Remember me
▼ Content

Barrow Alaska Rapid Heating



Page 4 of 9<<<23456>>>
09-09-2017 18:17
GasGuzzlerProfile picture★★★★☆
(1875)
...and you can chew on this one for a while too since you said hurricanes are also gaining energy from global warming. It also has your beloved NOAA credentials on it.


All the time the base and surface are at equal temperature as the equilibrium graduates to establish the temperature development--Pete Rogers
Attached image:


Edited on 09-09-2017 18:25
09-09-2017 19:33
litesong
★★★★★
(2297)
"old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner badnight" bluffed: You probably have no idea what "rusty limp & baaing" even said on his show today.

"rusty limp & baaing" has a show? Where is it, so I can avoid it.
Ah.... you say Fake Faux? I avoid that already, noting the path around Fake Faux points me in the correct direction.
09-09-2017 20:22
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(13766)
GasGuzzler wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Wake wrote:
spot wrote:
New scientist says this;

https://www.newscientist.com/article/2146562-hurricane-irmas-epic-size-is-being-fuelled-by-global-warming/

So why did Irma grow so strong? Most likely because climate change is making Atlantic waters ever warmer.

Tropical cyclones are fuelled by warm surface waters of around 26°C or more. They draw in moist air from all around them, and as it rises, the water vapour condenses out and releases latent heat, which drives further uplift. Irma's clouds are 20 kilometres high.


But I'm sure if you google hard enough you will find someone telling you what you want to hear. but it won't be true.


As I see it you simply keep googling until you find something you think you can use. But sorry stupid - GasGuzzler already quoted a paper saying that the temperatures of the ocean where the hurricane's formed were either normal or a bit below.


His data is correct. I know the source of it and how it works. I know the references it uses. I know the accuracy of the equipment and where it is located. I know who collected it and when and for what purpose.


I believe there's a communication gap here, as you and Wake do more frequently than you know. Wake was talking about Spot's Google job.


He mentioned the data you presented. That is what I am referring to.

I can't imagine the heartache going on there right now. The picture below is the flood that went through my hometown of Cedar Rapids in 08, and I believe Houston to be on a scale 25 times bigger. I had a friend lose 1.5 million in screen printing equipment, other friends with sewage soaked homes. I helped several of them. If you've ever mucked out a flooded home you know what a miserable job it is. When you're trying to pull sheet rock you can't get more than a hand full. And when you've got a garbage buck full it's so heavy it takes 5 guys to carry it and dump it. It just sucks.


That it does. It can also be a very dangerous job, considering the mold and the junk that was in the water that stayed on the walls.

That stuff can really mess with your lungs.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit
09-09-2017 20:24
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(13766)
GreenMan wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:
ITN wrote;
...and you can't WAIT to hear about the destruction! You can almost pee yourself with excitement!


ITN you've nailed it here. At long last, the 12 year hurricane drought is over, and the "proof" they've needed for over a decade has finally come. They are pissing their pants they're so freikin giddy. Wonder if Al Joker pooped his pants again. Google that one.
Shit happens Al, but I really didn't need to know about it....what a moron.

Sidenote...The 00Z NAM is in and it has taken a jump back out to sea, farther east than it was before, never landfalling ANYWHERE, only brushing Miami with 40-50 MPH outer band winds. That would be a major disappointment to some if that verified. I'll look for this report on the news tonight. Any bets?


Yes, I'll take that bet. If Irma goes east of Florida, you win. If Irma follow the west coast of Florida, the alarmist media wins. I'm putting my money on the alarmist media, because of the water temperature from Key West and up the west coast of Florida. Water temperature is 89 in Key West, and 87 up the west coast, versus 86 up the east coast for a little then drops back to 85 in open ocean more east. But Tampa is sitting there with 87 degree water.

You can see that information here:
https://www.nodc.noaa.gov/dsdt/cwtg/satl_tmap.html
You can see all the current ocean temps there.

You can see the alarmist media projection here:
https://www.yahoo.com/gma/dangerous-winds-storm-surge-threaten-florida-even-hurricane-092608392--abc-news-topstories.html

So far, the tract of Irma is following the heat. Could be coincidental, but you might recall that I suggested that the heat island around Houston could have drawn Harvey in. Now we get to see if there is any relationship between sea temp and Irma's path. The warm water up the west coast of Florida I think is a little more appetizing for Irma than the east coast, or land. That's because the heat is causing more air to rise, creating a low pressure, right up the west coast.

Watch this.


Hurricanes don't 'follow the heat'. They follow the winds produced by different pressure areas. The reason Harvey stalled was that the storm got caught between two high pressure areas that weren't moving.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit
09-09-2017 20:31
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(13766)
GreenMan wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:
Quit making shit up. Mt Trashmore is tall enough. I checked multiple sites and Key West sea temp is 87. Average is 87. ...and I've been duped.

Here's one says 85...I'll need you to do the math for me but I'm guessing that's around 2 degrees below normal.


Yup, I would say that you have been duped. I'm starting to see the same thing in your searches for information. They always lead to the thing you want to see. You want to see a lower than average sea temp, so you surf the net until you find some sites that are wrong, and then you go with that as your information. Why not go to the source? I trust NOAA, over the click bait places.

He HAS used NOAA stations as his source data, dumbass!

He presents the raw data BEFORE it's cooked by NOAA. That is the ONLY data. NOAA is cooking its data using a math error for political purposes.

GreenMan wrote:
But I understand if you want to ignore reality.

You don't know what 'reality' is. You are illiterate in philosophy.

GreenMan wrote:
Many people do, because life is just too hard for them.

So...now you want to insult THE ENTIRE POPULATION???

GreenMan wrote:
Sorry if I hurt you too bad for revealing that you get your opinion from the Rush Limbaugh show.

He didn't. He did his own research. He presented valid data from known sources.

GreenMan wrote:
Didn't mean to hurt you that bad, was just pointing it out, so people would know what a loser you are.

But now I see the error in my ways, and I know that you can't help it. Being born with half a brain is a horrible defect to overcome.


And now you turn to just insults (a fallacy). Just like the way any good believer in the Church of Global Warming treats any Outsider.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit
09-09-2017 20:45
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(13766)
GreenMan wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
GreenMan wrote:
And, no, I don't believe in magic, except for the magic of life. But I am curious about why you think I do.


You believe in magick. The magick Holy Gas. The magick 'greenhouse effect'.

You're a liar, dude.


Nope, you are the liar, Pigeon Eater. Greenhouse Gases are not magic, no matter how you spell it. Their properties are well understood, by those who can actually think for themselves.


The properties of CO2, water and water vapor, O2, N2, and any other common material is well known. NONE of them have the properties you are trying to push through your Religion.

CO2 does NOT have any special insulative properties. It conducts heat pretty much like any other gas int he atmosphere.

CO2 does NOT have any remarkable specific heat properties. It's about the same as any other gas in the atmosphere.

CO2 does not have any magick ability to create energy.

CO2 does not have any magick ability to store energy.

CO2 does not have any magick ability to warm a hotter substance than itself.

CO2 can absorb and emit light just like any other substance. There is no remarkable property here either.

About the only remarkable thing about CO2 at all is how basically inert it is (making it useful as a fire extinguisher), and the high value of its triple point, making it useful as a coolant for gas liquification plants, and that it keeps carbon mobile so vegetation can make use of it, and shellfish can make their shells.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit
09-09-2017 20:47
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(13766)
GreenMan wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:
So one article you post says it's too early see the effects of AGW on tropical storms. Then you post another article that says AWG is to blame for Erma's strength. Now which is it Spot? Do you know what I do to my young son when I catch him telling me two different stories?


You probably should reveal what you do to your son, when you catch him telling two different stories, unless you want to get locked up.

You aren't very bright, are you Jizzy?

