Remember me
▼ Content

Barrow Alaska Rapid Heating



Page 3 of 9<12345>>>
08-09-2017 22:49
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(13268)
spot wrote:
Wake wrote:
spot wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:
Greenlite wrote;
I doubt that anyone who hasn't made up their mind about whether or not Global Warming is a threat [or even if it is real] will be influenced by an idiot like him.


Doesn't mean I won't still call you out when making false claims to show global warming.
You said this hurricane strength is a result of warmer than normal water temps. Did you not? At the big fear is that this storm could strengthen again when it hits the 87 degree water off the Florida coast.
So this thing will hit around Key West if the models are correct. Do you see that Aug-Sept average for water temps in Key West? Can you read that number for me please? I can't even read I'm such and idiot. What is that number oh math genius?


The amount of time and research you do to make such idiotic posts.

If I want to know about hurricanes I will go to the horses mouth and talk to hurricane experts. But even your god emperor said this hurricane is unprecedented. The next question is; 'why?' To find out I would hire experts and not my golf buddies.


Like you would even understand what they're saying. You tell us you've gone to the "climate experts" and they tell you that global warming is all man's fault. With morons like you who needs penguins?


Well I know enough to know you don't understand what they are saying, otherwise you would not spend so much time and energy on this board saying the crap you do.


You aren't saying anything. You are just making vague references to unnamed 'experts'.

Why don't you try presenting your OWN arguments for once?


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
08-09-2017 22:50
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(13268)
Wake wrote:
spot wrote:
Wake wrote:
spot wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:
Greenlite wrote;
I doubt that anyone who hasn't made up their mind about whether or not Global Warming is a threat [or even if it is real] will be influenced by an idiot like him.


Doesn't mean I won't still call you out when making false claims to show global warming.
You said this hurricane strength is a result of warmer than normal water temps. Did you not? At the big fear is that this storm could strengthen again when it hits the 87 degree water off the Florida coast.
So this thing will hit around Key West if the models are correct. Do you see that Aug-Sept average for water temps in Key West? Can you read that number for me please? I can't even read I'm such and idiot. What is that number oh math genius?


The amount of time and research you do to make such idiotic posts.

If I want to know about hurricanes I will go to the horses mouth and talk to hurricane experts. But even your god emperor said this hurricane is unprecedented. The next question is; 'why?' To find out I would hire experts and not my golf buddies.


Like you would even understand what they're saying. You tell us you've gone to the "climate experts" and they tell you that global warming is all man's fault. With morons like you who needs penguins?


Well I know enough to know you don't understand what they are saying, otherwise you would not spend so much time and energy on this board saying the crap you do.


It drives you crazy that everyone sees you for the moron you are doesn't it? And a British one at that. So if you are a British moron that really really says a whole lot. Having low intelligence in England is like having an IQ under 100 in the US. Really stupid.


This is a bigoted argument.


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
08-09-2017 22:53
GasGuzzlerProfile picture★★★★☆
(1783)
litesong wrote:
[b]Into the Night wrote: it CAN cool 20 degrees F in a relatively short space of time. The fastest I've seen was about 5 minutes, due to the arrival of a hail storm and a violent cold front right behind it.

Yeah, there are big short-term temperature changes:
https://weather.com/sports-recreation/ski/news/5-extreme-temperature-drops-20130118#/1
During the ice age, wild temperature drops fresh-froze mastodons.


Thank you Litebeer! It took you 10 months but you FINALLY put up a link to something interesting. Wow! That is some extreme weather! And here's the best part...this is the type of thing the Church loves to point to AGW for. OK here we go...
Story 1. 1943
Story 2. 1911
Story 3. 1919
Story 4. 1936

OK, I lied a bit, #4 is actually 2011, but it's RECORD COLD in Oklahoma!
Story 5. 1936


All the time the base and surface are at equal temperature as the equilibrium graduates to establish the temperature development--Pete Rogers
Edited on 08-09-2017 22:53
08-09-2017 22:57
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(13268)
GasGuzzler wrote:
Spot wrote;
The amount of time and research you do to make such idiotic posts.

It only takes seconds to find this stuff, Google is amazing. What takes longest is filtering out propaganda.

If I want to know about hurricanes I will go to the horses mouth and talk to hurricane experts.

I'd love to talk to these guys. I've got one friend at NOAA in Davenport, but I don't know anyone at the hurricane center. can you hook me up?
But even your god emperor said this hurricane is unprecedented.

