kallend 1,623 #26 January 13, 2011 Attacking the OP is always an option when rushmc has nothing else to say.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
popsjumper 2 #27 January 13, 2011 Quote QED, you just proved conclusively that you really can't tell the difference between weather and climate, and you don't understand the concept of "global" So, instead of posting nothing more than a smart-ass remark, why don't you explain the difference?My reality and yours are quite different. I think we're all Bozos on this bus. Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
popsjumper 2 #28 January 13, 2011 Quote Attacking the OP is always an option when rushmc has nothing else to say. If you'd get away from the arrogant, smart-ass remarks and post useful information you wouldn't get called out. Surely you understand that, don't you?My reality and yours are quite different. I think we're all Bozos on this bus. Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,623 #29 January 13, 2011 QuoteQuote Attacking the OP is always an option when rushmc has nothing else to say. If you'd get away from the arrogant, smart-ass remarks and post useful information you wouldn't get called out. Surely you understand that, don't you? Read the OP, it says all that needs to be said. The deniers are thrashing about. Do you REALLY not know the difference between weather and climate? Do you really think current weather in the USA or Australia is the same as GLOBAL climate? Really?... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #30 January 13, 2011 Quote Attacking the OP is always an option when rushmc has nothing else to say. Irony score: incalculable.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CanuckInUSA 0 #31 January 13, 2011 Quote Feeling warm? Not really ... http://www.cbc.ca/weather/s0000047.html You see it started snowing in late October and short of a few days when some chinook winds from the mountains blew in, it has stayed pretty much this way ever since. I fully expect it to stay cold with snow until April or May, maybe even June. This is normal for us. It has always been cold this time of year, and it will continue to stay cold. Hey I heard some lobby groups were trying to bring in a "Cash for your Mooney" program? Shouldn't you be flying some modern electric (or solar) powered airplane instead of that 1950s gas guzzler of yours? Don't you care about the environment? Or are you one of those "Do as I say, not as I do" peeps. Try not to worry about the things you have no control over Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 18 #32 January 13, 2011 Quote Attacking the OP is always an option when rushmc has nothing else to say. I had plenty to say As for an attack? You usually claim that when your bs is called out"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,623 #33 January 13, 2011 Quote Quote Attacking the OP is always an option when rushmc has nothing else to say. I had plenty to say As for an attack? You usually claim that when your bs is called out Very droll. You should be on late night TV.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 18 #34 January 13, 2011 Quote Quote Quote Attacking the OP is always an option when rushmc has nothing else to say. I had plenty to say As for an attack? You usually claim that when your bs is called out Very droll. You should be on late night TV. IF it was droll it would only be on a staition run by libs So no one would be watching"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turtlespeed 212 #35 January 13, 2011 Quote 2010 ties 2005 for warmest and wettest year on record. Nothing to worry about. That's funny - why do you think that NASA has it at 2006? strange - don't-cha think?I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lawrocket 3 #36 January 13, 2011 Quote>Lemme guess - the years in between are just weather - right? Nope. They're climate too. The last decade has been the warmest in history. NOAA - 2010 tied with 2005 for warmest (sea surface/land surface temperature) Remote Sensing Systems - 2010 second warmest after 1998 University of Alabama Huntsville - 2010 second warmest after 1998. 2010 was warm, indeed (notably, 1998 and 2010 were positively influenced by an El Nino). Considering history, we would likely expect a drop in global temperature next year. My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,396 #37 January 13, 2011 >2010 was warm, indeed (notably, 1998 and 2010 were positively influenced by > an El Nino). Considering history, we would likely expect a drop in global > temperature next year. Yep, there's a good chance of that. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,623 #38 January 13, 2011 QuoteQuote>Lemme guess - the years in between are just weather - right? Nope. They're climate too. The last decade has been the warmest in history. NOAA - 2010 tied with 2005 for warmest (sea surface/land surface temperature) Remote Sensing Systems - 2010 second warmest after 1998 University of Alabama Huntsville - 2010 second warmest after 1998. 