The article clip that Spot posted was clear. In fact, what you posted is saying the same thing. You are just too stupid to understand what is really meant. They simply don't have the technology to measure the changes, because the changes are small. And AGW [not AWG, that's a wire size unit] is adding to the strength of all hurricanes, and tornadoes, and even thunder storms, for that matter.

Now go slap your kid around some more.


Argument of the Stone (combined with insults). The historical hurricane data has been made available to you. The Mauna Loa data is already known to you. You just choose to ignore it.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit
09-09-2017 20:48
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(13766)
GasGuzzler wrote:
GreenMan wrote:
Wake wrote:
spot wrote:
New scientist says this;

https://www.newscientist.com/article/2146562-hurricane-irmas-epic-size-is-being-fuelled-by-global-warming/

So why did Irma grow so strong? Most likely because climate change is making Atlantic waters ever warmer.

Tropical cyclones are fuelled by warm surface waters of around 26°C or more. They draw in moist air from all around them, and as it rises, the water vapour condenses out and releases latent heat, which drives further uplift. Irma's clouds are 20 kilometres high.


But I'm sure if you google hard enough you will find someone telling you what you want to hear. but it won't be true.


As I see it you simply keep googling until you find something you think you can use. But sorry stupid - GasGuzzler already quoted a paper saying that the temperatures of the ocean where the hurricane's formed were either normal or a bit below.


Actually no he didn't, dumb ass. Jizzy's paper just showed a bogus temperature for Key West. You don't pay much attention, do you?


I have never really looked around at buoy data. I'm honestly surprised at the amount of variability over such a short distance. Here's a better site...
http://www.ndbc.noaa.gov/station_page.php?station=mukf1

Tonight I saw as much as 6F difference in 50 miles....then again, it's NOAA and sometimes they can be a little flaky.

No, it's quite possible. If a current moves out of the path of a buoy, you will see much greater differences than that.

Ocean water isn't uniform in temperature.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit
09-09-2017 20:50
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(13766)
GasGuzzler wrote:
Look dumb dumb,

Here's what is so funny. If you, or any other unsuspecting member of your Church, knew even the most basic and elementary things about weather, you'd realize that LESS storm frequency and severity of ANY kind would be a MUCH easier argument to pull off. But this approach was not taken by the Church, because it knows that the most effective way to sell a scam is through scare tactics and fear mongering. Your religion needs predictions of death and destruction to gain and maintain it's membership. Well, it's too late now. You've played your hand, the cards are down, and your foolish ignorance has been exposed.


Bingo. Well argued, sir.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit
09-09-2017 20:51
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(13766)
GreenMan wrote:
Wake wrote:
Into the Night wrote: Because there's always a bigger fish. There's always a biggest hurricane.


Now it turns out that Irma isn't the strongest hurricane on record. Now they are using the phrase "The only hurricane to hold level 5 for so long."

The records previous to about 2005 were recorded using the atmospheric pressure in the EYE of the storm. This is not an accurate gauge of the strength of a storm. Moreover unless you had a landfall or ship where this pressure could be measured you didn't have any records.

So previous to 1969 or so there are extremely few records and the records they have are not particularly indicative of hurricane strength since a very low pressure hurricane can also be very small but with extremely high winds since they are mostly wrapped around the eye wall.

The end result of this is that AS USUAL the media is lying through it's teeth. Greenman will accept anything that he feels will prove that the world is dying. I wish I could see what he has to say when he hits 70 years old.


You will have to wait a few more years, numb nuts. Holding Category 5 for so long is a record. Wind speed while in the Atlantic before getting to the Caribbean Sea or the Gulf of Mexico is also a record. It's tied at 2nd for the strongest wind speed anywhere in the Atlantic basin.

Here's some good up to date information on it.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/weather/2017/09/07/all-records-hurricane-irma-has-already-broken/642948001/
http://mashable.com/2017/09/06/how-hurricane-irma-got-so-strong/#Aj5obWcIOmqD

I didn't check to see if those sites are typical fear mongering media sites or not. Seems like any news organisation that reports on the weather lately is suspect, lately, by the Church of AGW Denial congregation.


No such church. The argument of the Outsider of your church is not based on a circular argument.

Yours is.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit
09-09-2017 21:16
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(13766)
GreenMan wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Wake wrote:
Into the Night wrote: Because there's always a bigger fish. There's always a biggest hurricane.


Now it turns out that Irma isn't the strongest hurricane on record. Now they are using the phrase "The only hurricane to hold level 5 for so long."

The records previous to about 2005 were recorded using the atmospheric pressure in the EYE of the storm. This is not an accurate gauge of the strength of a storm. Moreover unless you had a landfall or ship where this pressure could be measured you didn't have any records.

So previous to 1969 or so there are extremely few records and the records they have are not particularly indicative of hurricane strength since a very low pressure hurricane can also be very small but with extremely high winds since they are mostly wrapped around the eye wall.

The end result of this is that AS USUAL the media is lying through it's teeth. Greenman will accept anything that he feels will prove that the world is dying. I wish I could see what he has to say when he hits 70 years old.


And this brings up a problem the media does not recognize.

What is the 'strength' of a storm? Purely the windspeed? The amount of water is carries? The size of the pressure drop? The diameter of the storm? The diameter of the eye? The amount of destruction it causes? Even THAT...destruction in terms of money, or in terms of lives, or in terms of property damage?

I'm thinking the media does recognize all those characteristics, since they report on them all.

No, they don't. They often just report random numbers. The media LOVES to speculate. It sells 'news'.

GreenMan wrote:
But they usually do wait until a few weeks after the storm to report on the property damage.

Bullshit. They are speculating on the property damage BEFORE THE STORM HITS!

GreenMan wrote:
Like Harvey, for example. There's another record. More rain than any tropical storm in our history.

WRONG. Harvey did not have an unusual amount of rain in it.

GreenMan wrote:
And the flood damage is estimated in the billions, which is likely to set a new record.

You are speculating just like the media! Good dog!

GreenMan wrote:
Too early to tell.

Duh. We won't know the costs for at least a year after the storm, probably several years.

GreenMan wrote:
It's a hard one for the people of Texas, who mostly don't have flood insurance. The Insurance companies will get a big break there, with just 20% insured.

Have you ever had flood insurance? Have you EVER tried making a claim with them?

GreenMan wrote:
Here's a good link, that gives the numbers, that you think the media doesn't provide.
...deleted propaganda...

These aren't numbers. The media doesn't have them. They are making shit up again.

GreenMan wrote:
They didn't mention the pressure drop, sorry.

Because they don't know what it is!

GreenMan wrote:
Into the Night wrote:

If you use the strength of the wind, where are you measuring it? The eye edge? The so-called perimeter of the storm, which isn't even well defined? What altitude? The winds are radically different depending on where you measure it!

I think they fly them big airplanes through those storms. But not sure if they have one constantly going through it at different altitudes or not. They have a term they use, called "maximum sustained wind speeds," which pretty much indicates that they know the winds are radically different depending on where you measure it, and when you measure it. Hence, they use the word, "sustained."

Okay. You have aptly demonstrated you have no idea what they measure and how with those airplanes, do you?

GreenMan wrote:
Into the Night wrote:

So we group storms into categories based roughly on an observed wind speed.


Yuppers, we do.

You probably don't even realize that you are using the same tactic to try to debunk hurricane observations as you use to try to debunk Climate Change observations, do you?

Maybe because it's the same math problem, and it's mishandled by the media in exactly the same way.

GreenMan wrote:
It's the same MO, junior.

The media is pretty predictable about this bullshit. They've become a national joke for it.

GreenMan wrote:
You just do your best to cast doubt into any argument.

You just do your best to use random numbers for data. I keep calling you out for it.

GreenMan wrote:
The cigarette manufacturers came up with that MO back in the sixties.

False equivalence.

GreenMan wrote:
It worked for them quite well for a while, which is why you are doing it.

Are you batshit insane? The tobacco companies sell their product based on 'coolness' appeal. They don't use math.

