Author Topic: General Climate Discussion  (Read 103705 times)

Offline MORAY37

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2318
Re: General Climate Discussion
« Reply #1155 on: January 06, 2008, 11:34:27 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by 2Slow
As I recall, in the late '60's and early '70's the concern was about the coming Ice Age.

Our collective pollution was reflecting the Sun's energy and preventing it from reaching the surface.

There must of not been any money in this theory.  Thus, it went away.

Here it is as I see it.  The Sun's activity is causing the ice cap melt.  The ice cap melt will dilute the salinity of the seas.  This reduction in salinity will interrupt the ocean streams that bring warmth to the northern reaches of the northern hemisphere.  We get an "ice age" of some sort.

With the increase in the polar ice caps, the salinity of the oceans increases.  The ocean streams, such as the Gulf Stream, resume operation.  We get warm again.


 



It is true that there were some predictions of an "emminent ice age" in the 1970's but what does this tell us about today's warnings?

A very cursory comparison of then and now reveals a huge difference. Today, you have a widespread scientific consensus supported by national academies and all the major scientific institutions solidy behind the warning that the temperature is rising, anthropogenic CO2 is the cause and the warming will worsen unless we reduce emissions. In the 1970's, there was a book in the popular press, a few articles in popular magazines, and a small amount of scientific speculation based on the recently discovered glacial cycles and the recent slight cooling trend from air pollution blocking the sunlight. No daily headlines. No avalanche of scientific articles. No United Nations treaties and commissions. No G8 summits on the dangers.

There quite simply is no comparison, I'm sure you could find better evidence of a "consensus" of a coming alien invasion.
"Ocean: A body of water occupying 2/3 of a world made for man...who has no gills."
-Ambrose Bierce

Offline MORAY37

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2318
Re: General Climate Discussion
« Reply #1156 on: January 06, 2008, 11:41:41 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Holden McGroin


I got within 35% on my company NFL pool this year and still lost.



Beat you badly then, just using statistics.

 Placed 2nd out of 94.  Actually knowing math got me $3,000.
"Ocean: A body of water occupying 2/3 of a world made for man...who has no gills."
-Ambrose Bierce

Offline Holden McGroin

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8591
Re: General Climate Discussion
« Reply #1157 on: January 07, 2008, 12:28:49 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by MORAY37
I suppose it's routine to get half of it in one storm.


If you would have read the rest of my post, you would have understood that 1847 Donner Party apparently had drifts of 20" drop on them in a single day.

Quote
Originally posted by MORAY37
Holden seriously... could ya stop with the splitting of the hairs? I'm starting to think I gave you too much credit... or perhaps you didn't spend a whole lotta time actually studying what you spout. (Perhaps you're still in college?) I don't know which.

Gravity is a constant. That cannot be argued... nor am I. It can be measured and predicted to the n'th degree... but why it exists IS still a theory. There has not been a proof yet that has yielded an all encompassing reason why gravity can even exist.

If you can't see the difference in this statement, and its implications therein, I have to say then, that the conversation is way over your head.


Splitting Hairs? You brought up gravity into this, and then accuse me of doing it by deftly only discussing the Universal Law of Gravity.

Intresting that it took you several days to come up with this BS about what you really meant.  If it were obvious, you would have said something about it your first reply post, but instead you debate (or are you still not debating?) Newtons law, not the ephemeral reason of gravity's existance.

Quote
Originally posted by MORAY37
Beat you badly then, just using statistics.

Placed 2nd out of 94. Actually knowing math got me $3,000.


That's 30% (actually I was 68.75% correct so 31.25% wrong) away from getting all the NFL games correct.  The winner was only two games away from me.  I was third of 25.  Ours was all or nothing for the season, about $70 each week.  I netted 2 weekly wins and made enough to come out about $25 in the black.
Holden McGroin LLC makes every effort to provide accurate and complete information. Since humor, irony, and keen insight may be foreign to some readers, no warranty, expressed or implied is offered. Re-writing this disclaimer cost me big bucks at the lawyer’s office!

Offline lazs2

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 24886
Re: General Climate Discussion
« Reply #1158 on: January 07, 2008, 08:37:55 AM »
moray... you don't know much about northern kalifornia weather do you?  

But.. what is "normal" to you?  have we ever had a normal year?  to you.. even if the rainfall or snowfall is "normal"... it isn't... cause it fell at the wrong day or over the wrong time frame.  

