ongoing multi-decadal signal (the set of oceanic and atmospheric conditions that have spawned increased Atlantic hurricane activity since 1995) and La Niña – produced the expected below-normal hurricane activity over the eastern and central Pacific regions. However, La Niña’s impact over the Atlantic was weaker than expected, which resulted in stronger upper-level winds and increased wind shear over the Caribbean Sea during the peak months of the season (August-October). This limited Atlantic hurricane formation during that period. NOAA’s scientists are investigating possible climate factors that may have led to this lower-than-expected activity.

Seems NOAA is dissatisfied with their predictive abilities.

[Curval]

LOL Holden...

Nice cherry pick on the bolding.  You missed this:

The 2007 Atlantic hurricane season produced the predicted number of named storms

Which contradicts what you said in your initial post.

You seem only concerned with predictions of storms hitting the US, which figures.  I'd say predicting that a couple of Cat 5s would make landfall is pretty darn good, yes, even if they hit south of where they were predicted to....it has never happened before.