ht : ChildOfThe60s
Posted on 11/30/2006 10:27:05 PM PST by george76
As a largely inactive 2006 hurricane season came to an official end Thursday, predictions that temperature increases in the earth's atmosphere and oceans would lead to more intense hurricanes are facing scrutiny from some "global warming" skeptics.
Climatologists last May predicted that the 2006 hurricane season would be more intense than last year's season, which brought destruction to the Gulf Coast in Hurricanes Katrina and Rita.
But the 2006 season brought fewer hurricanes than predicted, and none of the hurricanes made landfall. Experts attribute this to the unexpected early formation of El Nino, a periodic warming of tropical Pacific Ocean waters.
According to Gerry Bell, a hurricane forecaster with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), El Nino produces a "sinking motion" and increased wind shear in the Atlantic atmosphere, both of which kill hurricanes.
In a September 2005 speech, former Vice President Al Gore warned that "the average hurricane will continue to get stronger because of global warming" as "unusually warm waters" create "much stronger" hurricanes.
But Gore has also linked global warming to El Nino - which according to Bell, may actually have the effect of killing hurricanes.
In November 1997, Gore was quoted as suggesting that rising temperatures might be leading to more frequent and powerful El Nino systems.
(Excerpt) Read more at cnsnews.com ...
/s
Who's Al Gore?
Nothing to see here....
Move along...
BTTT
ht : ChildOfThe60s
Those who scream about global warming today,30 years ago said there was going to be global cooling.Weather goes through cycles and trying to predict it is an impossiblity.
Am I the only one who sees some wisdom in it's forecast? Oh, to get back to a simpler life!
Wake up to rain or snow...we deal with it. Hot, sunny morning? Head for a lake, pool or the ocean if you're free.
As to hurricanes, tornadoes and tsunamis, I welcome any warnings from the modern meteorologists. Half the time they're wrong but I'll take their heads-up on any one these monsters.
BTTT
These jokers can't predict next week's weather, and have here demonstrated that their forecast a few months ahead is unreliable, but they seriously argue for public policy changes costing trillions on the basis of their weather forecasts extending out for decades. What bunk!
when the best technology of the day cannot predict the weather seven days hence, one wonders what kind of fool beleives that we can predict the weather 50-60 YEARS into the future.
As the 2006 hurricane fiasco illustrates.
One wonders at what kind of morons beleive this junk anymore.
'Questions about global warming'
(in the voice of Vincini (sp) from 'the Princess Bride')
YOU'D LIKE TO BELIEVE THAT, wouldn't you!
HOWEVER, I heard on the radio yesterday that the lack of hurricanes (estimates downgraded twice, and even then were too high) this year can be blamed on El Nino.
And what is El Nino? A pattern of WARM air, yes? YES.
Therefore, our LACK of hurricanes (which are all caused by global warming), was caused by an unusual pattern of warming.
So there you have it. There is no doubt. Global Warming Forever.
Anything else is… inconceivable!
= P
Al Gore can't get nature to do as he wants, so he just changes what he says to fit a new scenario. He lives his days in fantasy and too many people are just as clueless as him.
You joke, but WFLA-AM in Tampa was running a piece from an NWS guy yesterday basically saying that 2007 could be the worst season ever. Right after saying they blew the 2006 predictions.
Gotta get those research grants ya' know.
If the experts can't predict El Nino from month to month, why should we believe their predictions of global warming looking decades into the future?
Jean Dixon syndrome. You only have to be lucky once every thirty years. If you get one right, you're set for life.
Nor can man chart the stars in course through the heavens. (Newton actually thought that God needed to intervene occasionally to keep the Solar System stable.)
There are limits on what is knowable. Legitimate scientists always emphasize the bounds on what is known and knowable. The problem is dilettantes, poseurs, careerists and charlatans who exploit an issue for personal reasons.
Gotta give Al Gore credit though; he exhibits absolutely no fear of being branded a dilettante.
Jean Dixon syndrome. You only have to be lucky once every thirty years...
bump
See http://skepdic.com/dixon.html for more on what is more formally known as the "Jeane Dixon effect".