GreenMan wrote:
You just act like they don't know what they are talking about, because they can't measure anything up to your standards.

The guys in that storm plane know what they are talking about. So does the national hurricane center. So do actual meteorologists.

You don't.

GreenMan wrote:
Then you try to point out whatever you think could make their measurements look like guesswork.

You have made no measurements. Your numbers are pure guesswork.

GreenMan wrote:
You are counting on time being on your side, unlike the cigarette companies.

Did you know the tobacco companies are still there?

GreenMan wrote:
It wasn't on their side for long, because people were dying every day from smoking their cigarettes.

The theory that cigarettes cause death has been falsified. Tobacco does not kill people. It does, however, reduce your ability to breath (or eat, if you happen to chew it). The stuff is not good for you, but it does not directly cause death or even cancer.

All it takes to falsify a theory is a single example. There are many examples of old people who have smoked all their lives, and they die at about the same age as others. George Burns is a famous individual that smoked all his adult life and lived to be 100. He had no cancer.

GreenMan wrote:
It will take quite a while until people are dying from Climate Change at the same rate they are dying from smoking cigarettes.

You can't even define 'climate change'. How are people going to die from something you can't define?

GreenMan wrote:
When it does, you will know what a loser you truly are, for selling your soul.


You've already sold yours, to the Church of Global Warming and the Church of Karl Marx.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit
09-09-2017 21:26
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(13766)
GreenMan wrote:
I already have explained it, Jizzy. But for you, I will try, try, try again.

Start with above average heat from the Gulf of Mexico.

It is not above average.
GreenMan wrote:
Now consider that heat is what provides the energy for storms, including hurricanes.

Yes. Convection is what powers the hurricane. You can only get that kind convection because of COLD AIR over warm water.
GreenMan wrote:
The heated air rising off the surface of the ocean lifts water up into the air.

The more heat, the more water.

WRONG. More heat does not mean more water. The hurricane uses the water already in the air.
GreenMan wrote:
That water gets to hang around upstairs for a while, and then it falls back down. And some of it lands on the ground. Some of it lands back in the water.

Not sure why you said I suggest that "hurricanes don't carry their load of rain and then just drop it all on land." That's like saying I think it doesn't rain over the ocean, lol. That's stupid. I grew up close to the Atlantic. Have seen many storms come in from the ocean. They are fun to watch, if you are under a good shelter.

But you have no idea how they work.
GreenMan wrote:
Also, you might be interested to know that Harvey did set an all time record for rainfall. Here you go.
...deleted propaganda...

The news media is not a valid reference.

GreenMan wrote:
Now how about that for some good reporting!

How's THAT for being a dupe believing the news is an authoritative source!


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit
09-09-2017 21:32
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(13766)
GreenMan wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:
Look dumb dumb,

Here's what is so funny. If you, or any other unsuspecting member of your Church, knew even the most basic and elementary things about weather, you'd realize that LESS storm frequency and severity of ANY kind would be a MUCH easier argument to pull off. But this approach was not taken by the Church, because it knows that the most effective way to sell a scam is through scare tactics and fear mongering. Your religion needs predictions of death and destruction to gain and maintain it's membership. Well, it's too late now. You've played your hand, the cards are down, and your foolish ignorance has been exposed.


So you think that because your idiot ass has lived through Al Gore's predictions that I have played my hand? I'm supposing that's what you are basing your little outburst on. You found out that tornadoes aren't showing any increase in frequency, and you are crowing like fool who thinks he just won the lottery, because he doesn't know that his ticket is for last week's drawing.

Harvey and Irma are both record breaking storms. Just like Al said would begin to happen. You lose.


Not just Al Gore's predictions. But also your bad math, your insistence on using manufactured data, your general rejection of actual data from verifiable sources, your denial of science including the 1st and 2nd laws of thermodynamics and the Stefan-Boltzmann law, your illiteracy in meteorology in general, your illiteracy in history, and your continued use of fallacy after fallacy.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit
09-09-2017 23:37
Wake
★★★★★
(4031)
GasGuzzler wrote:
Wake wrote;
....Now the media is threatening Tampa with Irma. Though by he time it gets there they are sorry to admit it will only be a Cat 3.... It is also possible that Irma won't make landfall until it drops to a tropical storm.

Who is reporting this? If it dropped to Cat 3 or lower that'd be great, but I do agree that Tampa is in a bit of trouble. Any time you have the eye over water and the front right quadrant relative to it's forward motion over land, there will be some destruction. That's why I was hoping for an eastern route, the left front quadrant would be over land with much less wind and storm surge. Fort Myer up to Tampa is where I would put the heaviest damage right now, according to the models this morning. However, don't rule out a surprise with this storm either. Normally the models are all over the place 7-10 days out and the eventually converge on a solution. They did that this time, and the went whacky again 72 hours out, when they are normally settling in. Sometimes that can mean one or two models is picking up on some "fly in the ointment".

Anyway, from where I'm sitting, evacuation of the entire state seems a bit overdone, but I am clueless as to what it takes to get 5 million people out. Can't be easy. The leadership is in a "damned if they do, damned if they don't right now.

The real problem will come with the next big hurricane. 3/4 of the people that evacuated this time, won't leave next time.


All over the news this morning they were boo-hooing that the hurricane wasn't going to hit Miami after all. And even worse they expected it to reduce to at least a level 3 by the time it got to Tampa. My take is that it will be a 2 or less because of the reduced water temperatures up towards the panhandle of Florida.

But they are still whooping that it is going to hit Atlanta. That ought to be funny since it will below the level of tropical storm then and will offer little more than rain if it does hit Atlanta.
10-09-2017 00:33
GasGuzzlerProfile picture★★★★☆
(1875)
Well, Mr. Greenlite came out swinging this morning....and then took a proper beat down. He's been awful quiet today. Hope he's doing some soul searching. That said, I normally wouldn't kick a man when he's down, but I was looking over this entire thread again. I saw the very first post and just about came unglued again. As we know, Greenery has accused me of stacking the deck and posting made up stuff. He has expressed a faith in the National Weather Service data, and says I should use that to back up my claims. So, here is the first image he posted on this thread.


All the time the base and surface are at equal temperature as the equilibrium graduates to establish the temperature development--Pete Rogers
Attached image:

10-09-2017 00:34
GasGuzzlerProfile picture★★★★☆
(1875)
Now which one do you suppose is made up stuff?


All the time the base and surface are at equal temperature as the equilibrium graduates to establish the temperature development--Pete Rogers
Attached image:

10-09-2017 01:27
Wake
★★★★★
(4031)
GasGuzzler wrote:
Now which one do you suppose is made up stuff?


Remember that greenman doesn't understand anything about science so he will google until he finds something that proves his point. Since he doesn't understand science he very often pulls his own plug.

This is the same with spot and greenman both. litebrain is stuck trying to convince the entire world that a reduction in the polar ice means something despite the fact that we really have no history to show that there even is a reduction and not a cyclic advance and recession. I showed that in 1954 and 1955 nuclear submarines surfaced in open water at the north pole.

Nightmare continues to believe that if he makes up enough "science" that somehow he will be smart. You HAND him an explanation of the Stefan-Boltzmann equation and what it means and not only does he deny it but then turns around and threatens others with it as if he has a magic baseball bat. The most basic algebra demonstrates what it means and extensions to it but he is incapable of that. While AGW is plainly incorrect the theory of it is so basic that anyone could understand it. It is the Stefan-Boltzmann equation in action. The problem is that the theory requires additional CO2 to decrease the irradiance of the Earth and it can't.

The most basic understanding of heat motion in the troposphere shows two things:

1. There isn't any energy in the single open absorption band of CO2 so total saturation of that wavelength occurred at about 200 ppm - 280 ppm. This is what keeps CO2 at those levels as a minimum - at 180 ppm to 200 ppm photosynthesis ceases and plant extraction of CO2 no longer occurs. CO2 can then begin building up from all of the natural sources from volcanic to animal life. In any case since there is no energy in this band additional CO2 cannot effect irradiance.