Unprecedented since when? "strongest on record" doesn't mean strongest ever. Accurate hurricane measurements are relatively young.
The next question is; 'why?' To find out I would hire experts and not my golf buddies.

You can't hire experts on a phone repairman's salary.

You can find historical hurricane data at http://weather.unisys.com/hurricane/atlantic/.

If you examine that data, you will find there is NO correlation between CO2 concentration in the atmosphere (which has been logged as smoothly rising since 1960), and the number or intensity of hurricanes, or even Atlantic hurricanes. This data goes back to 1949, when we first started flying aircraft into hurricanes to measure them. Data before that is based on rough interpretations made from the ground.


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
08-09-2017 22:59
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(13268)
spot wrote:
Lets google that and see what the experts say. they use big words and unlike used car salesmen they put caveats in what they write so I don't expect you to understand.

It is premature to conclude that human activities–and particularly greenhouse gas emissions that cause global warming–have already had a detectable impact on Atlantic hurricane or global tropical cyclone activity. That said, human activities may have already caused changes that are not yet detectable due to the small magnitude of the changes or observational limitations, or are not yet confidently modeled (e.g., aerosol effects on regional climate).
Anthropogenic warming by the end of the 21st century will likely cause tropical cyclones globally to be more intense on average (by 2 to 11% according to model projections for an IPCC A1B scenario). This change would imply an even larger percentage increase in the destructive potential per storm, assuming no reduction in storm size.
There are better than even odds that anthropogenic warming over the next century will lead to an increase in the occurrence of very intense tropical cyclone in some basins–an increase that would be substantially larger in percentage terms than the 2-11% increase in the average storm intensity. This increase in intense storm occurrence is projected despite a likely decrease (or little change) in the global numbers of all tropical cyclones.
Anthropogenic warming by the end of the 21st century will likely cause tropical cyclones to have substantially higher rainfall rates than present-day ones, with a model-projected increase of about 10-15% for rainfall rates averaged within about 100 km of the storm center.

More speculation from the IPCC. Science is not the IPCC. They are not experts at anything but propaganda.


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
08-09-2017 23:01
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(13268)
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.


Speculation from the New Scientist magazine.

Science isn't a magazine. This is not even how a hurricane forms.


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
08-09-2017 23:04
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(13268)
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.


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
08-09-2017 23:05
Wake
★★★★★
(4031)
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.
08-09-2017 23:13
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(13268)
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?

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!

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


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 03:59
GasGuzzlerProfile picture★★★★☆
(1783)
Into the Night wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:
Spot wrote;
The amount of time and research you do to make such idiotic posts.

It only takes seconds to find this stuff, Google is amazing. What takes longest is filtering out propaganda.

If I want to know about hurricanes I will go to the horses mouth and talk to hurricane experts.

I'd love to talk to these guys. I've got one friend at NOAA in Davenport, but I don't know anyone at the hurricane center. can you hook me up?
But even your god emperor said this hurricane is unprecedented.

Unprecedented since when? "strongest on record" doesn't mean strongest ever. Accurate hurricane measurements are relatively young.
The next question is; 'why?' To find out I would hire experts and not my golf buddies.

You can't hire experts on a phone repairman's salary.

You can find historical hurricane data at http://weather.unisys.com/hurricane/atlantic/.

If you examine that data, you will find there is NO correlation between CO2 concentration in the atmosphere (which has been logged as smoothly rising since 1960), and the number or intensity of hurricanes, or even Atlantic hurricanes. This data goes back to 1949, when we first started flying aircraft into hurricanes to measure them. Data before that is based on rough interpretations made from the ground.

Yes, well aware of this site. Had it in my favorites for a long time. Been saving it for a week like this..


All the time the base and surface are at equal temperature as the equilibrium graduates to establish the temperature development--Pete Rogers
09-09-2017 03:59
litesong
★★★★★
(2297)
"old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy steenin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner badnight"bluffed: ...Speculation...


I don't speculate that "old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy steenin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner badnight" is an old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy steenin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner.
09-09-2017 04:00
GasGuzzlerProfile picture★★★★☆
(1783)
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.


All the time the base and surface are at equal temperature as the equilibrium graduates to establish the temperature development--Pete Rogers
09-09-2017 04:15
GasGuzzlerProfile picture★★★★☆
(1783)
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?

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!

