Dr. Jeff Masters' WunderBlog

Quoting weathers4me:
All this talk about GW and Co2 emissions is making me tired. GW won't take us out, it will be a volcanic eruption and or rock from the sky. I'm leaning toward an eruption. Yellowstone is about 30 thousand years over due. This is a scientific fact. And to say that man is not contributing to GW and/or negatively affecting our planet, would be pretty arrogant to say the least. If trying to be nice.

My vote is on the Rock.

BTW, the only fact on this blog is the fact the discussions revolve around only theory .

It's "Big Energy," I tell ya! They're controlling the weather for profit. ;)

Cold snap helps boost Duke Energy 4Q profit
By MARK WILLIAMS (AP Energy Writer)
From Associated Press
February 05, 2009 1:30 PM EST

COLUMBUS, Ohio - Power generator Duke Energy Corp. said Thursday that its fourth quarter profit rose 36 percent as unusually cold weather drove demand for energy despite a big drop in industrial demand in the Midwest and Carolina as the recession took hold.

Orca~ I myself am a little sceptical of the climate models, it's a bit of info to consider but also remember the worst of the gloom & doom models didn't see the artic opening, permafrost melting & migrations happening til much later than they have.. 10 years ago 40-50 years the models said would be the 1st we saw a ship through the NW passage.

Quoting Stanb999:


That is why Ice melt in the Arctic is largely irrelevant. It has strong negative feed backs. :-)

The temps in the Antarctic on land aren't close to the melt point, likewise with Greenland (Even the name Greenland shows good marketing.LOL).

So where is this higher threat of a higher albedo coming from? Not the data. In the past it was thought to be from the arctic and the sea water.... But that has been dispelled. It is well known that glaciers retreat and advance is due to precipitation not temperature. So where is this change to take place?

a major climate shift

I have to say there is good empirical evidence for man changing the weather.

That Canadian blast of cold in the south.... can be directly laid at the feet of KOTG and Orca.

i got like nine turbo fans on the roof of the building all pointing s

Come,..sit down and I'll explain relativity to ya..

And bring me a Diet Pepsi will ya..

Its torrid here

Quoting Ossqss:
BTW, the only fact on this blog is the fact the discussions revolve around only theory .

It's not theory that CO2 absorbs and re-emits IR radiation. This is a proven scientific fact.

23 cold degrees in east Sarasota last night. At least I will not have to cut the grass for 6 weeks since its dead now.

My vote is on the Rock.

BTW, the only fact on this blog is the fact the discussions revolve around only theory .

Theories, I agree but they are based on sound scientific evidence and I respect these theories. We have evidence that such life ending events happened in the past and will repeat themselves given time. So the question is not if, but when.

Quoting Ossqss:
23 cold degrees in east Sarasota last night. At least I will not have to cut the grass for 6 weeks since its dead now.

its not dead just sleeping

THe conjecture you put forth as a future impact is the theory. No one can definitively prove or deny any of these items. We think then we guess, and then rethink and reguess based upon the little we actually know. Hence the GW theory not the GW fact.

Quoting KEEPEROFTHEGATE:
its not dead just sleeping

Good to hear that as I thought ours was dead too. :)

Quoting Patrap:
Come,..sit down and I'll explain relativity to ya..

And bring me a Diet Pepsi will ya..

Its torrid here

OK -- WHATS WITH THE SHOES OR HIGH HEELS?

It's dead here trust me. Looks like seaweed.

Quoting conchygirl:
Good to hear that as I thought ours was dead too. :)

gw is kinda like a big pot of goulash and no matter how it turns out we all got to eat it

Quoting sullivanweather:
Stan,

The main change in albedo comes from northern hemisphere snow cover during the spring and summer months. Snow cover during this time has shown statistically significant decreases in coverage.

But wont a ice free arctic bring more snow to those areas? It will take time but the feedbacks are quite resilient. The reason I say this is that the earths temperature is for the most part very stable. We measure "changes" in <1 degree increments decade to decade.

Think of it, we are on a mound of rock covered with water and gases, Flying in a wobbly path with a varying rotation around an explosion millions of miles away.

And some folks expect to have no change. ;-)

KEH,
Wanna borrow a broken snow shovel????
LOL

Quoting KEHCharleston:
I have to say there is good empirical evidence for man changing the weather.

That Canadian blast of cold in the south.... can be directly laid at the feet of KOTG and Orca.

I like that. Theme of the blog: LOL

Quoting KEEPEROFTHEGATE:
gw is kinda like a big pot of goulash and no matter how it turns out we all got to eat it

362. Ossqss 6:26 PM GMT on February 05, 2009
THe conjecture you put forth as a future impact is the theory. No one can definitively prove or deny any of these items. We think then we guess, and then rethink and reguess based upon the little we actually know. Hence the GW theory not the GW fact.