2. The density of the atmosphere in the troposphere is such that virtually ALL of the energy emitted from the Earth from the troposphere into the stratosphere is via conduction and convection. Even were CO2 able to find some energy it is a trace gas of such small percentages that since H20 vapor in the atmosphere is some 200 times greater volume, again conduction from CO2 to the rest of the atmosphere and most especially into water vapor is completely assured.

The counter-science that has been used to support AGW is literally staggering. NASA and NOAA both have gone so far and to totally falsely scaled the effects of water vapor vs. CO2. Dr. Michael Mann totally eliminated the last two warm periods so as to make his "hockey stick" look impressive.

Despite totally accurate MGT data from satellites that show no warming since the satellites could gather data (38 years!) NOAA and NASA have relied upon ground sites that measure temperature. At least one study has shown that of the American sites only 10% or so could measure temperature within 1 degree C. A large segment had errors of 5 degree C and higher. The sites over most of the rest of the world have exactly the same sorts of problems. This makes NOAA and NASA historic data sets a laughing stock.

When will this global warming hoax cease?
10-09-2017 05:10
GreenMan
★★★☆☆
(661)
Wake wrote:
GreenMan wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:
ITN wrote;
...and you can't WAIT to hear about the destruction! You can almost pee yourself with excitement!


ITN you've nailed it here. At long last, the 12 year hurricane drought is over, and the "proof" they've needed for over a decade has finally come. They are pissing their pants they're so freikin giddy. Wonder if Al Joker pooped his pants again. Google that one.
Shit happens Al, but I really didn't need to know about it....what a moron.

Sidenote...The 00Z NAM is in and it has taken a jump back out to sea, farther east than it was before, never landfalling ANYWHERE, only brushing Miami with 40-50 MPH outer band winds. That would be a major disappointment to some if that verified. I'll look for this report on the news tonight. Any bets?


Yes, I'll take that bet. If Irma goes east of Florida, you win. If Irma follow the west coast of Florida, the alarmist media wins. I'm putting my money on the alarmist media, because of the water temperature from Key West and up the west coast of Florida. Water temperature is 89 in Key West, and 87 up the west coast, versus 86 up the east coast for a little then drops back to 85 in open ocean more east. But Tampa is sitting there with 87 degree water.

You can see that information here:
https://www.nodc.noaa.gov/dsdt/cwtg/satl_tmap.html
You can see all the current ocean temps there.

You can see the alarmist media projection here:
https://www.yahoo.com/gma/dangerous-winds-storm-surge-threaten-florida-even-hurricane-092608392--abc-news-topstories.html

So far, the tract of Irma is following the heat. Could be coincidental, but you might recall that I suggested that the heat island around Houston could have drawn Harvey in. Now we get to see if there is any relationship between sea temp and Irma's path. The warm water up the west coast of Florida I think is a little more appetizing for Irma than the east coast, or land. That's because the heat is causing more air to rise, creating a low pressure, right up the west coast.

Watch this.


You've lost already. Now the media is threatening Tampa with Irma. Though by he time it gets there they are sorry to admit it will only be a Cat 3. I'll bet you cried yourself to sleep last night the millions of people weren't destroyed. I'll bet your dreams of death and carnage being destroyed by a careless mother nature just broke your heart. It is also possible that Irma won't make landfall until it drops to a tropical storm. You can then get drunk and kill yourself in your misery. Hopefully.


You are truly a sick puppy, Wake. And did you know that your name makes a lot of sense. I have to compliment you on such a fitting name for yourself, but you had to have someone else help you with it, because it is so fitting. Wake is a party for a dead person, before they are buried. You are the big party for those who will die because they ignored the warnings of Global Warming.


~*~ GreenMan ~*~

https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/leftbehind/index.php
10-09-2017 05:15
GreenMan
★★★☆☆
(661)
GasGuzzler wrote:
GreenMan wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:
Greenshit wrote;
And AGW [not AWG, that's a wire size unit] is adding to the strength of all hurricanes, and tornadoes, and even thunder storms, for that matter.

Please explain.


All I can conclude is that the special ed teachers at your elementary school did a wonderful job of teaching a kid born with half a brain to copy and paste irrelevant propaganda on the Internet.


I've got a life to live a not much time today, so I'll just address this one for now.

You said man made global warming is adding strength to tornadoes.

I showed you a chart from your beloved NOAA clearly showing you are wrong. You have said you trust them, have faith in them, and believe them.

You call it irrelevant propaganda and credit my elementary teachers.

Is that your argument?


Yes, that is m argument, but I am really starting to feel bad now, because I just realized that you really do only have half a brain, and here I am making fun of you. Shame on me.

Your chart is irrelevant for a couple of reasons. It doesn't go back far enough in time to really see if Climate Change is increasing the severity of storms. And my argument can't even be disputed, unless you are trying to dispute the well known fact that tornadoes are fueled by heat. I don't think your chart is disputing that, are you?


~*~ GreenMan ~*~

https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/leftbehind/index.php
10-09-2017 05:16
GreenMan
★★★☆☆
(661)
Wake wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:
I've got a life to live a not much time today, so I'll just address this one for now.

You said man made global warming is adding strength to tornadoes.

I showed you a chart from your beloved NOAA clearly showing you are wrong. You have said you trust them, have faith in them, and believe them.

You call it irrelevant propaganda and credit my elementary teachers.

Is that your argument?


You can't expect a vicious fool to make any sort of honest answer do you?


Appears to me that one just did, even though the question wasn't directed at him.


~*~ GreenMan ~*~

https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/leftbehind/index.php
10-09-2017 05:22
GasGuzzlerProfile picture★★★★☆
(1875)
Greenlite wrote;
Your chart is irrelevant for a couple of reasons. It doesn't go back far enough in time to really see if Climate Change is increasing the severity of storms. And my argument can't even be disputed, unless you are trying to dispute the well known fact that tornadoes are fueled by heat. I don't think your chart is disputing that, are you?


62 years isn't enough to show a trend???? ...and no, tornadoes are not fueled by heat. Showing your ignorance again. Useful idiot.


All the time the base and surface are at equal temperature as the equilibrium graduates to establish the temperature development--Pete Rogers
Edited on 10-09-2017 05:23
10-09-2017 05:35
GreenMan
★★★☆☆
(661)
GasGuzzler wrote:
Wake wrote;
....Now the media is threatening Tampa with Irma. Though by he time it gets there they are sorry to admit it will only be a Cat 3.... It is also possible that Irma won't make landfall until it drops to a tropical storm.

Who is reporting this? If it dropped to Cat 3 or lower that'd be great, but I do agree that Tampa is in a bit of trouble. Any time you have the eye over water and the front right quadrant relative to it's forward motion over land, there will be some destruction. That's why I was hoping for an eastern route, the left front quadrant would be over land with much less wind and storm surge. Fort Myer up to Tampa is where I would put the heaviest damage right now, according to the models this morning. However, don't rule out a surprise with this storm either. Normally the models are all over the place 7-10 days out and the eventually converge on a solution. They did that this time, and the went whacky again 72 hours out, when they are normally settling in. Sometimes that can mean one or two models is picking up on some "fly in the ointment".

Anyway, from where I'm sitting, evacuation of the entire state seems a bit overdone, but I am clueless as to what it takes to get 5 million people out. Can't be easy. The leadership is in a "damned if they do, damned if they don't right now.

The real problem will come with the next big hurricane. 3/4 of the people that evacuated this time, won't leave next time.


They will leave next time too, if they have a brain. A category 5, or 4, or 3 for that matter is nothing to ignore. Your hero Rush Limbaugh even evacuated, after putting the media down for reporting the storm, lol.

