dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
2102
share rss forum feed


aurgathor

join:2002-12-01
Lynnwood, WA
kudos:1

A new norm for storms & global warming

Scientist have long predicted that one of the result of global warming will be more extreme weather, and there you have it: Sandy.

Of course single events are hard to blame on global warming, but if one looks back in history, major hurricanes that north are more frequent lately than they used to be, and the main culprit behind them is the warming ocean that provides more 'fuel' to hurricanes.
»video.msnbc.msn.com/nightly-news/49616092
--
Wacky Races 2012!



IIIBradIII
Comm M-E-L Instr

join:2000-09-28
Greer, SC

Makes you wonder what kind of dire predictions were made from catastrophic events such as Galveston in 1900 or the Long Island Express in 1938. I'll bet they came up with some good ones then too.



Grail Knight

Premium
join:2003-05-31
Valhalla
kudos:6
Reviews:
·Verizon Online DSL
·Time Warner Cable
reply to aurgathor

With extreme weather seeming to be the norm in recent years I was surprised that Congress/president cut funding for NOAA. NOAA will loose 2 main weather satellites for 1-2 years by 2014 until 2016 est.

Considering recorded weather only goes back 100 odd years who is to say if current trends are natural cycles or man-made although I am leaning towards man-made weather events.
--
"Paranoia, the destroyer"



aurgathor

join:2002-12-01
Lynnwood, WA
kudos:1

1 recommendation

While there is no full record (meaning instrumental data) beyond a certain time, there is record of extreme events going back much more than that.

One issue here is that certain 100 year events now seem to happen every few years.
--
Wacky Races 2012!



Grail Knight

Premium
join:2003-05-31
Valhalla
kudos:6

Like I said I am leaning towards man-made causes and something had to give eventually. I hate to say this but the weather is only going to worsen in the coming decades.
--
"Paranoia, the destroyer"



NOCTech75
Premium
join:2009-06-29
Marietta, GA
reply to aurgathor

This was NOT a major hurricane.. it was a Cat 2. Major hurricanes are defines as Cat 3/4/5.



NOCTech75
Premium
join:2009-06-29
Marietta, GA
Reviews:
·Comcast

1 recommendation

reply to Grail Knight

said by Grail Knight:

Like I said I am leaning towards man-made causes and something had to give eventually. I hate to say this but the weather is only going to worsen in the coming decades.

»heartland.org/editorial/2012/09/···frequent

quote:
Let’s split the 100-year hurricane record in half, starting with major hurricane strikes during the most recent 50 years.

During the most recent decade, 2001-2010, 7 major hurricanes struck the United States. That is exactly the 100-year average.

During the preceding decade, 1991-2000, 6 major hurricanes struck the United States. That is below the 100-year average.

During the decade 1981-1990, 4 major hurricanes struck the United States. That is substantially below the 100-year average, and ties the least number of major hurricanes on record.

During the decade 1971-1980, 4 major hurricanes struck the United States. That is substantially below the 100-year average, and ties 1981-1990 as the two decades with the least number of major hurricanes.

During the decade 1961-1970, 7 major hurricanes struck the United States. That is exactly the 100-year average.

Incredibly, not a single decade during the past 50 years saw an above-average number of major hurricanes – not a single decade!

Now let’s look at the preceding 50 years in the hurricane record, before the alleged human-induced global warming crisis.

During the decade 1951-1960, 9 major hurricanes struck the United States. That is above the 100-year average.

During the decade 1941-1950, 11 major hurricanes struck the United States. That is substantially above the 100-year average.

During the decade 1931-1940, 8 major hurricanes struck the United States. That is above the 100-year average.

During the decade 1921-1930, 6 major hurricanes struck the United States. That is slightly below the 100-year average.

During the decade 1911-1920, 8 major hurricanes struck the United States. That is above the 100-year average.


aurgathor

join:2002-12-01
Lynnwood, WA
kudos:1
reply to NOCTech75

Good point, but somewhat of a nitpicky technicality.

Yes, it didn't have the cat3 or above windspeed, but it was a really big (size) storm with record barometric pressure and record storm surge for that particular area.
--
Wacky Races 2012!



NOCTech75
Premium
join:2009-06-29
Marietta, GA
Reviews:
·Comcast

said by aurgathor:

Good point, but somewhat of a nitpicky technicality.

Not really... unless of course you want to change the definition to suit you and your argument.


IIIBradIII
Comm M-E-L Instr

join:2000-09-28
Greer, SC

said by NOCTech75:

said by aurgathor:

Good point, but somewhat of a nitpicky technicality.

Not really... unless of course you want to change the definition to suit you and your argument.