There is no normal weather...  I have decades of data for every day.. no day is like another.

But... if we are to blame for the bad things then surely..... we are to be credited for the good?

It has all been good too hasn't it?   15% increase in crop failures... less people died of cold than ever before.. nice pleasant warm summers...

and..  the predictions of an ice age before the year 2000 were by 250 "leading" scientists.    they were as wrong as all the scientists that predicted mans internal organs could not stand a speed of 70 mph.

lazs

Offline Angus

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10057
Re: General Climate Discussion
« Reply #1159 on: January 07, 2008, 11:37:10 AM »
And because of the increased crops and food production due to this better climate, production prices are rizing   :confused:
It was very interesting to carry out the flight trials at Rechlin with the Spitfire and the Hurricane. Both types are very simple to fly compared to our aircraft, and childishly easy to take-off and land. (Werner Mölders)

Offline Maverick

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 13958
Re: General Climate Discussion
« Reply #1160 on: January 07, 2008, 12:52:20 PM »
It's more like food is being redirected from normal uses to production of ethanol, causing prices in all related areas to rise.
DEFINITION OF A VETERAN
A Veteran - whether active duty, retired, national guard or reserve - is someone who, at one point in their life, wrote a check made payable to "The United States of America", for an amount of "up to and including my life."
Author Unknown

Offline MORAY37

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2318
Re: General Climate Discussion
« Reply #1161 on: January 07, 2008, 01:21:40 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Holden McGroin
If you would have read the rest of my post, you would have understood that 1847 Donner Party apparently had drifts of 20" drop on them in a single day.

 

 


Yep... drifts of 20 feet.  (" means inches, by the way.  ' means feet)  You can get drifts of 20' with as little as 2 1/2 feet of snowfall, with the right wind and topographical features.

Yes, I do know about California's snowfall in the higher elevations lazs.  I also know, that statistically, the now..14 total expected feet in those elevations, 10 of which were in the first 48 hours,
is significant .


That equals out to 168 inches.  Blue Canyon... the "snowiest city in the US" gets 240" of snowfall per YEAR.  That makes this last 72 hours..70% of their yearly snowfall in one storm.   Where do you think all that moisture is suddenly coming from?  Why now, with all the rest of this crazy weather?
"Ocean: A body of water occupying 2/3 of a world made for man...who has no gills."
-Ambrose Bierce

Offline Holden McGroin

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8591
Re: General Climate Discussion
« Reply #1162 on: January 07, 2008, 02:32:50 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by MORAY37
Blue Canyon... the "snowiest city in the US" gets 240" of snowfall per YEAR.  That makes this last 72 hours..70% of their yearly snowfall in one storm.   Where do you think all that moisture is suddenly coming from?  Why now, with all the rest of this crazy weather?


240" per year is an average.  Sometimes it may even be more than average.

Quote
Winter Storm Batters Western US

Link
 
High Winds Brought Down Trees Across California
 
A winter storm is sweeping the western states of the US, bringing heavy rain, snow and high winds. Avalanche warnings were posted in the Sierra Nevada mountains after up to 5ft (1.5m) of snow fell. There were fresh flood warnings in southern California.[/b]


Quote
February 17, 1990 - The biggest winter storm of the season hit the Pacific Coast Region. In northern California, snow fell along the coast, and two day totals in the mountains ranged up to 67 inches at Echo Summit. (The National Weather Summary) (Storm Data)


Quote
February 22, 1986 - A twelve day siege of heavy rain and snow, which produced widespread flooding and mudslides across northern and central California, finally came to an end. The storm caused more than 400 million dollars property damage. Bucks Lake, located in the Sierra Nevada Range, received 49.6 inches of rain during the twelve day period. (Storm Data)


Quote
March 12, 1967 - A tremendous four day storm raged across California. Winds of 90 mph closed mountain passes, heavy rains flooded the lowlands, and in sixty hours Squaw Valley CA was buried under 96 inches (eight feet) of snow.


Quote
Second greatest United States 24-hour snowfall record: 67 inches (5.6 ft.) January 4-5, 1982.  The old California record of 60 inches in 24 hours was recorded at Giant Forest in the southern Sierra Nevada in January 1933.  


