Bomb Cyclone to Slam East Coast as Winter Storm Continues to Bombard Us

Page 5 of 8

iamanonman Well-Known Member

Joined:

Dec 2, 2016

Messages:

4,826

Likes Received:

1,576

Trophy Points:

113

Cold over a small area does not cancel out hot over a large area. So while the northeast US was cold the rest of the world was still way above average. Again, the United States is not the same thing as the whole world. It's not that hard.
Hoosier8 Well-Known Member Past Donor

Joined:

Jan 16, 2012

Messages:

107,548

Likes Received:

34,488

Trophy Points:

113
Nonsensei436 Well-Known Member Past Donor

Joined:

Jan 9, 2018

Messages:

1,450

Likes Received:

960

Trophy Points:

113

Gender:

Male

Global warming means more severe seasonal extremes. Colder winters and hotter summers. This has been observed clearly in recent meteorological observations and we'll documented.
The suggestion that this is a natural occurrence is blatant nonsense. Global climate change does not occur in so short a period of time naturally. Even if the change took place over the course of one thousand years it would be a lightning quick change.

Climate change deniers use people's lack of ability to understand clear data points and their inability to understand the scope of the passage of time required to global change to occur naturally to muddy the issue and keep regulations from being made.

But it's sadly hilarious that in the end we will all pay for not taking action. Even the deniers.
Ddyad Well-Known Member

Joined:

Nov 17, 2015

Messages:

48,955

Likes Received:

22,045

Trophy Points:

113

Global warming may happen and it may even be caused by mankind, but when "scientists" win awards for urging scientists to fudge their data how can they be trusted?
iamanonman Well-Known Member

Joined:

Dec 2, 2016

Messages:

4,826

Likes Received:

1,576

Trophy Points:

113

All of the them. The standard 1960 baseline. The 1980-2010 baseline. The last 30 years climatalogical average. These are all standard metrics used in academia.
iamanonman Well-Known Member

Joined:

Dec 2, 2016

Messages:

4,826

Likes Received:

1,576

Trophy Points:

113

Who fraudulently fudged data? And is it a widespread problem like it is in the blogger sphere?
Lee S Moderator Staff Member Past Donor

Joined:

Jun 20, 2012

Messages:

10,254

Likes Received:

2,118

Trophy Points:

113

I feel it is rather odd that so much hyperventilation was made over the inappropriately named cyclone bomb. At the same time the East Coast was experiencing wind gusts up to 50 miles per hour, there was a wind advisory warning for the Columbia River Gorge for gusts up to 90 miles per hour. A milder weather condition on the East Coast earns the moniker Cyclone Bomb, but in Oregon, we called it Thursday.
Was the term 'cyclone bomb' warranted or was it just the fact that weather whisperers know that outrageous apoplexy of the weather disaster de jour increases ratings? Did the East Coast even have extreme weather or was it simply winter with a whole lot of hype? And really, making broad pronouncements that a relatively normal winter is some harbinger of a global warming Nuclear Climate Holocaust Sharknado is silly enough to strip normal people of any credibility they earned over the course of their lifetime.
Pollycy Well-Known Member

Joined:

Sep 24, 2008

Messages:

29,112

Likes Received:

13,609

Trophy Points:

113

Gender:

Male

Yours is the best explanation of the 'global warming' phenomenon I've read so far, and although I know that Carbon Dioxide makes up a microscopic .04% of the Earth's atmosphere, I will take your suggestion and view "The Thin Ice". I think I've found it, or parts of it, on YouTube, but it can probably be streamed from various sources as well. Is this it? Link: http://www.greenplanetfilms.org/product/thin-ice-broadcast-edition/
I've never doubted that human beings are big contributors to our overall problems on this planet. Earth's population was about 4 billion when I graduated from college, and, as we all know, it is 7.6 billion now, and increasing -- especially in the Third World where energy is produced almost entirely by coal-burning plants which, unfortunately, are not equipped with latest-gen electrostatic scrubbers. Even if we argue today about 'global warming's' causes, we certainly have ample evidence of the kind of damage that mankind can do -- by looking no further than our oceans, many of which are now vast, toxic garbage dumps.

Lastly, I see a dilemma facing all of us in the future concerning mankind's portion of the overall situation. If we had mandatory population-growth control, it would spark outrage. If we put a total ban on nuclear power plants, it would spark outrage (and enormous increases in energy costs). If we put a total ban on all coal-burning plants, we'd see the same outrage, and the same (or worse) costs for energy. If we allow a klatsch of social-behavior 'scientists' to extort vast sums of money from independent nations to fund various "new world order" schemes, we'd see outrage, and I'd be one of those who is outraged.... But, if we wait for 'big business' to clean up toxic emissions from decades-old coal burners, clean up the toxic trash in the oceans, and make other needed changes throughout the world, how long would be have to wait? Forever? Frankly, I don't trust the 'captains of industry' any more than I trust some wild-eyed socialist who wants his faction to 'rule the world'. There must be balance and common-sense in what we do now....

Perhaps a useful interim solution might be for China and India to equip their coal-burners with electrostatic scrubbers, and for ALL nations to contribute money for the funding of R&D that will finally produce the "Holy Grail" of energy production -- Hydrogen Fusion plants. As I'll bet you know, that would provide mankind with limitless energy (so long as there is sea water), with no pollution at all....

Thank you for taking the time and interest in the subject to write your well-considered post. It is obvious that you did not simply 'cut-and-paste' it from some other source (which is a thing that way too many people do here). I will take special interest in the posts of a person of your calibre in the future.