Are you saying that there is no proof of previous impacts to Earth? There are carters that prove this. Look at the moon and Mars, FACT. There will be future impacts to Earth again. FACT. As far as GW goes. It is a fact that the Earth goes through cycles of hot and cold. Fact, man is contributing to Earth's demise as we know it. The only thing that remains theory is to what point and how much are we affecting it.

KOTG - turn those fans OFF!

grasses go into a hibenated state just as a treea do everthing pulls into the root leaving on top a brown dry appearance

Quoting Stanb999:


But wont a ice free arctic bring more snow to those areas? It will take time but the feedbacks are quite resilient.

That's the dance...

The further the planet warms the closer we get to climatic states that aren't stable. An ice-free arctic would certainly lead to more precipitation at high latitudes.

Foxx,

I think I am beginning to detect a pattern here.

Apple Pie courtesy of GulfPoet
Goulash courtesy of KOTG

Yikes, now I am cold and hungry

Quoting weathers4me:
362. Ossqss 6:26 PM GMT on February 05, 2009
THe conjecture you put forth as a future impact is the theory. No one can definitively prove or deny any of these items. We think then we guess, and then rethink and reguess based upon the little we actually know. Hence the GW theory not the GW fact.


Are you saying that there is no proof of previous impacts to Earth? There are carters that prove this. Look at the moon and Mars, FACT. There will be future impacts to Earth again. FACT. As far as GW goes. It is a fact that the Earth goes through cycles of hot and cold. Fact, man is contributing to Earth's demise as we know it. The only thing that remains theory is to what point and how much are we affecting it.

The fact is you nor anyone else really knows the truth. Interpretation of referenced facts to any conclusion is simply preference and not indisputable as fact. Tell me, what should the temp of the earth actually be right now, with or without the influence of man. You cannot correctly answer that question. It would again only be speculation and extrapolation and not fact. The earth controlls us not the inverse.

Quoting sullivanweather:



That's the dance...

The further the planet warms the closer we get to climatic states that aren't stable. An ice-free arctic would certainly lead to more precipitation at high latitudes.

it already has there have been some items ive read that shows evidence of increases to global water vapour levels this may also be linked to larger than normal accumlating rain snow events as of late

The fact is you nor anyone else really knows the truth. Interpretation of referenced facts to any conclusion is simply preference and not indisputable as fact. Tell me, what should the temp of the earth actually be right now, with or without the influence of man. You cannot correctly answer that question. It would again only be speculation and extrapolation and not fact. The earth controlls us not the inverse

I agree with you there. We are at the mercy of the Earth and all the process of the universe. There are some things that we cannot control. If we cannot adapt to a changing environment, we will not survive as a species.

As far as what the temp should be, you got me. We have no way to know that.

Apple Pie and Goulash - yum!

Quoting Orcasystems:
Ok, since KEH has put down the stir stick.. I will put in my two cents.

I have heard people using Models.. Predictions.. Data.. Ouji boards to tell us about GW. This is a matter that has been extensively studied in the last 15-20 years. They are warning us of the dire consequences of what is going to happen in 25-100 years time.

We all have to agree with the above.. no matter what side of the GW equation you are on.

Hurricanes have been extensively studied for 50 years. Using Models.. Predictions.. Data.. Ouji boards to tell us what is happening and where/when, with in the next 10 days (normally long range).

We will all agree that any tracking/forecasting model outside of 3 days or less is speculation at best... and model data 7 - 10 days out is garbage.

If we agree with that statement... and they cannot predict the weather accurately with in 7 - 10 days... why in the world would I believe predictions 25-100 years out?

Do they have that much better Model data and scientists then the people trying to protect the CONUS from Hurricanes?

The "doc" covered this subject several blogs ago. Forgive any flaw in memory.
Seems the meandering tumbles of a weather system across an impossible to model resistance to flow of landscapes and other meandering tumbling weather systems yields a ten day prediction no more accurate than the toss of a coin.
Long range models feed more on trends and historical and current recordings in relation to what may or may not indeed force a climate change.
I'm curious though as to the wide descrepencies in these models and wonder if an operating philosophy is more of an influence than addmitted.
Comments if I misunderstand....?

Mauritius Meteorological Services
Tropical Cyclone Advisory Number SEVENTEEN
TROPICAL CYCLONE GAEL (08-20082009)
22:00 PM Réunion February 5 2009
==================================

At 18:00 PM UTC, Tropical Cyclone Gael (970 hPa) located at 18.3S 55.1E has 10 minute sustained winds of 65 knots with gusts of 90 knots. The cyclone is reported as moving west at 8 knots.