Just look at the logic attempted in the original article. "We know you can't extrapolate anything useful from one big storm, but well, we're going to do just that." Hilarious what passes for journalism and science these days.
--
»www.FlightSimWorld.com
Remember, there are old pilots and there are bold pilots, but there are no old bold pilots.
Flight Simulator


Grail Knight

Premium
join:2003-05-31
Valhalla
kudos:6

1 recommendation

reply to NOCTech75

Lets not get stuck on hurricanes.
Drought, flooding, snowfall, etc... extremes are all part of the weather system.
--
"Paranoia, the destroyer"



NOCTech75
Premium
join:2009-06-29
Marietta, GA
Reviews:
·Comcast

said by Grail Knight:

Lets not get stuck on hurricanes.
Drought, flooding, snowfall, etc... extremes are all part of the weather system.

And they all have happened before in various areas. Using a couple of examples of drought, flooding and snowfall doesn't come close to proving or disproving theories. And this thread was started by the OP on the basis of one hurricane.. so yes, we are going to be stuck on hurricanes since that is what this thread is about.


EGeezer
zichrona livracha
Premium
join:2002-08-04
Midwest
kudos:8

1 recommendation

reply to NOCTech75

When one is discussing "global" climatology, limiting discussion to hurricanes in the Unites states is only a small subset of the data.
--
Buckle Up. It makes it harder for the aliens to suck you out of your car.



NOCTech75
Premium
join:2009-06-29
Marietta, GA
Reviews:
·Comcast

said by EGeezer:

When one is discussing "global" climatology, limiting discussion to hurricanes in the Unites states is only a small subset of the data.

Tell that to the OP, not me.


EGeezer
zichrona livracha
Premium
join:2002-08-04
Midwest
kudos:8
Reviews:
·Callcentric

said by NOCTech75:

Tell that to the OP, not me.

I was responding to the list of US-only storms you posted as a discussion point on global events and data.

Feel free disregard that observation as you wish.
--
Buckle Up. It makes it harder for the aliens to suck you out of your car.


NOCTech75
Premium
join:2009-06-29
Marietta, GA

It was posted because that is what we were talking about.



Grail Knight

Premium
join:2003-05-31
Valhalla
kudos:6
Reviews:
·Verizon Online DSL
·Time Warner Cable
reply to NOCTech75

Unless the OP complains about discussion not pertaining to hurricanes only I do not see a problem especially if it is man made or simply nature doing its thing.

I will not get in a pissing contest over the cause of extreme weather.
There are people on both sides of the fence and the winner is still the loser in the long run.
--
"Paranoia, the destroyer"



ropeguru
Premium
join:2001-01-25
Mechanicsville, VA
reply to aurgathor

Seems that scientists don't agree with your assertion:

said by Scientists dispute politician' sclaims that global warming grew Sandy :

To further complicate matters, climate scientists and hurricane experts largely conclude that as the climate warms, there will be fewer hurricanes overall, although those that hit will be stronger and wetter, according to the Associated Press.

So why was Sandy such a doozy?

Several factors contributed to the strength of the hurricane, beyond the standard elements that cause the storms to brew up in the tropics: a low-pressure trough dipping from the Arctic, higher tides thanks to a full moon, and a high-pressure system pushing the storm onshore.

"You've got three factors here that have come together in just the right pattern to create a storm of this type," David Robinson, a Rutgers University professor and New Jersey's state climatologist, told LiveScience. "That's why it's very rare."

»www.foxnews.com/science/2012/10/···trending


FFH
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Tavistock NJ
kudos:5
reply to IIIBradIII

said by IIIBradIII:

said by NOCTech75:

said by aurgathor:

Good point, but somewhat of a nitpicky technicality.

Not really... unless of course you want to change the definition to suit you and your argument.

Just look at the logic attempted in the original article. "We know you can't extrapolate anything useful from one big storm, but well, we're going to do just that." Hilarious what passes for journalism and science these days.

And the 2 biggest NY pols jumped on the global warming caused this storm bandwagon - the mayor of NYC & the Governor of NY. What idiots.
--
»www.gop.com/2012-republican-platform_home/
»www.gop.com/2012-republican-plat···onalism/


Hayward
K A R - 1 2 0 C
Premium
join:2000-07-13
Key West, FL
kudos:1

2 edits
reply to IIIBradIII

said by IIIBradIII:

Makes you wonder what kind of dire predictions were made from catastrophic events such as Galveston in 1900 or the Long Island Express in 1938. I'll bet they came up with some good ones then too.

You left out the strongest storm to ever hit the US, the 1935 storm the hit the Keys and wiped out Henry Flagler's Oversea Railroad. (though only all the land stuff, the incredibly well built bridges all stand to this day, they are only deteriorating now because they have not been maintained in 30 years since they built the new highway)

But as to you hypothesis, not they didn't because they didn't really have the historical statistics to draw one. In 1900 official records had only been kept for 25 years (and Galveston not heavily populated much longer), and even in 35 and 38 still fairly little to base things on, especially path history and development, just boom there it was, possibly a record from a ship or two at sea, that was only reported later.
--