2010 was warm, indeed (notably, 1998 and 2010 were positively influenced by an El Nino). Considering history, we would likely expect a drop in global temperature next year. Regression towards the mean doesn't mean there's not a trend. I'm surprised you haven't already blamed it on an Arctic Oscillation.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 18 #39 January 13, 2011 Quote Quote Quote >Lemme guess - the years in between are just weather - right? Nope. They're climate too. The last decade has been the warmest in history. NOAA - 2010 tied with 2005 for warmest (sea surface/land surface temperature) Remote Sensing Systems - 2010 second warmest after 1998 University of Alabama Huntsville - 2010 second warmest after 1998. 2010 was warm, indeed (notably, 1998 and 2010 were positively influenced by an El Nino). Considering history, we would likely expect a drop in global temperature next year. Regression towards the mean doesn't mean there's not a trend. And you claiming it is does not either"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,623 #40 January 13, 2011 Quote Quote Quote Quote >Lemme guess - the years in between are just weather - right? Nope. They're climate too. The last decade has been the warmest in history. NOAA - 2010 tied with 2005 for warmest (sea surface/land surface temperature) Remote Sensing Systems - 2010 second warmest after 1998 University of Alabama Huntsville - 2010 second warmest after 1998. 2010 was warm, indeed (notably, 1998 and 2010 were positively influenced by an El Nino). Considering history, we would likely expect a drop in global temperature next year. Regression towards the mean doesn't mean there's not a trend. And you claiming it is does not either I claim only that NOAA knows more about it than you or mnealtx.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #41 January 13, 2011 When you dismiss every cold event as 'weather' and tout every warm event as "climate", it makes your 'weather isn't climate' argument a bit hard to swallow. You claim a decreasing trend of Arctic ice as proof of warming, while dismissing an increase in Antarctic ice. You dismiss 10 years of temperature data as being too short, while claiming a satellite record that is shorter a valid source to prove warming effects. CO2 at the start of 1998 was 365. At the end of 2010 it was 389.69, a 6.76% increase. GISS average anomaly for 2010 was +0.485, an 8.14% decrease from the 1998 average of +0.528. HADCRUT average anomaly for 2010 was +0.485, an 8.13% decrease from the 1998 average of +.529. SST average anomaly for 2010 is +0.406, a 10.07% decrease from the 2008 average of +0.451. A paper by Joe D'Aleo (submitted to SPPI) shows correlation factors between temperature and possible 'drivers' (higher fraction is a better match between temp and 'driver'). Soares has published a paper in IJG supporting it: CO2 shows an r-squared correlation of .44 with temperature. TSI (solar irradiance) shows an r-squared correlation of .57 with temperature. PDO+AMO (ocean currents) shows an r-squared correlation of .83 with temperature. Yet, you cling to the story of CO2 being the driver and dismiss skeptics of knowing 'sweet FA' about the subject.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lawrocket 3 #42 January 13, 2011 QuoteI'm surprised you haven't already blamed it on an Arctic Oscillation. The only thing I've attributed recently to the Arctic Oscillation was Atlantic sea ice extent. On the other hand, the El Nino Southern Oscillation has usually been a pretty good indicator of how weather will be. But, I'm glad I can keep you on your toes. My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turtlespeed 212 #43 January 13, 2011 Quote Quote I'm surprised you haven't already blamed it on an Arctic Oscillation. The only thing I've attributed recently to the Arctic Oscillation was Atlantic sea ice extent. On the other hand, the El Nino Southern Oscillation has usually been a pretty good indicator of how weather will be. But, I'm glad I can keep you on your toes. I can't believe that no one take the Earth's decreasing magnetic field as an issue that affects temperature by way of the amount of solar energy let in.I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lawrocket 3 #44 January 13, 2011 The GCR theory has been around for a while. A study was just published in "Geology" that has some paleomodeling results that give some credence to it. The problem is that with the presen tundertsanding of physics, the earth's magnetic field only acts upon electrical charges, and any electrical connection with climate seems weak since the lower troposphere isn't really conducive to passing electric current (unless it's huge like lightning). but it's worth consideration. We may be wrong... My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
