9 June, 2011: Tornado track - Page 2

infinite monkey · 06-09-2011, 11:40 AM

Here's a NY Times article about why they're so much harder to predict ahead of time than other severe weather phenoms:

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/29/us/29tornadoes.html

infinite monkey · 06-09-2011, 11:42 AM

You sly dog, you.

blueboy56 · 06-09-2011, 12:20 PM

Oh yes, and just remember, that these tornados, floods, fires (in Texas and Arizona/New Mexico) plus the 90+ temperatures on the east coast have absoulutely, positively beyond a shadow of a doubt has nothing whatsoever to do with climate change. . . . Really.

Coign · 06-09-2011, 01:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by blueboy56

Oh yes, and just remember, that these tornados, floods, fires (in Texas and Arizona/New Mexico) plus the 90+ temperatures on the east coast have absoulutely, positively beyond a shadow of a doubt has nothing whatsoever to do with climate change. . . . Really.

They have a word for this ... weather.

Climate change is mapped out over hundreds (that is more than 100) and thousands of years. A 20-year bump is nothing. That is weather.

(I am in the group that says, show me a peer reviewed, independent, non-politicized, proof of climate change and I will talk to you. Right now climate change is just another word for politicians to raise taxes, give funding to lobbiests, and pass laws like the "lightbulb Law" that will dump a billion dollars into GE's coffers.)

classicman · 06-09-2011, 12:42 PM

Thanks blue - I was wondering that. I feel much better now.

infinite monkey · 06-09-2011, 12:46 PM

Let me help just a leetle:

See, way way up in the sky, and looking towards the planet (we'll call it 'Earth'), a tornado might seem like a fairly straight line. That is to say, even though they bob and weave, from a billion miles away you're just gonna see some squiggles.

A 'nado doesn't start in, say, Cincinnati, veer down to south KY, then veer back up to Cleveland...no storm does THAT, not even a 'less sarcastic obviously exaggerated' version of THAT.

It's not rocket science, why the lines seem 'straight.' It's barely even meteorological science.

blueboy56 · 06-10-2011, 04:44 PM

Let me get this straight: Roughly 6.5 billion people on the planet, consuming about 6.5 billion pounds of food and about 9.75 billion gallons of water per day, along with producing about 6 billion pounds of poo each day, along with burning the gasoline, diesel, wood, and coal to move and produce the food and electricity. . . Nah, we humans don't effect the planet a bit, never did.

BigV · 06-09-2011, 01:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robert Heinlein

Climate is what you expect.

Weather is what you get.

Don't worry Coign, I'm not talking to you. Your list of prerequisites clearly indicate your position and your interest and willingness to learn more facts. I do find it interesting that one of your conditions is that you're only interested in talking about non-politicized information and in the very next sentence you display a high degree of politicization on the very same subject. I wonder what you *do* with non-politicized information?

Coign · 06-10-2011, 12:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BigV

Don't worry Coign, I'm not talking to you. Your list of prerequisites clearly indicate your position and your interest and willingness to learn more facts. I do find it interesting that one of your conditions is that you're only interested in talking about non-politicized information and in the very next sentence you display a high degree of politicization on the very same subject. I wonder what you *do* with non-politicized information?

That is the problem with discussions of climate change right now. It immediately dives into politics right now. Carbon Tax, laws that outlaw incandescent bulbs, subsidiaries for ethanol, and more. There is a reason for governments to fund these papers that slant results to show it is happening so they can push more control, more taxes, and more money into the pockets of the congress/lobbiests backing it.

The problem is the computer models cannot prove or disprove climate change is man-made. And it is not even that they need to prove if it is happening or not, it it proving that carbon dioxide, the stuff that makes plants grow, is the cause of it.

Until we know it is happening, and more importantly know what it is causing it, anything we do to slow/halt/reverse it is just an unnecessary tax/control against an economy that does not have the money to spend.

http://climateaudit.org/2007/11/29/co2-levels/

Also Google "Climategate" and "Steve McIntyre" to get a start on a lot of views that say, "we don't have any proof. We are just now learning more about Climate and how we affect it."

xoxoxoBruce · 06-11-2011, 06:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Coign

....Until we know it is happening, and more importantly know what it is causing it,....