The problem they have is evacuating a lot of people in a short time. It's impossible to do that, anywhere, much less the state of Florida, with just 2 main arteries going north. 75 and 95 are parking lots. So they start early trying to get people to leave. The smart ones do, unless they are first responders and need to stay. That's because, as you have found out, no one really knows where these things are going to attack until a few hours before the attack begins, and then it is way to late to even think about evacuating. You will just be stuck in your car as the storm goes through.

But people like Rush Limbaugh aren't worried about that. I didn't hear how he evacuated his fat ass out of the state, but I suppose it was on a private jet or helicopter.

Did you know that the Republican party will soon be extinct, because of stupid people like him? He was hoping he could sit there in his nice mansion, and spout off about how nobody knows what they are talking about when it comes to the weather, and how it's all hyped up, and be one of the lucky ones that gets missed. Didn't turn out that way, and neither will the Republican's strategy when it comes to dealing [or not dealing] with Climate Change. Just like Limbaugh, people will eventually realize that NOAA and NASA weren't making it up. And they will then destroy the party of misleaders.


~*~ GreenMan ~*~

https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/leftbehind/index.php
10-09-2017 05:38
GasGuzzlerProfile picture★★★★☆
(1875)
What? has Greenery done the old hit and run like hell too?
2 questions for him.

1. Is it possible to have a tornado with temps in the 30s? (it is) What fuels it?

2. In about 90 days, will you, like you do everything else, blame massive snowstorms on heat? Should we start looking now for the upper Midwest heat islands that will get clobbered with snow?
Edited on 10-09-2017 05:40
10-09-2017 05:50
GasGuzzlerProfile picture★★★★☆
(1875)
Spoonfedmuffinman wrote;
Your hero Rush Limbaugh even evacuated, after putting the media down for reporting the storm, lol.

Did you bother to go listen to what Rush said after you heard about it on CNN? I did. He simply was raising the question of whether or not the Media was scratching the backs of it's supporters(advertisers) such as Lowes and Home DePot. He did not accuse anyone of anything, as you like to do. Like when you claimed I made an east coast hurricane route prediction. I did no such thing. I was simply reporting what the flip flopping models were doing. I wondered if the media would report the model discrepancy. I'm a decent writer, learn to read.
Edited on 10-09-2017 05:51
10-09-2017 06:16
GreenMan
★★★☆☆
(661)
GasGuzzler wrote:
...and you can chew on this one for a while too since you said hurricanes are also gaining energy from global warming. It also has your beloved NOAA credentials on it.


Again, it's irrelevant. But here's a deal I'll make with you. Put the Harvey and Irma on it, and let's take another look, because it might just show a little increase. But it still wouldn't be relevant.

If you want to see an increase in the last 50 years you can though. Take a look at the increase in property loss in the last 50 years due to storms and forest fires. Or go back 100 years if you want, just make sure to adjust for inflation, so you don't fool yourself into thinking it's even worse.


~*~ GreenMan ~*~

https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/leftbehind/index.php
10-09-2017 06:19
GreenMan
★★★☆☆
(661)
Into the Night wrote:
GreenMan wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:
ITN wrote;
...and you can't WAIT to hear about the destruction! You can almost pee yourself with excitement!


ITN you've nailed it here. At long last, the 12 year hurricane drought is over, and the "proof" they've needed for over a decade has finally come. They are pissing their pants they're so freikin giddy. Wonder if Al Joker pooped his pants again. Google that one.
Shit happens Al, but I really didn't need to know about it....what a moron.

Sidenote...The 00Z NAM is in and it has taken a jump back out to sea, farther east than it was before, never landfalling ANYWHERE, only brushing Miami with 40-50 MPH outer band winds. That would be a major disappointment to some if that verified. I'll look for this report on the news tonight. Any bets?


Yes, I'll take that bet. If Irma goes east of Florida, you win. If Irma follow the west coast of Florida, the alarmist media wins. I'm putting my money on the alarmist media, because of the water temperature from Key West and up the west coast of Florida. Water temperature is 89 in Key West, and 87 up the west coast, versus 86 up the east coast for a little then drops back to 85 in open ocean more east. But Tampa is sitting there with 87 degree water.

You can see that information here:
https://www.nodc.noaa.gov/dsdt/cwtg/satl_tmap.html
You can see all the current ocean temps there.

You can see the alarmist media projection here:
https://www.yahoo.com/gma/dangerous-winds-storm-surge-threaten-florida-even-hurricane-092608392--abc-news-topstories.html

So far, the tract of Irma is following the heat. Could be coincidental, but you might recall that I suggested that the heat island around Houston could have drawn Harvey in. Now we get to see if there is any relationship between sea temp and Irma's path. The warm water up the west coast of Florida I think is a little more appetizing for Irma than the east coast, or land. That's because the heat is causing more air to rise, creating a low pressure, right up the west coast.

Watch this.


Hurricanes don't 'follow the heat'. They follow the winds produced by different pressure areas. The reason Harvey stalled was that the storm got caught between two high pressure areas that weren't moving.


You don't know that hurricanes don't follow the heated waters. What I am saying is that the heated waters could be causing the low pressure and the winds that do direct the hurricanes.


~*~ GreenMan ~*~

https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/leftbehind/index.php
10-09-2017 06:23
GasGuzzlerProfile picture★★★★☆
(1875)
GreenMan wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
GreenMan wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:
ITN wrote;
...and you can't WAIT to hear about the destruction! You can almost pee yourself with excitement!


ITN you've nailed it here. At long last, the 12 year hurricane drought is over, and the "proof" they've needed for over a decade has finally come. They are pissing their pants they're so freikin giddy. Wonder if Al Joker pooped his pants again. Google that one.
Shit happens Al, but I really didn't need to know about it....what a moron.

Sidenote...The 00Z NAM is in and it has taken a jump back out to sea, farther east than it was before, never landfalling ANYWHERE, only brushing Miami with 40-50 MPH outer band winds. That would be a major disappointment to some if that verified. I'll look for this report on the news tonight. Any bets?


Yes, I'll take that bet. If Irma goes east of Florida, you win. If Irma follow the west coast of Florida, the alarmist media wins. I'm putting my money on the alarmist media, because of the water temperature from Key West and up the west coast of Florida. Water temperature is 89 in Key West, and 87 up the west coast, versus 86 up the east coast for a little then drops back to 85 in open ocean more east. But Tampa is sitting there with 87 degree water.

You can see that information here:
https://www.nodc.noaa.gov/dsdt/cwtg/satl_tmap.html
You can see all the current ocean temps there.

You can see the alarmist media projection here:
https://www.yahoo.com/gma/dangerous-winds-storm-surge-threaten-florida-even-hurricane-092608392--abc-news-topstories.html

So far, the tract of Irma is following the heat. Could be coincidental, but you might recall that I suggested that the heat island around Houston could have drawn Harvey in. Now we get to see if there is any relationship between sea temp and Irma's path. The warm water up the west coast of Florida I think is a little more appetizing for Irma than the east coast, or land. That's because the heat is causing more air to rise, creating a low pressure, right up the west coast.

Watch this.


Hurricanes don't 'follow the heat'. They follow the winds produced by different pressure areas. The reason Harvey stalled was that the storm got caught between two high pressure areas that weren't moving.


You don't know that hurricanes don't follow the heated waters. What I am saying is that the heated waters could be causing the low pressure and the winds that do direct the hurricanes.


...and your ignorance is of astronomical proportions.

Look up cyclogenesis. Once you understand that you won't be any smarter really, but you might know how stupid you've been.


All the time the base and surface are at equal temperature as the equilibrium graduates to establish the temperature development--Pete Rogers
10-09-2017 06:23
GreenMan
★★★☆☆
(661)
Into the Night wrote:
GreenMan wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:
Quit making shit up. Mt Trashmore is tall enough. I checked multiple sites and Key West sea temp is 87. Average is 87. ...and I've been duped.

