Prev: precision definition of a finite-line compared to finite-number #338; Correcting Math
Next: The scheme of Universe.
From: Sam Wormley on 25 Jan 2010 13:26

> Science Q&A: Cold Weather & Global Warming
> Jay Gulledge, Senior Scientist and Program Manager for Science & Impacts
>
> Is heavy snowfall or unusually cold weather inconsistent with global warming?
>
> You need two things to create heavy snowfall: moist air and cold air. The two generally
> don't occur in the same air mass because cold air can't hold much moisture. So you
> need two air masses, one that is warm and moist and one that is cold and dry, to
> collide with each other.
>
> This condition is not only consistent with global warming, but it can be expected
> to occur more frequently in certain places as a direct result of global warming.
> Read more... [http://rs6.net/tn.jsp?et=1102959188264&s=26950&e=001q-qfCbFCZxg8RGZhoI9Kf-l-vSp6YtHT97ZErRRenj-u9KsOSTxqsTna1vyVSyHHBa9FXHkM6du7-v5RfSO---8aXVZrRYvrDlCwP8uDGE1HoFL3oj_ShQ1zQuR6tDiwipt8-t7jFXcIHroNmJGYMvLuTerP3Ih6eHVhyS3_31JqzhrM8fVKwS0ffnjYd9T6whvl31ZteMU=]
From: mary on 25 Jan 2010 14:43

"Sam Wormley" <swormley1(a)gmail.com> wrote in message
news:0rydnf9wkPfbf8DWnZ2dnUVZ_sNi4p2d(a)mchsi.com...
>
>> Science Q&A: Cold Weather & Global Warming
>> Jay Gulledge, Senior Scientist and Program Manager for Science & Impacts
>>
>> Is heavy snowfall or unusually cold weather inconsistent with global
>> warming?
>>
>> You need two things to create heavy snowfall: moist air and cold air. The
>> two generally
>> don't occur in the same air mass because cold air can't hold much
>> moisture. So you
>> need two air masses, one that is warm and moist and one that is cold and
>> dry, to
>> collide with each other.
>>
>> This condition is not only consistent with global warming, but it can be
>> expected
>> to occur more frequently in certain places as a direct result of global
>> warming.


what a load of BS.


"consistent with Goblal Worming"

SORRY but analysis follows facts.

COMPLETY BASS ACKWARDS


From: Mike Jr on 25 Jan 2010 15:44
On Jan 25, 1:26 pm, Sam Wormley <sworml...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> > Science Q&A: Cold Weather & Global Warming
> > Jay Gulledge, Senior Scientist and Program Manager for Science & Impacts
>
> > Is heavy snowfall or unusually cold weather inconsistent with global warming?
>
> > You need two things to create heavy snowfall: moist air and cold air. The two generally
> > don't occur in the same air mass because cold air can't hold much moisture. So you
> > need two air masses, one that is warm and moist and one that is cold and dry, to
> > collide with each other.
>
> > This condition is not only consistent with global warming, but it can be expected
> > to occur more frequently in certain places as a direct result of global warming.
> > Read more... [http://rs6.net/tn.jsp?et=1102959188264&s=26950&e=001q-qfCbFCZxg8RGZho...]

But global warming should make it less likely that those cold arctic
blasts head south.

Given that the temperature anomaly is on the order of 1/5 of a single
degree Celsius, Jay Gulledge is claiming an amazing effect for such a
small stimulus. So what should we expect? As CO2 builds up the world
goes more and more into an ice age? If only those 3-toed sloths in
that last interglacial didn't drive SUVs....

Clutching at straws Sam.

--Mike Jr.
From: Mike Jr on 25 Jan 2010 16:21
On Jan 25, 1:26 pm, Sam Wormley <sworml...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> > Science Q&A: Cold Weather & Global Warming
> > Jay Gulledge, Senior Scientist and Program Manager for Science & Impacts
>
> > Is heavy snowfall or unusually cold weather inconsistent with global warming?
>
> > You need two things to create heavy snowfall: moist air and cold air. The two generally
> > don't occur in the same air mass because cold air can't hold much moisture. So you
> > need two air masses, one that is warm and moist and one that is cold and dry, to
> > collide with each other.
>
> > This condition is not only consistent with global warming, but it can be expected
> > to occur more frequently in certain places as a direct result of global warming.
> > Read more... [http://rs6.net/tn.jsp?et=1102959188264&s=26950&e=001q-qfCbFCZxg8RGZho...]

Sam,
If you want a warmest friendly site that doesn't let any other
opinions in the door, go here:
http://blogs.nature.com/climatefeedback/

You can catch your breath. :-)

--Mike Jr.
From: Jonathan on 25 Jan 2010 21:15

"Mike Jr" <n00spam(a)comcast.net> wrote in message
news:e226a273-36b8-4f3f-9431-fd3c58a539da(a)m4g2000vbn.googlegroups.com...


> But global warming should make it less likely that those cold arctic
> blasts head south.

> Given that the temperature anomaly is on the order of 1/5 of a single
> degree Celsius, Jay Gulledge is claiming an amazing effect for such a
> small stimulus. So what should we expect? As CO2 builds up the world
> goes more and more into an ice age? If only those 3-toed sloths in
> that last interglacial didn't drive SUVs....