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


All excellent questions. And you bring up one that Greenlite has been trying to pull off and has not been corrected.
Harvey no doubt carried a lot of water. He also dumped a lot of water, Most hurricanes do. Most hurricanes can also muster up enough forward speed to cover 300-400 miles a day. Harvey had trouble with 100 miles in 3 days, and then backed up and went where he came from. This storm also formed fairly early in the tropical season, and the conus is typically has some stagnant weather in that period. This was the case with Harvey and could not find any steering current to get him going, or allow him to get through. Also, hurricanes don't carry their load of rain and then just drop it all on land, as Greenlite has suggested. The system is continually dumping and regenerating new convection. So Mr Greenlite, if you'd like to try again explaining why 50" of rain is due to "climate change", then by all means go ahead, I'd love to hear it.


All the time the base and surface are at equal temperature as the equilibrium graduates to establish the temperature development--Pete Rogers
Edited on 09-09-2017 04:19
09-09-2017 04:56
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(13268)
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.


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 04:58
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(13268)
GasGuzzler 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?

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!

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


All excellent questions. And you bring up one that Greenlite has been trying to pull off and has not been corrected.
Harvey no doubt carried a lot of water. He also dumped a lot of water, Most hurricanes do. Most hurricanes can also muster up enough forward speed to cover 300-400 miles a day. Harvey had trouble with 100 miles in 3 days, and then backed up and went where he came from. This storm also formed fairly early in the tropical season, and the conus is typically has some stagnant weather in that period. This was the case with Harvey and could not find any steering current to get him going, or allow him to get through. Also, hurricanes don't carry their load of rain and then just drop it all on land, as Greenlite has suggested. The system is continually dumping and regenerating new convection. So Mr Greenlite, if you'd like to try again explaining why 50" of rain is due to "climate change", then by all means go ahead, I'd love to hear it.


Harvey was like the unwelcome guest that comes to town and WON"T LEAVE.

I'll bet Houston was glad to see that one finally go!



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 04:58
GasGuzzlerProfile picture★★★★☆
(1783)
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.


Ahha! Reading error on my part.


All the time the base and surface are at equal temperature as the equilibrium graduates to establish the temperature development--Pete Rogers
09-09-2017 05:13
GasGuzzlerProfile picture★★★★☆
(1783)
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.


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 05:14
09-09-2017 05:33
GreenMan
★★★☆☆
(661)
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.


~*~ GreenMan ~*~

https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/leftbehind/index.php
09-09-2017 06:07
GreenMan
★★★☆☆
(661)
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.

But I understand if you want to ignore reality. Many people do, because life is just too hard for them. Sorry if I hurt you too bad for revealing that you get your opinion from the Rush Limbaugh show. 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.


~*~ GreenMan ~*~

https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/leftbehind/index.php
09-09-2017 06:36
GreenMan
★★★☆☆
(661)
Wake wrote:
GreenMan wrote:
Wake wrote:
GreenMan wrote:

That was meant to be a challenge, instead of an insult. But I can see how you can take it as an insult, instead of a challenge. You feel comfortable in your little world, so you like listening to the bull shit Rush Linbaugh preaches. You are hooked, and you don't like people pointing that out.

Evidence of Global Warming is all around. Like that hurricane that attacked Houston last week, and the one that is bearing down on us now. The one last week had a lot more water than previous storms. And this one is the largest category we have. But neither of that is actual evidence of intensification. The only real evidence of intensification is just common sense. The waters are warmer than they used to be. Warm waters are what fuel hurricanes. Warmer water fuels hurricanes even more.

But according to you foolish leaders, we can't even tell what the temperature of the water is, to any degree of accuracy. So you should just ignore what they say about warmer water, warmer world, etc. They are just trying to fool you into thinking there really is a problem, when it's just a Chinese hoax.

And no, I'm not coming around. You can throw off on my Climate Model for not being able to predict your weather tomorrow. But it just shows your stupidity, and your inability to grasp the concept that this is going to be a long drawn out ordeal. We are just starting to see the beginning of our problems. It gets worse as time goes on, and that is what my Climate Model predicts.

You idiots really need to grasp that concept. It's not about forecasting your weather next year. It's about forecasting OUR weather a hundred years from now, and it ain't pretty.


Hey Chris - why don't you tell us ALL about "your model"? I really love to hear you talk about things you know nothing about. Your belief in magic doesn't make anything you have to think true.