Dvorak Intensity: T4.5

Hurricane-Force Winds
===================
close to the center

Storm-Force Winds
==================
25 NM radius of the center extending up to 30 NM in the southern semi-circle

Gale-Force Winds
==================
60 NM radius from the center extending up to 100 NM in the eastern semi-circle

Near Gale-Force Winds
======================
120 NM radius from the center, extending up to 160 NM in the eastern semi-circle

Forecast and Intensity
=======================
12 HRS: 18.6S 53.3E - 75 knots (Cyclone Tropical)
24 HRS: 19.3S 52.2E - 85 knots (Cyclone Tropical)

Additional Information
========================
GAEL is currently tracking in the north of Réunion Island. It is regularly intensifying within a favorable environment. System is expected to keep on tracking globallu west-southwest within the next 12 hours and beyond, to recurve southwest regularly intensifying.

Quoting weathers4me:
The fact is you nor anyone else really knows the truth. Interpretation of referenced facts to any conclusion is simply preference and not indisputable as fact. Tell me, what should the temp of the earth actually be right now, with or without the influence of man. You cannot correctly answer that question. It would again only be speculation and extrapolation and not fact. The earth controlls us not the inverse

I agree with you there. We are at the mercy of the Earth and all the process of the universe. There are some things that we cannot control. If we cannot adapt to a changing environment, we will not survive as a species.

As far as what the temp should be, you got me. We have no way to know that.

Remember that 99.99999999999% of the species that have ever existed are now extinct.

Quoting weathers4me:
The fact is you nor anyone else really knows the truth. Interpretation of referenced facts to any conclusion is simply preference and not indisputable as fact. Tell me, what should the temp of the earth actually be right now, with or without the influence of man. You cannot correctly answer that question. It would again only be speculation and extrapolation and not fact. The earth controlls us not the inverse

I agree with you there. We are at the mercy of the Earth and all the process of the universe. There are some things that we cannot control. If we cannot adapt to a changing environment, we will not survive as a species.

As far as what the temp should be, you got me. We have no way to know that.

BTW, your last statement is indicative of the entire GW debate.

Quoting Ossqss:


Remember that 99.99999999999% of the species that have ever existed are now extinct.

extintion is the way of the earth been that way since the beginning be that way till the end

Remember that 99.99999999999% of the species that have ever existed are now extinct.

Gee that's comforting. The only point I was making, and I agree with you about theories, is that there is physical evidence of impact craters on Earth that could have only been made by an outer-space missile. There is evidence of this all around the globe. There is evidence of lava layers at all periods and all locations on Earth. There fore, since this has happened (and still happening), why do you say that these are theories?

Yum! as long as its hot!
I'm cold and hungry!

Quoting conchygirl:
Apple Pie and Goulash - yum!

Quoting Orcasystems:
We will all agree that any tracking/forecasting model outside of 3 days or less is speculation at best... and model data 7 - 10 days out is garbage.

If we agree with that statement... and they cannot predict the weather accurately with in 7 - 10 days... why in the world would I believe predictions 25-100 years out?

Do they have that much better Model data and scientists then the people trying to protect the CONUS from Hurricanes?

I think you are confused regarding the difference between weather models and climate models.

Weather models are a model of fluid dynamics in a gridded scale, susceptible to errors in resolution and initialization.

Climate models are models of Earth's energy budget with a few small caveats such as biome coverage which may effect absorption vs. reflection but essentially, these are relatively small effects compared to the global effects of well-mixed greenhouse gasses in the atmosphere.

Thanks for clearing up all the controversy-not!. Stick to the tropics.

Quoting Ossqss:


Remember that 99.99999999999% of the species that have ever existed are now extinct.

And if some of those puppies were still here, then we wouldn't be.

Quoting weathers4me:
Remember that 99.99999999999% of the species that have ever existed are now extinct.

Gee that's comforting. The only point I was making, and I agree with you about theories, is that there is physical evidence of impact craters on Earth that could have only been made by an outer-space missile. There is evidence of this all around the globe. There is evidence of lava layers at all periods and all locations on Earth. There fore, since this has happened (and still happening), why do you say that these are theories?

Craters, yep, no doubt. A big one is proposed to have created the Gulf of Mexico and perhaps caused the demise of the Dino population. My theory comment is relagated to the GW debate and the proposed solutions the green folks think we need. Use current energy vs stored energy etc. I am fearful the go green way may make us brown in the end and may unecessarily to boot.

Quoting theshepherd:


And if some of those puppies were still here, then we wouldn't be.