Here's one says 85...I'll need you to do the math for me but I'm guessing that's around 2 degrees below normal.


Yup, I would say that you have been duped. I'm starting to see the same thing in your searches for information. They always lead to the thing you want to see. You want to see a lower than average sea temp, so you surf the net until you find some sites that are wrong, and then you go with that as your information. Why not go to the source? I trust NOAA, over the click bait places.

He HAS used NOAA stations as his source data, dumbass!

You must have missed his failed attempt to show that the current sea temp in Key West was 85, by surfing around until he found the site with the lowest numbers. He even admitted it, dumbass.

Then he puts a couple charts up there that were from NOAA, and that means that NOAA is his source data? I doubt that. Whatever data he can find that he thinks makes his stupid point is what his source data is, idiot.

Into the Night wrote:

He presents the raw data BEFORE it's cooked by NOAA. That is the ONLY data. NOAA is cooking its data using a math error for political purposes.

GreenMan wrote:
But I understand if you want to ignore reality.

You don't know what 'reality' is. You are illiterate in philosophy.

GreenMan wrote:
Many people do, because life is just too hard for them.

So...now you want to insult THE ENTIRE POPULATION???

GreenMan wrote:
Sorry if I hurt you too bad for revealing that you get your opinion from the Rush Limbaugh show.

He didn't. He did his own research. He presented valid data from known sources.

GreenMan wrote:
Didn't mean to hurt you that bad, was just pointing it out, so people would know what a loser you are.

But now I see the error in my ways, and I know that you can't help it. Being born with half a brain is a horrible defect to overcome.


And now you turn to just insults (a fallacy). Just like the way any good believer in the Church of Global Warming treats any Outsider.



~*~ GreenMan ~*~

https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/leftbehind/index.php
10-09-2017 06:29
GasGuzzlerProfile picture★★★★☆
(1875)
Spoonfedmuffinman wrote;
You must have missed his failed attempt to show that the current sea temp in Key West was 85, by surfing around until he found the site with the lowest numbers. He even admitted it, dumbass.

Then he puts a couple charts up there that were from NOAA, and that means that NOAA is his source data? I doubt that. Whatever data he can find that he thinks makes his stupid point is what his source data is, idiot.


YOU are the one that asked for NOAA!! I provided NOAA data with proof of my point crawling up your ass and out through your eyeballs and you still can't see it? What data would you like to see next time so you can deny it? ITN is so right...all religions are faith based and yours is no exception.

And to be completely honest, I googled "Key West current sea temp" and it popped up 87. I did some more digging and found the 85s along with some 86s, 87s, 88s and 89s. Average is 87 and so it kind of blows holes in your overheated water theory.
Edited on 10-09-2017 06:53
10-09-2017 06:35
GasGuzzlerProfile picture★★★★☆
(1875)
Spoonfedmuffinman wrote;
If you want to see an increase in the last 50 years you can though. Take a look at the increase in property loss in the last 50 years due to storms and forest fires. Or go back 100 years if you want, just make sure to adjust for inflation, so you don't fool yourself into thinking it's even worse.

Mmmm.....is there more or less property available for destruction than there was 100 years ago?

You may have to write new Algorizm for this one.
10-09-2017 06:38
GreenMan
★★★☆☆
(661)
Into the Night wrote:
GreenMan wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
GreenMan wrote:
And, no, I don't believe in magic, except for the magic of life. But I am curious about why you think I do.


You believe in magick. The magick Holy Gas. The magick 'greenhouse effect'.

You're a liar, dude.


Nope, you are the liar, Pigeon Eater. Greenhouse Gases are not magic, no matter how you spell it. Their properties are well understood, by those who can actually think for themselves.


The properties of CO2, water and water vapor, O2, N2, and any other common material is well known. NONE of them have the properties you are trying to push through your Religion.

CO2 does NOT have any special insulative properties. It conducts heat pretty much like any other gas int he atmosphere.

CO2 does NOT have any remarkable specific heat properties. It's about the same as any other gas in the atmosphere.

CO2 does not have any magick ability to create energy.

CO2 does not have any magick ability to store energy.

CO2 does not have any magick ability to warm a hotter substance than itself.

CO2 can absorb and emit light just like any other substance. There is no remarkable property here either.

About the only remarkable thing about CO2 at all is how basically inert it is (making it useful as a fire extinguisher), and the high value of its triple point, making it useful as a coolant for gas liquification plants, and that it keeps carbon mobile so vegetation can make use of it, and shellfish can make their shells.


You left out the real thing that CO2 does, that makes it a Greenhouse Gas. And I'm thinking you know that, and you did it on purpose. Because part of your MO is to induce arguments for the other person [which is a twisted version of what they actually said], just so you can shoot down their argument, with irrelevant information.

Not going to work this time, Pigeon Eater.

CO2 produces thermal energy when it absorbs light at the right frequency. That thermal energy heats the surrounding air, making it a little bit warmer. Nitrogen and Oxygen do not have that ability, which is what differentiates the two types of gases.

But calling it a Holy Gas is actually correct, since if it weren't for Greenhouse Gases, we wouldn't be able to live on this planet, due to the extreme cold.


~*~ GreenMan ~*~

https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/leftbehind/index.php
10-09-2017 06:41
GreenMan
★★★☆☆
(661)
Into the Night wrote:
GreenMan wrote:
Wake wrote:
Into the Night wrote: Because there's always a bigger fish. There's always a biggest hurricane.


Now it turns out that Irma isn't the strongest hurricane on record. Now they are using the phrase "The only hurricane to hold level 5 for so long."

The records previous to about 2005 were recorded using the atmospheric pressure in the EYE of the storm. This is not an accurate gauge of the strength of a storm. Moreover unless you had a landfall or ship where this pressure could be measured you didn't have any records.

So previous to 1969 or so there are extremely few records and the records they have are not particularly indicative of hurricane strength since a very low pressure hurricane can also be very small but with extremely high winds since they are mostly wrapped around the eye wall.

The end result of this is that AS USUAL the media is lying through it's teeth. Greenman will accept anything that he feels will prove that the world is dying. I wish I could see what he has to say when he hits 70 years old.


You will have to wait a few more years, numb nuts. Holding Category 5 for so long is a record. Wind speed while in the Atlantic before getting to the Caribbean Sea or the Gulf of Mexico is also a record. It's tied at 2nd for the strongest wind speed anywhere in the Atlantic basin.

Here's some good up to date information on it.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/weather/2017/09/07/all-records-hurricane-irma-has-already-broken/642948001/
http://mashable.com/2017/09/06/how-hurricane-irma-got-so-strong/#Aj5obWcIOmqD

I didn't check to see if those sites are typical fear mongering media sites or not. Seems like any news organisation that reports on the weather lately is suspect, lately, by the Church of AGW Denial congregation.


No such church. The argument of the Outsider of your church is not based on a circular argument.

Yours is.


Yes, your argument is circular, and in the worst way. Your only argument is your emotional reaction to this threat, which is denial.


~*~ GreenMan ~*~

https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/leftbehind/index.php
10-09-2017 07:48
GreenMan
★★★☆☆
(661)
Into the Night wrote:
GreenMan wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:
Look dumb dumb,

Here's what is so funny. If you, or any other unsuspecting member of your Church, knew even the most basic and elementary things about weather, you'd realize that LESS storm frequency and severity of ANY kind would be a MUCH easier argument to pull off. But this approach was not taken by the Church, because it knows that the most effective way to sell a scam is through scare tactics and fear mongering. Your religion needs predictions of death and destruction to gain and maintain it's membership. Well, it's too late now. You've played your hand, the cards are down, and your foolish ignorance has been exposed.


So you think that because your idiot ass has lived through Al Gore's predictions that I have played my hand? I'm supposing that's what you are basing your little outburst on. You found out that tornadoes aren't showing any increase in frequency, and you are crowing like fool who thinks he just won the lottery, because he doesn't know that his ticket is for last week's drawing.