Perhaps you can explain what the hell Rush Limbaugh has to do with anything? Is he your magic breaker and must be done away with? Or is this the New Hampshire sort of thinking that Rush is the leader of the pack? Perhaps you ought to look at ratings a little more closely before you have things like that to say. There are several other talk show hosts that have far better ratings. Some with law degrees and others with PhD's etc.

But anyone that actually listened to Limbaugh knows that he, unlike the leftest media on anything like yahoo or TV, only gives opinions and he calls them opinions. The media plainly lies to the people and misrepresents anything they cannot lie about.

Sort of like your Climate Model. Go back to being and engineer "controlling" those toilet paper dispensers. Do something you might possibly be good at.


Rush Limbaugh doesn't have much to do with anything, agreed. I was commenting on how closely what Jizz Guzzler was saying compared to what Rush Limbaugh was saying. Could be coincidental, but it is more likely that Jizz got his opinion from Rush.

So maybe Rush has more to do with it than you, or I think he does? I doubt that anyone who hasn't made up their mind about whether or not Global Warming is a threat [or even if it is real] will be influenced by an idiot like him. But a lot of die hard conservatives believe everything he says.

Doesn't look like the hurricane cares what he says. It don't care what Jizzy's color weather radar map prediction says either. It looks like the alarmist media called it very close, so far.

Still can't figure out what you mean by magic. My Climate Model is simply an algorithm, that backcasts the earth's average temperature accurately. It's not magic. It is math. That's not really magic to most people nowadays.

Since we are on first name basis, why don't you share yours?


So some similarities between what you interpreted GasGuzzler as saying you believe Limbaugh was saying. And that proves what again? That you listen to Limbaugh and believe that everyone else does as well? Probably 80% of Limbaugh's audience are haters like you. Since the rest of us pretty much agree with him we don't have to listen.

No, I don't listen to Rush Limbaugh. What he said was so ridiculous that it made the headlines, so I read the story. Just so happened that it was right after reading Jizzy's ridiculous comment about the same thing. You appear to fit right in with your description of Limbaugh's audience, though you don't need to listen to him, to know that you agree with him.

Wake wrote:

How about I send your postings with your wording to your employer? I could include the numbers of your posts and the times they were posted.

I could care less, moron. My employer could care less either. But thanks for revealing to the world what kind of person you are. And what about if I forward your threat to the moderators of this forum, along with all your other threats of physical violence toward me and others in the forum? How would you like that, Mr. Bad Ass Cyber Bully? You should be ashamed of yourself. Why do you want to hurt people, anyway. You are a veteran of Viet Nam. That means you are in your 70s, or close to it. Don't you think it's time to stop trying to be a bad ass and hurt people? You are too vulnerable yourself, old man. And you couldn't do anything, even if you had someone like me in your face. I would just laugh at you, like I am now.

Wake wrote:

You don't have a climate "model" because you don't even know what that is. Copying DATA onto a chart is NOT MODELING. It is NOT AN ALGORITHM.

Not, data is not an algorithm. I wrote the algorithm.

Wake wrote:

Go back to automating your toilet paper dispensers.

You are such an idiot. I don't automate toilet paper dispensers.

Wake wrote:

Since my Indian friend didn't have any trouble discovering everything about you perhaps you can do the same with me. After all anyone bright enough to write an algorithm that models 800,000 years of climate should be bright enough to do almost anything - right?


So far I have been able to do anything I set my mind too, dumb ass. I hope you paid your Indian friend well for your little snoop search. But I don't think I will return the favor. I could care less who you are.

But I will make a deal with you. Put your address out here, and I will put my boss's email address out here.


~*~ GreenMan ~*~

https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/leftbehind/index.php
09-09-2017 06:40
GasGuzzlerProfile picture★★★★☆
(1783)
GreenMan wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:
[quote]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.

Nothing like betting on a game in 4th quarter. Dumbass.
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.

What's your point? Average is 87. Where's the AGW? By the way, I see a 91 degree reading on the east shore. Shouldn't your wife Irma be going there?
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.

Yep, got it. I actually liked this site. Never seen it before.
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

Not even going to bother. This storm is over hyped for most areas.
So far, the tract of Irma is following the heat.

No it isn't.

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.

VERY coincidental. You know 0 about hurricanes.
The warm water up the west coast of Florida I think is a little more appetizing for Irma than the east coast, or land.