Last edited: Jan 11, 2018
VanCleef Well-Known Member

Joined:

Jul 24, 2017

Messages:

4,265

Likes Received:

3,546

Trophy Points:

113

What...

I mean the whole world laughs at US when our leaders mistake weather for climate.

Last edited: Jan 11, 2018
drluggit Well-Known Member Donor

Joined:

Nov 17, 2016

Messages:

26,620

Likes Received:

23,895

Trophy Points:

113

Evidently, at least two studies now cast doubt as to the origination of the severe cold snap that started just before Christmas this year in the N hemisphere. Evidently, it is now considered a "fluke of nature". Imagine that... Nature being responsible for climate for a change.... Only in climate wars could it actually be remarkable that nature had in fact produced a non modeled event... Laughable.
Ddyad Well-Known Member

Joined:

Nov 17, 2015

Messages:

48,955

Likes Received:

22,045

Trophy Points:

113

No, the "whole world" does not laugh at Al Gore - that is an exaggeration.
RP12 Well-Known Member

Joined:

Nov 11, 2011

Messages:

48,833

Likes Received:

11,720

Trophy Points:

113

Would you call 30 out of over 6 billion a small sample size?
VanCleef Well-Known Member

Joined:

Jul 24, 2017

Messages:

4,265

Likes Received:

3,546

Trophy Points:

113

Why do you only respond with joke/meme posts lol.The cause of these Cold Snaps in no way refutes GW or AGW. 2017 was still the 2nd hottest year in record, with 2016 being the most hottest.
RP12 Well-Known Member

Joined:

Nov 11, 2011

Messages:

48,833

Likes Received:

11,720

Trophy Points:

113

Do you understand how "year in record" is hollow?
VanCleef Well-Known Member

Joined:

Jul 24, 2017

Messages:

4,265

Likes Received:

3,546

Trophy Points:

113

I'm using it to refute the idea these recent cold snaps meant GW/AGW is false. No one with a brain thinks that. Weather =/= Climate.
BTW, that is your opinion.

Last edited: Jan 11, 2018
Ddyad Well-Known Member

Joined:

Nov 17, 2015

Messages:

48,955

Likes Received:

22,045

Trophy Points:

113

Science fraud has always been too common, but a scientist wining an award for encouraging Fake Science is new.
Especially at a time when credible science is especially needed.

"To do that (reduce the risk of potentially disastrous climactic change) we have to get some broad-based support, to capture the publics imagination. That, of course, entails getting loads of media coverage. So we have to offer up scary scenarios, make simplified, dramatic statements, and make little mention of any doubts we might have. This "double ethical bind" that we frequently find ourselves in cannot be solved by any formula. Each of us has to decide what the right balance is between being effective and being honest." atmospheric scientist Stephen Schneider, of the National Center for Atmospheric Research. "Discover" magazine, Oct. 1989.

In 1991 Schneider won the AAAS(American Association for the Advancement of Science) "Award for the Public Understanding of Science." Paul R. Gross, and Norman Levitt, "Higher Superstition," Johns Hopkins University Press, 1994, pp 167,168.

And he won a AAAS award for that! Scientists can be very stupid. The burden of proof in this environment is a very heavy one.
RP12 Well-Known Member

Joined:

Nov 11, 2011

Messages:

48,833

Likes Received:

11,720

Trophy Points:

113

How is year in record not hollow when the "records" only go back about 150 years and most of those without even close to the technology we have now.
VanCleef Well-Known Member

Joined:

Jul 24, 2017

Messages:

4,265

Likes Received:

3,546

Trophy Points:

113

They are using the recent bomb cyclone to dismiss age, but that was the 2nd hottest year on record. I'm simply using it to dismiss their fallacy.
Ddyad Well-Known Member

Joined:

Nov 17, 2015

Messages:

48,955

Likes Received:

22,045

Trophy Points:

113

What "meme"?
Record Cold = Record Heat - Is that you Al?
VanCleef Well-Known Member

Joined:

Jul 24, 2017

Messages:

4,265

Likes Received:

3,546

Trophy Points:

113

If climatology is such a fraud science you can surely refute this exhaustive report,
https://science2017.globalchange.gov/

I'll be awaiting your posts quoting portions of that paper, and under the quotes telling me what was wrong and then at the end of your sentence providing a link to a peer reviewed study the same thing.

Last edited: Jan 11, 2018
VanCleef Well-Known Member

Joined:

Jul 24, 2017

Messages:

4,265

Likes Received:

3,546

Trophy Points:

113

1. Even with the record cold, 2017 was still on average the 2nd hottest year on record. Climate =/= Weather. The world laughs at USA.
2. There you go with that meme. I don't care about Al Gore. I only cite publishing climatologists with PHDs.

Last edited: Jan 11, 2018
Ddyad Well-Known Member

Joined:

Nov 17, 2015

Messages:

48,955

Likes Received:

22,045

Trophy Points:

113

Google Schneider. When someone with his influence urges scientists to fudge the date why should anyone trust the data?
VanCleef Well-Known Member

Joined:

Jul 24, 2017

Messages:

4,265

Likes Received:

3,546

Trophy Points:

113

If that data is wrong, you can easily refute it. Do it.
Heh. This is what we call a win.

Last edited: Jan 11, 2018
RP12 Well-Known Member

Joined:

Nov 11, 2011

Messages:

48,833

Likes Received:

11,720

Trophy Points:

113

They are not I i thought Progressives wanted to use correct pronouns?
VanCleef Well-Known Member

Joined:

Jul 24, 2017

Messages:

4,265

Likes Received:

3,546

Trophy Points:

113

They are using it to dismiss AGW. The GED bloggers that is. No actual climatologists.

Last edited: Jan 11, 2018