Quote
Mount Shasta Ski Bowl, California, Single storm snowfall record: 189 inches (15.75 ft.) February 13 – 19, 1959. There were 103 inches of snowfall measured from Feb. 15–17 during this event, which holds both the United States and the world’s greatest two-day snowfall on record.

A comparable snow event occurred near Donner Pass in mid-February 1999, when a powerful winter storm dumped 168 inches (14 ft.) at Sugar Bowl Ski Resort from Feb. 6 to 9.  


Quote
Tamarack, California--U.S. snowfall record for one month: 390 inches (32.5 ft.) January 1911


Quote
Tamarack, California--Sierra Nevada record snowfall during one season: 884 inches (73.7 ft.) 1906-07


Oh my God!  The snow is as bad as it's been several times before! What should we do?  This one storm is at least 60% of what happened in 1959 at Mount Shasta!

Perhaps we should calm down.
Holden McGroin LLC makes every effort to provide accurate and complete information. Since humor, irony, and keen insight may be foreign to some readers, no warranty, expressed or implied is offered. Re-writing this disclaimer cost me big bucks at the lawyer’s office!

Offline AKIron

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 13365
Re: General Climate Discussion
« Reply #1163 on: January 07, 2008, 03:10:20 PM »
Washington is definitely having winter. My daughter got a couple of her pics posted on a local weather site:

http://www.krem.com/weather/pix/?image_id=135219

http://www.krem.com/weather/pix/?image_id=135218
Here we put salt on Margaritas, not sidewalks.

Offline Angus

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10057
Re: General Climate Discussion
« Reply #1164 on: January 08, 2008, 05:49:13 AM »
Have you guys seen the oil price forecast for the next year or so? I've heard double!
While it will not affect me too much personally (I don't have a car, hehe), it will hit the farm purse when I tank up them tractors.
It was very interesting to carry out the flight trials at Rechlin with the Spitfire and the Hurricane. Both types are very simple to fly compared to our aircraft, and childishly easy to take-off and land. (Werner Mölders)

Offline AquaShrimp

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1706
Re: General Climate Discussion
« Reply #1165 on: January 08, 2008, 09:50:26 AM »
My ecology instructor had worked for a few years in the private sector doing environmental consulting.  He said that the scientists who worked for the environmental company he worked for were instructed on what outcomes to recomend, even before they had done the research.  He also said some of those guys would sell their own grandmothers for enough money.

So in short, you can get a scientist to say whatever you want for enough money.

Offline Angus

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10057
Re: General Climate Discussion
« Reply #1166 on: January 08, 2008, 09:56:19 AM »
A sidenote to all of this energy-use issue as well as offer vs demand is that most of the energy we burn goes to waste.
Just read a little breakup about aluminum. All our tincans you see. Ok, let's have numbers:
4-5 tons boxite = 1 tonne pure Al.
1 tonne pure al = 60.000 cans.
Energy needed for 1 ton Al = energy needed for 30 tons of steel.
U.S. Al as waste every year = 2.5 million tons.
Guess how many Boeing 737's it takes to dump.....roughly 30.000!
CURSE ON LAGERCANS! USE KEGS!!!
It was very interesting to carry out the flight trials at Rechlin with the Spitfire and the Hurricane. Both types are very simple to fly compared to our aircraft, and childishly easy to take-off and land. (Werner Mölders)

Offline Curval

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 11572
      • http://n/a
Re: General Climate Discussion
« Reply #1167 on: January 08, 2008, 03:26:44 PM »
lol

Yup...that is what the whole debate is about.  Everyone is jealous of your cars so they made up GW to take them away from you.

:noid :noid :noid
Some will fall in love with life and drink it from a fountain that is pouring like an avalanche coming down the mountain

Offline TwentyFo

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1006
Re: General Climate Discussion
« Reply #1168 on: January 08, 2008, 06:51:51 PM »
I just emailed a link of this thread to the White House. Hopefully, they will see that we solved Global Warming. What should we tackle next?
XO ***THE LYNCHMOB***

Offline Angus

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10057
Re: General Climate Discussion
« Reply #1169 on: January 09, 2008, 02:42:10 AM »
They'll have something to do then :D
It was very interesting to carry out the flight trials at Rechlin with the Spitfire and the Hurricane. Both types are very simple to fly compared to our aircraft, and childishly easy to take-off and land. (Werner Mölders)