MMMMMM.....why would they EVER make landfall?
That's because the heat is causing more air to rise, creating a low pressure, right up the west coast.
So now I'm confused. Heat rises and causes low pressure. MMmmmm. So with all that hot water, why don't we get a hurricane every time the heat rises over the ocean?
Watch this.

Watch what?


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

09-09-2017 06:47
GreenMan
★★★☆☆
(661)
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?


~*~ GreenMan ~*~

https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/leftbehind/index.php
09-09-2017 06:50
GreenMan
★★★☆☆
(661)
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.


~*~ GreenMan ~*~

https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/leftbehind/index.php
09-09-2017 06:58
GreenMan
★★★☆☆
(661)
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.


~*~ GreenMan ~*~

https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/leftbehind/index.php
09-09-2017 07:00
GasGuzzlerProfile picture★★★★☆
(1783)
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.


All the time the base and surface are at equal temperature as the equilibrium graduates to establish the temperature development--Pete Rogers
Edited on 09-09-2017 07:51
09-09-2017 07:05
GasGuzzlerProfile picture★★★★☆
(1783)
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 the time the base and surface are at equal temperature as the equilibrium graduates to establish the temperature development--Pete Rogers
Attached image:

09-09-2017 07:40
GasGuzzlerProfile picture★★★★☆
(1783)
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.
Edited on 09-09-2017 07:47
09-09-2017 07:56
GreenMan
★★★☆☆
(661)
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.


~*~ GreenMan ~*~

https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/leftbehind/index.php
09-09-2017 08:56
GreenMan
★★★☆☆
(661)
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. But they usually do wait until a few weeks after the storm to report on the property damage. Like Harvey, for example. There's another record. More rain than any tropical storm in our history. And the flood damage is estimated in the billions, which is likely to set a new record. Too early to tell. 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.

Here's a good link, that gives the numbers, that you think the media doesn't provide.
http://abcnews.go.com/US/hurricane-harvey-wreaks-historic-devastation-numbers/story?id=49529063

They didn't mention the pressure drop, sorry.

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."

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?

It's the same MO, junior.

You just do your best to cast doubt into any argument. The cigarette manufacturers came up with that MO back in the sixties. It worked for them quite well for a while, which is why you are doing it.

You just act like they don't know what they are talking about, because they can't measure anything up to your standards. Then you try to point out whatever you think could make their measurements look like guesswork.

You are counting on time being on your side, unlike the cigarette companies. It wasn't on their side for long, because people were dying every day from smoking their cigarettes. It will take quite a while until people are dying from Climate Change at the same rate they are dying from smoking cigarettes. When it does, you will know what a loser you truly are, for selling your soul.


~*~ GreenMan ~*~

https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/leftbehind/index.php
09-09-2017 09:00
GreenMan
★★★☆☆
(661)
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.


And Pigeon Eater remarked about how good his data is. That is funny isn't it. I think Pigeon Eater is trying to show what a good sport he is.


~*~ GreenMan ~*~

https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/leftbehind/index.php
09-09-2017 09:14
GreenMan
★★★☆☆
(661)
GasGuzzler 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?

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!

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


All excellent questions. And you bring up one that Greenlite has been trying to pull off and has not been corrected.
Harvey no doubt carried a lot of water. He also dumped a lot of water, Most hurricanes do. Most hurricanes can also muster up enough forward speed to cover 300-400 miles a day. Harvey had trouble with 100 miles in 3 days, and then backed up and went where he came from. This storm also formed fairly early in the tropical season, and the conus is typically has some stagnant weather in that period. This was the case with Harvey and could not find any steering current to get him going, or allow him to get through. Also, hurricanes don't carry their load of rain and then just drop it all on land, as Greenlite has suggested. The system is continually dumping and regenerating new convection. So Mr Greenlite, if you'd like to try again explaining why 50" of rain is due to "climate change", then by all means go ahead, I'd love to hear it.


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. Now consider that heat is what provides the energy for storms, including hurricanes. The heated air rising off the surface of the ocean lifts water up into the air. The more heat, the more water. 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.

Also, you might be interested to know that Harvey did set an all time record for rainfall. Here you go.
www.theverge.com
Tropical Storm Harvey has set a record for rainfall in the continental US, according to the National Weather Service. The storm has poured 51.88 inches of rain into Cedar Bayou, Texas.