> Clutching at straws Sam.


Since my hobby is Complexity Science, which is what chaos
theory has become, and have spent several years watching
thousands of real live complex adaptive systems wax and
wane, I can assure you that the following properties can
be counted upon wrt global warming.

Proof of my ability to predict complex adaptive systems
is below.

A CAS is highly resilient to change and can adapt and
absorb a considerable amount of change. But once
such a system approaches the tipping point, or point
of trend reversal, the system / volatility / dramatically
increases, foreshadowing the tipping point to an equally
dramatic change in long term direction.

Volatility does NOT mean warmer or colder, it means
the system suddenly begins to swing rather wildly in
BOTH directions. The cold spells will become colder
and the warm spells warmer and sometimes just the
opposite occurs and usually out of nowhere.

It becomes /locally/ chaotic in space and in time.
Signaling a global trend reversal.
Chaos with order is the term.

And let me assure you of something else, once that
volatility is seen, the trend reversal is already a done deal
......once clear decisive proof of climate change
rears it's ugly head...............

IT'S TOO FLIIPPIN LATE!!!

No amount of 'repairs' intelligent or otherwise will
stop the inevitable crash.

You can pump all the greenhouses gasses you want
into the atmosphere without much worry, provided
the...RATE OF CHANGE...is modest and steady.
The biosphere, and humanity will adapt just fine.

But /too fast/ and the bubble very predictably bursts.

And if you think I'm a loon, let me brag for a second.
As far as I know I'm the only person on the face
of this planet to ...publicly...predict the stock market
crash of Oct 08. Not only did I predict a /panic/ in
advance (which is supposed to be impossible) but
I also called the local total fall of the panic quite accurately.

Here's link to the post. On Friday Oct 3, 2008

http://groups.google.com/group/misc.invest.stocks/browse_thread/thread/2b4730963cc1f09e/4606bf0bc5cb0330?hl=en&q=crash+is+far+from+over

2 year chart of the Dow
http://bigcharts.marketwatch.com/quickchart/quickchart.asp?symb=djia&sid=1643&o_symb=djia&freq=1&time=9

Crash Timeline
http://www.stockhideout.com/market-news/680-2008-stock-market-crash.html

On the following Monday the panic started culminating in
Black Thursday on Oct 9. The worst week since 1931
And see how the local bottom compared
to my prediction of a bottom of 8500.

Now when I talk about volatility in the atmosphere how
should one go about recognizing it????

It's not that hard
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2005_Atlantic_hurricane_season

And it wasn't just the number and strength of the storms that
was unprecedented, but the two ....largest in DIAMETER
Cat 5 storms ever recorded on this half of the planet went
directly over my house in the span of TWO WEEKS.
It's rather hard not to notice. Katrina hit N.O and barely
two weeks later an equally large and powerful Wilma
swept through barely missing a complete devastation of
South Florida. Trust me when the folks down here saw
Wilma approaching, realizing every last bit of rescue help
just headed for N.O. there was a lot of praying going
on. Fortunately Wilma dropped just before landfall.
But just barely. The debate over global warming ended
the very next day in South Florida.

In stock patterns, that ONE - TWO punch of Katrina and
Wilma is a common and unmistakable pattern, called a double-top.
Which is the clear signal of a dramatic trend reversal.
After the 2005 season, while the NHC dramatically upped
their prediction for the next year as a result of the 05 data, I
quite accurately predicted that we can expect the opposite, a
dramatically declining hurricane seasons for the short term.
And I was right, the NHC was humiliated in just how far they
missed the next couple season predictions.
I am still bragging <g>

Don't believe me?
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.geo.geology/browse_thread/thread/519badf8981ce0d4/bc836b7a75f9ec57?hl=en&q=double+top+author:jonathan


The rate of change of Co2 is the thing. We need to slow
the rate or an ice age, the end of life as we know it, will be
our gift to our grandchildren. And btw the solution to this
entire global warming thingy is also rather easy to diagnose.

The fix, what will determine if our future is a catastrophic
ice age, or a steady life-giving warming to a new
stable equilibrium, is simple.

China must become a democracy....and SOON.

It shouldn't be too hard to see why, if you look
at things from a perspective of rates of growth
.....combined...with the potential for even more growth.
Along with the 'global' tendencies of dictatorships
vs. democracies in things like environmental protection.
With a little luck this economic meltdown will finally
flush the communists out, once and for all.

Nothing else can prevent the ice-age which is currently
our /most certain/ future. As things stand now...IMHO.

And if you don't believe an ice age is upon us, please
scroll down to fig 1.5

http://muller.lbl.gov/pages/IceAgeBook/history_of_climate.html

It doesn't take much experience in reading charts to
see what's in store for us.....unless we take control
and begin /managing/ our biosphere. Because as the
chart shows a little warming is a good thing.
TOO much and it's over the cliff for humanity.

We'll just have to wait a 100,000 years to give it
another try.


Jonathan


> --Mike Jr.






 |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6
Prev: precision definition of a finite-line compared to finite-number #338; Correcting Math
Next: The scheme of Universe.