That proof doesn't come from climatologists, that comes from historians... if there's any left.

BigV · 06-14-2011, 11:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Coign

That is the problem with discussions of climate change right now. It immediately dives into politics right now. Carbon Tax, laws that outlaw incandescent bulbs, subsidiaries for ethanol, and more. There is a reason for governments to fund these papers that slant results to show it is happening so they can push more control, more taxes, and more money into the pockets of the congress/lobbiests backing it.

The problem is the computer models cannot prove or disprove climate change is man-made. And it is not even that they need to prove if it is happening or not, it it proving that carbon dioxide, the stuff that makes plants grow, is the cause of it.

Until we know it is happening, and more importantly know what it is causing it, anything we do to slow/halt/reverse it is just an unnecessary tax/control against an economy that does not have the money to spend.

http://climateaudit.org/2007/11/29/co2-levels/

Also Google "Climategate" and "Steve McIntyre" to get a start on a lot of views that say, "we don't have any proof. We are just now learning more about Climate and how we affect it."

Shall we move the conversation over here?

SPUCK · 06-10-2011, 05:28 AM

Pretend you're on a Mars mission..?

Naw, I'm just talking about sleeping at night.

classicman · 06-10-2011, 01:02 PM

there is this thread ... on that subject.

glatt · 06-10-2011, 01:16 PM

Yeah, where's that dead horse icon?

classicman · 06-14-2011, 12:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BigV

Shall we move the conversation over here?

You mean ...

Quote:

Originally Posted by classicman

there is this thread ... on that subject.

06-09-2011, 12:42 PM	#5
classicman barely disguised asshole, keeper of all that is holy. Join Date: Nov 2007 Posts: 23,401	Thanks blue - I was wondering that. I feel much better now. __________________ "like strapping a pillow on a bull in a china shop" Bullitt

06-10-2011, 01:02 PM	#13
classicman barely disguised asshole, keeper of all that is holy. Join Date: Nov 2007 Posts: 23,401	there is this thread ... on that subject. __________________ "like strapping a pillow on a bull in a china shop" Bullitt

06-09-2011, 11:40 AM	#1
infinite monkey Person who doesn't update the user title Join Date: Mar 2011 Posts: 13,002	Here's a NY Times article about why they're so much harder to predict ahead of time than other severe weather phenoms: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/29/us/29tornadoes.html

06-09-2011, 11:42 AM	#2
infinite monkey Person who doesn't update the user title Join Date: Mar 2011 Posts: 13,002	You sly dog, you.

06-09-2011, 12:20 PM	#3
blueboy56 Master Locutor Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 151	Oh yes, and just remember, that these tornados, floods, fires (in Texas and Arizona/New Mexico) plus the 90+ temperatures on the east coast have absoulutely, positively beyond a shadow of a doubt has nothing whatsoever to do with climate change. . . . Really.

06-09-2011, 12:46 PM	#6
infinite monkey Person who doesn't update the user title Join Date: Mar 2011 Posts: 13,002	Let me help just a leetle: See, way way up in the sky, and looking towards the planet (we'll call it 'Earth'), a tornado might seem like a fairly straight line. That is to say, even though they bob and weave, from a billion miles away you're just gonna see some squiggles. A 'nado doesn't start in, say, Cincinnati, veer down to south KY, then veer back up to Cleveland...no storm does THAT, not even a 'less sarcastic obviously exaggerated' version of THAT. It's not rocket science, why the lines seem 'straight.' It's barely even meteorological science.

06-10-2011, 04:44 PM	#7
blueboy56 Master Locutor Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 151	Let me get this straight: Roughly 6.5 billion people on the planet, consuming about 6.5 billion pounds of food and about 9.75 billion gallons of water per day, along with producing about 6 billion pounds of poo each day, along with burning the gasoline, diesel, wood, and coal to move and produce the food and electricity. . . Nah, we humans don't effect the planet a bit, never did.

06-10-2011, 05:28 AM	#12
SPUCK Professor Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 1,911	Pretend you're on a Mars mission..? Naw, I'm just talking about sleeping at night.

06-10-2011, 01:16 PM	#14
glatt ™ Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Arlington, VA Posts: 27,717	Yeah, where's that dead horse icon?

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)