The previous record for rainfall in the continental US was 48 inches, also in Texas, during cyclone Amelia in 1978. However, the all-time record of 52 inches happened near Hawaii in 1950 — and it's still possible for the storm to exceed the all-time record.

https://www.theverge.com/2017/8/29/16223338/hurricane-harvey-storm-record-rainfall-flooding-texas


Now how about that for some good reporting!


~*~ GreenMan ~*~

https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/leftbehind/index.php
Edited on 09-09-2017 09:17
09-09-2017 09:53
GreenMan
★★★☆☆
(661)
GasGuzzler wrote:
GreenMan wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:
[quote]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.

Nothing like betting on a game in 4th quarter. Dumbass.

I'm a dumbass? You're the one who got it wrong, idiot. You were caught repeating Rush Limbaugh's bull shit, lol.

GasGuzzler wrote:
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.

What's your point? Average is 87. Where's the AGW? By the way, I see a 91 degree reading on the east shore. Shouldn't your wife Irma be going there?

I'm thinking they follow the warmest water in their path, as opposed to taking a long look up the coast to see what's way up there.

My point is simple. But I'm not really surprised that you have to ask. I'm just flagging people's attention to the coincidental relationship between Irma's path and the sea temperature. I know that high pressures steer hurricanes, but what I am suggesting is that the warmer water is dividing the high pressures with low pressure valleys, which the storms are following.

GasGuzzler wrote:
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.

Yep, got it. I actually liked this site. Never seen it before.
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

[Sticks head in hole in the ground]Not even going to bother. This storm is over hyped for most areas.
So far, the tract of Irma is following the heat.

No it isn't.

Yes it is.

GasGuzzler wrote:

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.

VERY coincidental. You know 0 about hurricanes.

I know a lot more about them than you do, hay boy.

GasGuzzler wrote:

The warm water up the west coast of Florida I think is a little more appetizing for Irma than the east coast, or land.

MMMMMM.....why would they EVER make landfall?

It will make landfall, idiot. And then it keeps going for a while, before dying out.

GasGuzzler wrote:
That's because the heat is causing more air to rise, creating a low pressure, right up the west coast.
So now I'm confused. Heat rises and causes low pressure. MMmmmm. So with all that hot water, why don't we get a hurricane every time the heat rises over the ocean?

Because it takes the right conditions upstairs to. It's when those conditions exist upstairs that all the heat from downstairs gets to have fun.

GasGuzzler wrote:
Watch this.

Watch what?


Oh, uh, you are the inattentive one, aren't you.

Watch the storm, duffus, and see where it tracks, which will be right where the alarmist media is alarming people the most.

I'm thinking your wife has to be very clear when she needs something. No dropping hints or leaving clues for you, huh?


~*~ GreenMan ~*~

https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/leftbehind/index.php
09-09-2017 10:03
GreenMan
★★★☆☆
(661)
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.


I couldn't figure out why you thought that link was better. And it would be great if you could figure out how to mark your links as URL addresses. That way, people could just click on the links and get to your site easier. It's easy to do, just click on the url button. Then put your mouse in between the url start and end brackets, and paste your link there. It's almost like magic.

Have you ever heard of ocean currents before, Jizzy? They are like rivers, out in the middle of the ocean. They flow, and carry their water around with them, wherever they go. And their water is special water, at its very own temperature, that is different from the rest.


~*~ GreenMan ~*~

https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/leftbehind/index.php
09-09-2017 10:05
GreenMan
★★★☆☆
(661)
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.


~*~ GreenMan ~*~

https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/leftbehind/index.php
09-09-2017 10:17
GreenMan
★★★☆☆
(661)
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.


~*~ GreenMan ~*~

https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/leftbehind/index.php
09-09-2017 17:20
Wake
★★★★★
(4031)
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.
09-09-2017 17:24
GasGuzzlerProfile picture★★★★☆
(1783)
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?


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

09-09-2017 17:31
Wake
★★★★★
(4031)
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?
09-09-2017 17:54
GasGuzzlerProfile picture★★★★☆
(1783)
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 the time the base and surface are at equal temperature as the equilibrium graduates to establish the temperature development--Pete Rogers
Edited on 09-09-2017 18:26
09-09-2017 18:05
GasGuzzlerProfile picture★★★★☆
(1783)
Sorry there Greenstuff,
I posted up the wrong chart. Here's he correct one with your beloved NOAA stamp 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:

Page 3 of 9<12345>>>





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