stitch 0 #45 January 13, 2011 QuoteQuoteNothing to worry about Well, at least you got that part right. 71% snow cover of the US... every state but Florida has snow. http://www.hawaiinewsnow.com/Global/story.asp?S=13826342 Snow in 49 states including Hawaii Posted: Jan 12, 2011 12:57 AM Updated: Jan 12, 2011 3:51 AM HONOLULU (HawaiiNewsNow) - According to national news sources, it is snowing in 49 states across the country including Hawaii where snow has fallen atop Mauna Kea on the Big Island. Florida is the only state without fresh snow. "Weather isn't climate" - unless it shows warming...right, perfesser?Snow on the big island is by no means uncommon. From Wikipedia: Temperatures at sea level generally range from highs of 85-90 °F (29-32 °C) during the summer months to 79-83 °F (26-28 °C) during the winter months. Rarely does the temperature rise above 90 °F (32 °C) or drop below 60 °F (16 °C) at lower elevations. Temperatures are lower at higher altitudes; in fact, the three highest mountains of Mauna Kea, Mauna Loa, and Haleakala often receive snowfall during the winter."No cookies for you"- GFD "I don't think I like the sound of that" ~ MB65 Don't be a "Racer Hater" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #46 January 13, 2011 QuoteSnow on the big island is by no means uncommon. I didn't make the claim that it was.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turtlespeed 212 #47 January 13, 2011 QuoteThe GCR theory has been around for a while. A study was just published in "Geology" that has some paleomodeling results that give some credence to it. The problem is that with the presen tundertsanding of physics, the earth's magnetic field only acts upon electrical charges, and any electrical connection with climate seems weak since the lower troposphere isn't really conducive to passing electric current (unless it's huge like lightning). but it's worth consideration. We may be wrong... As I understand it, it repels solar wind and radiation. Unless that is all electrical energy, it would seem logical that it could warm the globe some if it decreases. I could be wrong though. It definately needs to be at least considered though. Hopefully Bill and John and Paul can all agree n that.I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,396 #48 January 13, 2011 >As I understand it, it repels solar wind and radiation. Magnetic fields don't affect radiation (i.e. light, heat, UV, radio waves, gamma radiation) - uncharged particles pass right through. They do affect charged particles (i.e. most solar wind) which is a good thing; that protects us from some of the radiation we'd get from energetic solar wind particles hitting the upper atmosphere. >Unless that is all electrical energy, it would seem logical that it could warm >the globe some if it decreases. I could be wrong though. Well, you'd have to decrease the earth's magnetic field a _lot_ to let any appreciable amount of solar wind through. We actually have pretty good records of what the earth's field was in the past, since some kinds of rocks preserve the magnetic field within them as they harden. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turtlespeed 212 #49 January 13, 2011 Quote>As I understand it, it repels solar wind and radiation. Magnetic fields don't affect radiation (i.e. light, heat, UV, radio waves, gamma radiation) - uncharged particles pass right through. They do affect charged particles (i.e. most solar wind) which is a good thing; that protects us from some of the radiation we'd get from energetic solar wind particles hitting the upper atmosphere. >Unless that is all electrical energy, it would seem logical that it could warm >the globe some if it decreases. I could be wrong though. Well, you'd have to decrease the earth's magnetic field a _lot_ to let any appreciable amount of solar wind through. We actually have pretty good records of what the earth's field was in the past, since some kinds of rocks preserve the magnetic field within them as they harden. I don't know what the exact number is - But I watched a show - (Yeah I know) and seem to remember where it has decreased 10-20% since recorded history.I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skiskyrock 0 #50 January 13, 2011 QuoteQuote>Lemme guess - the years in between are just weather - right? Nope. They're climate too. The last decade has been the warmest in history. NOAA - 2010 tied with 2005 for warmest (sea surface/land surface temperature) Remote Sensing Systems - 2010 second warmest after 1998 University of Alabama Huntsville - 2010 second warmest after 1998. 2010 was warm, indeed (notably, 1998 and 2010 were positively influenced by an El Nino). Considering history, we would likely expect a drop in global temperature next year. The el Nino effect dissipated in April. Since that time, we've been on a la Nina cycle: http://www.wmo.int/pages/prog/wcp/wcasp/enso_update_latest.html Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