It is total bunk.
They likely have an angle to make lots of money for themselves.
Memo to Rush: Millions of American sheeple (particularly liberal women) today have orgasms of ecstasy merely at the mention of the name of the non-charismatic socialist, AlGore.
It's time for a new Gorebasm tape, Rush. Set it to the tune of "Where Have All the Flowers Gone?"
Rush has been way too light on the parody tapes for a couple years, and I can't think of a better dirge for him to get back in the groove.
Leni
Leni
Yes...
" It's time for a new Gorebasm tape..."
Saying that we can't make climate predictions because we don't know what the weather will be next week makes no more sense than saying we can't make long-term market predictions because we don't know where the Dow will close next week.
Climate is not weather. There are good arguments against the global warming hysteria, but this isn't one of them. I wish that people would stop using it--it's counterproductive.
has ANY Long range climate prediction ever been accurate?
It depends on how long range you mean. We certainly have no experience with making long-range predictions on the order of decades, because it's only in the last few years that we've had computers powerful enough to even attempt it.
In any event, I'm not claiming that long-range predictions are accurate. I'm saying that the fact that we can't predict weather is irrelevant. Weather is a discrete event. Climate is an average.
I recall a long time ago my professor in statistical mechanics used to have an "unofficial" law of stat-mech: large deviations in one direction are ultimately compensated by similar deviations in the other direction. We had an active year and a quiet year. That's all we can conclude on the basis of that data.
That is the beauty of their logic.
They can never be "wrong."
See? It just proves it.
No kidding. I still chuckle to myself when I think of a local weatherman on the 11pm news who started his segment this way a few years ago:
"I was all set to bring you the current weather conditions based on excellent technical data from the latest high tech instruments ... and I was going to tell you that there was only a 5-10% chance of rain tonight in the county. But, just before I went on the air, one of my producers whispered in my earpiece that I might want to open the back door to the station before I hit the air with my weather info. So, I opened the door and discovered what most of you already know ... it's pouring rain out there."
It was too funny.
Hmmm, has anyone ever made any accurate longterm market predictions? Maybe Warren Buffet, but as he readily admits he is more often wrong than he is correct. Your premise that anyone can make accurate longterm market projections is incorrect.
Climate is not weather. There are good arguments against the global warming hysteria, but this isn't one of them. I wish that people would stop using it--it's counterproductive.
The average daily temperature is both climate and weather. The climate is a derivative of the weather. Theoretically if you know all the variables and how they interact, you should be able to predict both the weather and the climate (climates are just as variable as the weather over a longer period).
Great picture!
Sure. Anyone who says that the long-term trend of the market is up is making an accurate long-term market prediction, and it's not one that depends on knowing what the market will do on any particular day, or week.
The average daily temperature is both climate and weather. The climate is a derivative of the weather.
No. Climate models are not based on weather models, or derived from weather models. They don't attempt to make predictions of the temperature, humidity or winds on a daily basis, and then take a long-term average of them. They are much more coarse than that.
In a now common pattern, Al Gore was on the Tonight Show on Weds. night. The Tonight Show is filmed in LA. Leno has been making jokes all week about how cold it has been in LA this week. It would seem if we want to stop GW then we should just keep Al moving around the globe cooling off hot spots.
ping
Well, he sure causes a cold spot in my mind. In my state today with wind gusts up to 50mph and dropping temps, I would have to laugh Al right out of his chair!
I beleive we are both from the fine State of Indiana and yes Global Warming seems like a fond dream in Indianapolis today.
AlbertArnoldAlgore, Jr. is deeply saddened.
My eyebrows almost blew off taking in my trash cans. I guess the warming we enjoyed is officially over!
Algore invented 'no controlling legal authority.'
Another "inconvenient truth" for Al.
It's time to dust off those dire predictions of global cooling and nuclear winter that were so popular among the doom and gloom crowd 30 years ago.
" look out the window and give his report on the weather..."
Excellent plan !
Climate forcecasts and weather forecasts are not done the same way. Climate can be predicted 50-60 years in the future; weather can't be.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.