Harvey and Irma are both record breaking storms. Just like Al said would begin to happen. You lose.


Not just Al Gore's predictions. But also your bad math, your insistence on using manufactured data, your general rejection of actual data from verifiable sources, your denial of science including the 1st and 2nd laws of thermodynamics and the Stefan-Boltzmann law, your illiteracy in meteorology in general, your illiteracy in history, and your continued use of fallacy after fallacy.


I don't use "manufactured data." The data I use is from reliable sources. Just because AGW Deniers try to cast doubt on any climate data that is used to determine AGW doesn't mean the data is "manufactured." It just shows the lengths people will go to ignore things they don't want to do anything about.

I don't reject any data from verifiable sources. Though I do often reject the interpretations of that data from unreliable sources, such as yourself.

None of the laws of thermodynamics is broken by the Global Warming Theory, and neither is the Stefan-Boltzmann law. That has been explained to you already, yet you still bring it up. And the problem is that you are the one who doesn't understand what the theory actually says, because you aren't trying to figure out if the alarmists are right or not, you are simply grasping at straws to try to prove that they are wrong. And you are doing that willfully, because you have proven yourself to be a knowledgeable person

Do you know what you are doing to your own karma?

What do you think a good learning opportunity would be for someone who propagated the destruction of the entire human race?

I can't imagine any learning opportunity that would teach a person why that is wrong. In other words, there is no making up for that kind of mistake. To know the truth and deliberately mislead other people about it, is unforgivable. And in your case, uncalled for. Doing this won't do you any good, even in the short run. You are wasting all your time in here, spinning your wheels to no avail. Because this thing is for real, and it will continue as if you weren't even here. And the government is going to raise your taxes anyway, sooner or later, to pay for the attempted cleanup, and then the relocation expenses of major cities, and then finally the mass survival effort. And there will be a lot of other hardships along the way, on top of all those nasty taxes that you are trying so hard to avoid.

So anyway, feel free to do what you want to do, because you do have the free will to destroy your inner being if you want to.

You have been warned.


~*~ GreenMan ~*~

https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/leftbehind/index.php
10-09-2017 07:59
Wake
★★★★★
(4031)
GreenMan wrote:
Wake wrote:
GreenMan wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:
ITN wrote;
...and you can't WAIT to hear about the destruction! You can almost pee yourself with excitement!


ITN you've nailed it here. At long last, the 12 year hurricane drought is over, and the "proof" they've needed for over a decade has finally come. They are pissing their pants they're so freikin giddy. Wonder if Al Joker pooped his pants again. Google that one.
Shit happens Al, but I really didn't need to know about it....what a moron.

Sidenote...The 00Z NAM is in and it has taken a jump back out to sea, farther east than it was before, never landfalling ANYWHERE, only brushing Miami with 40-50 MPH outer band winds. That would be a major disappointment to some if that verified. I'll look for this report on the news tonight. Any bets?


Yes, I'll take that bet. If Irma goes east of Florida, you win. If Irma follow the west coast of Florida, the alarmist media wins. I'm putting my money on the alarmist media, because of the water temperature from Key West and up the west coast of Florida. Water temperature is 89 in Key West, and 87 up the west coast, versus 86 up the east coast for a little then drops back to 85 in open ocean more east. But Tampa is sitting there with 87 degree water.

You can see that information here:
https://www.nodc.noaa.gov/dsdt/cwtg/satl_tmap.html
You can see all the current ocean temps there.

You can see the alarmist media projection here:
https://www.yahoo.com/gma/dangerous-winds-storm-surge-threaten-florida-even-hurricane-092608392--abc-news-topstories.html

So far, the tract of Irma is following the heat. Could be coincidental, but you might recall that I suggested that the heat island around Houston could have drawn Harvey in. Now we get to see if there is any relationship between sea temp and Irma's path. The warm water up the west coast of Florida I think is a little more appetizing for Irma than the east coast, or land. That's because the heat is causing more air to rise, creating a low pressure, right up the west coast.

Watch this.


You've lost already. Now the media is threatening Tampa with Irma. Though by he time it gets there they are sorry to admit it will only be a Cat 3. I'll bet you cried yourself to sleep last night the millions of people weren't destroyed. I'll bet your dreams of death and carnage being destroyed by a careless mother nature just broke your heart. It is also possible that Irma won't make landfall until it drops to a tropical storm. You can then get drunk and kill yourself in your misery. Hopefully.


You are truly a sick puppy, Wake. And did you know that your name makes a lot of sense. I have to compliment you on such a fitting name for yourself, but you had to have someone else help you with it, because it is so fitting. Wake is a party for a dead person, before they are buried. You are the big party for those who will die because they ignored the warnings of Global Warming.


Still crying that widespread death and looting hasn't taken over? People in New Hampshire are said to be all like you. Disgusting.
10-09-2017 08:25
GreenMan
★★★☆☆
(661)
GasGuzzler wrote:
Well, Mr. Greenlite came out swinging this morning....and then took a proper beat down. He's been awful quiet today. Hope he's doing some soul searching. That said, I normally wouldn't kick a man when he's down, but I was looking over this entire thread again. I saw the very first post and just about came unglued again. As we know, Greenery has accused me of stacking the deck and posting made up stuff. He has expressed a faith in the National Weather Service data, and says I should use that to back up my claims. So, here is the first image he posted on this thread.


Hey Jizzy, do you remember when you were a kid, and you were watching wrestling on TV with your dad, and that big bad bully was kicking the shit out of old Dusty Rhodes? Oh yeah, that big bad bully would have him down and trying to get a count out, and old Dusty Rhodes would stick a fist into the air. Oh shit, you knew what was about to happen next. Old Dusty Rhodes would just stand up, with the big bad bully still hanging on, and then commence to beating the pure shit out of the big bad bully.

You remember that, don't you?

Well, I hope so, because now that I've had my sleep for the day [I work, if you can call it that, on graveyard shift, so my lack of posts for a while don't mean I'm down, lol], I'm gonna pummel your mentally deficient ass, lol.

Watch this.


~*~ GreenMan ~*~

https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/leftbehind/index.php
10-09-2017 08:40
GreenMan
★★★☆☆
(661)
GasGuzzler wrote:
Now which one do you suppose is made up stuff?


I'm going to revert back to my original explanation. The special ed teachers did a wonderful job, considering that you only have half a brain. It would have been nice if they could have went a little further, and actually taught you how to think. But it might not have been their fault, because the half that you are missing might be where the thought process originates. Let's see. Let's go over the two charts, and see if we can figure out where the discrepancy is.

Let's start with your chart.


Oh, I can feel the excitement you must have felt, when you posted that piece of irrelevant information. Your heart was just a pounding, wasn't it? You thought that you were about to deliver the fatal blow to the mighty Greenman, didn't you? Yes sir, you thought you were about to teach him a lesson about using made up data, didn't you.

I'm thinking your hottie wife didn't marry you for your intellectual skills, did she?

Take a look at the top of your graph. What does it say?

Now take a look at the top of my graph.


What does it say?

Do you know what the difference between an Annual Mean and a Monthly Mean temperature is?

I know your teachers tried. Do you remember when they told you that you can't compare apples to oranges? They weren't saying that just to piss you off, because you kept bringing oranges and leaving them on their desk. They did it because they were trying to teach you to think logically.

So tell me, please. Do you really think you should compare the monthly mean temperature to the annual mean temperature, or has enough been said?

Oh yea, that red face you got now. That was from me, cyber slapping the shit out of you. Next time, wait till the end, before declaring a beat down, lol.


~*~ GreenMan ~*~

https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/leftbehind/index.php
10-09-2017 09:03
GreenMan
★★★☆☆
(661)
GasGuzzler wrote:
Greenlite wrote;
Your chart is irrelevant for a couple of reasons. It doesn't go back far enough in time to really see if Climate Change is increasing the severity of storms. And my argument can't even be disputed, unless you are trying to dispute the well known fact that tornadoes are fueled by heat. I don't think your chart is disputing that, are you?