I agree with you there. That brings up another interesting debate. What did in the Dinosaur? My belief is that a combination of things caused it. Starting with disease and mass die off caused by biting insects and the impact effect of the rock and or/ massive volcanic eruption only delivered the final blow. I think humans will fare better that the Dinosaurs, we have sceince and medication on our side. But then again, who know what Mother Nature has in store for us. We are living here on her time clock.

TC GAEL Extended Forecast and Intensity
=====================================

48 HRS: 21.4S 51.0E - 105 knots (Cyclone Tropical Intense)
72 HRS: 24.1S 51.9E - 110 knots (Cyclone Tropical Intense)

well iam going to hook up a couple of more fans bbl

Quoting HadesGodWyvern:
TC GAEL Extended Forecast and Intensity
=====================================

48 HRS: 21.4S 51.0E - 105 knots (Cyclone Tropical Intense)
72 HRS: 24.1S 51.9E - 110 knots (Cyclone Tropical Intense)

TC Gael? Gale?

Wow, that's original.

Do we get Typhoon Windy next?

Maybe Tropical Storm Breeze. Hurricane Blustery sounds a good candidate....

I think it is pronounce Ja el.

Quoting GulfPoet:


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncertainty_principle

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Observer_effect_(physics)


It is not possible to divorce the realities of uncertainty and the observer effect - from the endless babble on computer modeling climate change. It is also - as demonstrated just this past week - an observed phenomenon that even near term climate modeling for weather is riddled with error and .... uncertainty.

To hold to a theory, computer program, or limited observational data with such absolutism, as in the case of AGW - is both illogical, and borders on religious thought. The real denialists are those who refuse to accept reality as it is, not according to the computer models, and denying the near infinite complexities and possibilities of uncertainty at the quantum level, which have direct bearing on the larger systemic outcomes.

Thus, through logic we must deduce that beyond the scientific inquiry lie motives. And it is this motive factor that most of us are truly seeking to unveil. The record of history is that whenever and institution or government seeks to distort the scientific method of discovery - the motive is always control. Whether the tyranny of the church in the dark ages, or the reign of kings - control is always the end, and the means are inquisition, proselytizing and finally…...yes.... death and taxes. You will submit to the dogma - and our control.

Freedom, liberty and objective truth serve all of us through rational thought and science - that continues to ask questions and challenge preconceived notions and delights in understanding the world the way it really is, not how we wish or think it should be.

Nicely worded. You had better be careful though because you are risking being branded an "infidel" on GW. You might get censored or worse get your hands cut off. If a sufficiently large computer says something is so, then it's as if God himself is speaking.

Quoting HadesGodWyvern:
I think it is pronounce Ja el.

May it be; still amusing though. :p

Quoting GulfPoet:


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncertainty_principle

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Observer_effect_(physics)


It is not possible to divorce the realities of uncertainty and the observer effect - from the endless babble on computer modeling climate change. It is also - as demonstrated just this past week - an observed phenomenon that even near term climate modeling for weather is riddled with error and .... uncertainty.

To hold to a theory, computer program, or limited observational data with such absolutism, as in the case of AGW - is both illogical, and borders on religious thought. The real denialists are those who refuse to accept reality as it is, not according to the computer models, and denying the near infinite complexities and possibilities of uncertainty at the quantum level, which have direct bearing on the larger systemic outcomes.

Thus, through logic we must deduce that beyond the scientific inquiry lie motives. And it is this motive factor that most of us are truly seeking to unveil. The record of history is that whenever and institution or government seeks to distort the scientific method of discovery - the motive is always control. Whether the tyranny of the church in the dark ages, or the reign of kings - control is always the end, and the means are inquisition, proselytizing and finally…...yes.... death and taxes. You will submit to the dogma - and our control.

Freedom, liberty and objective truth serve all of us through rational thought and science - that continues to ask questions and challenge preconceived notions and delights in understanding the world the way it really is, not how we wish or think it should be.

You are one of my favorite Bloggers.......well put my friend......

yup is it funny.

according to Mauritius Cyclone List, Gael name was contributed by Madagascar.

Quoting weathers4me:



I agree with you there. That brings up another interesting debate. What did in the Dinosaur? My belief is that a combination of things caused it. Starting with disease and mass die off caused by biting insects and the impact effect of the rock and or/ massive volcanic eruption only delivered the final blow. I think humans will fare better that the Dinosaurs, we have sceince and medication on our side. But then again, who know what Mother Nature has in store for us. We are living here on her time clock.

Your theory fits with the ever growing concensus of modern thought. We often forget how many species survive this period that covered millions of years. It didn't happen all at once.
I fear the mutations of the flu bug and mosquito born illness more than I do GW.
By the way let's call it PW (planet warming) ol' George has had his share by now....LOL

Can anyone please explain the shoes in #357 ??? It does not compute.