62 years isn't enough to show a trend???? ...and no, tornadoes are not fueled by heat. Showing your ignorance again. Useful idiot.


No, 62 years isn't enough to show a trend in tornado frequency due to Climate Change. You need to go back to before the climate began to be affected by the Industrial Revolution, if you seriously want to determine whether or not they are becoming more frequent. But yes, from your chart, it does look like the more we warm, the less frequently they occur.

Do you know where tornadoes come from?

If you said they are spawned by severe thunderstorms, then you are right.

But if you knew that, then I have to really dig deep to figure out how you can be so sure that heat doesn't fuel them? Does heat not fuel thunderstorms?

I can assure you that heat does fuel thunderstorms, after growing up in south Georgia.

Therefor, heat fuels tornadoes. And additional heat should fuel more tornadoes. Perhaps the reason is isn't is because it is heating the air and the earth, so there isn't a big enough difference between the two, to generate more storms. Let's hope that is what is going on, and that they don't pick up steam in the future.


~*~ GreenMan ~*~

https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/leftbehind/index.php
10-09-2017 09:13
GreenMan
★★★☆☆
(661)
GasGuzzler wrote:
What? has Greenery done the old hit and run like hell too?
2 questions for him.

1. Is it possible to have a tornado with temps in the 30s? (it is) What fuels it?

Heat, dumbass. I already told you.

Oh, I see the problem, you think that 30 isn't hot, because you feel cold at 30 degrees. So you don't understand what's going on, do you? Is that because you don't want to understand, my mentally challenged challenger?

It's easy to understand really, but you might have to wait a few months to actually do this. Stand outside on a cold day. I'm sure you guys have them out in Iowa. Wait until it is about 20 below. Get a good feel for that, and then wait till next spring, when it gets back up to 30. Then go stand outside again. See if you can feel a difference. That difference in the way it feels, is called heat, you blubbering idiot.

GasGuzzler wrote:

2. In about 90 days, will you, like you do everything else, blame massive snowstorms on heat? Should we start looking now for the upper Midwest heat islands that will get clobbered with snow?



~*~ GreenMan ~*~

https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/leftbehind/index.php
10-09-2017 09:39
GreenMan
★★★☆☆
(661)
GasGuzzler wrote:
Spoonfedmuffinman wrote;
Your hero Rush Limbaugh even evacuated, after putting the media down for reporting the storm, lol.

Did you bother to go listen to what Rush said after you heard about it on CNN? I did. He simply was raising the question of whether or not the Media was scratching the backs of it's supporters(advertisers) such as Lowes and Home DePot. He did not accuse anyone of anything, as you like to do. Like when you claimed I made an east coast hurricane route prediction. I did no such thing. I was simply reporting what the flip flopping models were doing. I wondered if the media would report the model discrepancy. I'm a decent writer, learn to read.


His accusation was that the media was over-hyping the storm, just to make money, basically. In doing that he was implying that there was no reason for people to stock up on supplies, to ride out the storm with, or to protect their property with. Just a hyped up fake news story, is how he was presented coverage of Irma. Then, ironically as hell, he had to pack his bags and head out of town, because of the "Liberal Media's reports."

If he was so sure it was just hype, why didn't he stay? The storm wasn't even close to him, before he bailed out. Oh darn, is that because he believed the "hype" the media was putting out?

And your prediction that Irma was going east was right in time with his bull shit. And all you have to do to point out the differences in the hurricane model's prediction is to take a look at what they call the Spaghetti Models. They show all the Hurricane Model's predicted paths. I always just conclude that it's going up the middle of where the Spaghetti Models are predicting.

And yes, you are a decent copy/paste writer. Learn to think. I know it hurts to start with, but it stops hurting so much after you get used to it.


~*~ GreenMan ~*~

https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/leftbehind/index.php
10-09-2017 09:50
GreenMan
★★★☆☆
(661)
GasGuzzler wrote:
GreenMan wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
GreenMan wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:
ITN wrote;
...and you can't WAIT to hear about the destruction! You can almost pee yourself with excitement!


ITN you've nailed it here. At long last, the 12 year hurricane drought is over, and the "proof" they've needed for over a decade has finally come. They are pissing their pants they're so freikin giddy. Wonder if Al Joker pooped his pants again. Google that one.
Shit happens Al, but I really didn't need to know about it....what a moron.

Sidenote...The 00Z NAM is in and it has taken a jump back out to sea, farther east than it was before, never landfalling ANYWHERE, only brushing Miami with 40-50 MPH outer band winds. That would be a major disappointment to some if that verified. I'll look for this report on the news tonight. Any bets?


Yes, I'll take that bet. If Irma goes east of Florida, you win. If Irma follow the west coast of Florida, the alarmist media wins. I'm putting my money on the alarmist media, because of the water temperature from Key West and up the west coast of Florida. Water temperature is 89 in Key West, and 87 up the west coast, versus 86 up the east coast for a little then drops back to 85 in open ocean more east. But Tampa is sitting there with 87 degree water.

You can see that information here:
https://www.nodc.noaa.gov/dsdt/cwtg/satl_tmap.html
You can see all the current ocean temps there.

You can see the alarmist media projection here:
https://www.yahoo.com/gma/dangerous-winds-storm-surge-threaten-florida-even-hurricane-092608392--abc-news-topstories.html

So far, the tract of Irma is following the heat. Could be coincidental, but you might recall that I suggested that the heat island around Houston could have drawn Harvey in. Now we get to see if there is any relationship between sea temp and Irma's path. The warm water up the west coast of Florida I think is a little more appetizing for Irma than the east coast, or land. That's because the heat is causing more air to rise, creating a low pressure, right up the west coast.

Watch this.


Hurricanes don't 'follow the heat'. They follow the winds produced by different pressure areas. The reason Harvey stalled was that the storm got caught between two high pressure areas that weren't moving.


You don't know that hurricanes don't follow the heated waters. What I am saying is that the heated waters could be causing the low pressure and the winds that do direct the hurricanes.


...and your ignorance is of astronomical proportions.

Look up cyclogenesis. Once you understand that you won't be any smarter really, but you might know how stupid you've been.


Ok, I went and looked up cyclogenesis.
Wikipedia said
Cyclogenesis can only occur when temperature decreases polewards (to the north, in the northern hemisphere), and pressure perturbation lines tilt westward with height. Cyclogenesis is most likely to occur in regions of cyclonic vorticity advection, downstream of a strong westerly jet.[14] The combination of vorticity advection and thermal advection created by the temperature gradient and a low pressure center cause upward motion around the low. [a] If the temperature gradient is strong enough, temperature advection will increase, driving more vertical motion. This increases the overall strength of the system. Shearwise updrafts[b] are the most important factor in determining cyclonic growth and strength.[17]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyclogenesis


Wow, looks like I'm right. Heat is what fuels tornadoes, and other forms of cyclones. Do you think you can have a difference in temperature without any heat?


~*~ GreenMan ~*~

https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/leftbehind/index.php
Page 4 of 9<<<23456>>>





Join the debate Barrow Alaska Rapid Heating:

Remember me

Related content
ThreadsRepliesLast post
Evidence of rapid climate change!012-10-2019 06:09
Alaska Supreme Court1111-10-2019 23:33
Alaska, July, hottest month every recorded...119-08-2019 07:13
Alaska in desperate need, of air conditioners and sunscreen...1308-07-2019 05:20
Was sudden rapid temperature increase in 1980s caused by USSR collapsed and shut off their weather statio213-04-2019 23:34
▲ Top of page
Public Poll
Who is leading the renewable energy race?

US

EU

China

Japan

India

Brazil

Other

Don't know


Thanks for supporting Climate-Debate.com.
Copyright © 2009-2020 Climate-Debate.com | About | Contact