Extremes

[westwall]

REALLY? I'm confused Mamooth..

That's an understatement. Apparently, something as simple as the difference between "2012" and "2013" escapes you.

Here's a hint. The summer of 2012 is over. The summer of 2012 would be when the record drought covered Indiana and over half the nation. A June 2013 drought map does not show 2012 conditions.

Here, let me help you out some more ...

Here's a challenge. You claim that the weather is getting more extreme. Please give us a list of events that you think are extreme and support your statement. Here's the catch, none of your examples will count if there is a event in history that is at least as bad and occurred when CO2 levels were low.

 

[mamooth]

Here's the catch, none of your examples will count if there is a event in history that is at least as bad and occurred when CO2 levels were low.

So you're dogshit ignorant of how statistics work.

But then, that goes along with your general complete ignorance of logic, math and science of all sorts. After all, if you weren't a retard, you wouldn't have gotten sucked into the right wing fringe extremist cult.

 

[westwall]

Here's the catch, none of your examples will count if there is a event in history that is at least as bad and occurred when CO2 levels were low.

So you're dogshit ignorant of how statistics works.

But then, that goes along with your general complete ignorance of logic, math and science of all sorts. After all, if you weren't a retard, you wouldn't have gotten sucked into the right wing fringe extremist cult.

I FULLY understand how statistics work....and how they can be massaged to render the report you wish. You claim that we are witnessing extremes, prove it. First let us define the term. You give us your term of extreme and we'll how that jibes with reality.

Remember for the term to be meaningful it must be accurately defined and the paramaters of what extreme means, set. That way we have an accurate baseline upon which to compare.

C'mon monkey boy, let's see you do some real work here.



[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=345uegSj-zQ]Laugh while you can monkey boy - YouTube[/ame]

 

[SSDD]

Here's the catch, none of your examples will count if there is a event in history that is at least as bad and occurred when CO2 levels were low.

So you're dogshit ignorant of how statistics works.

But then, that goes along with your general complete ignorance of logic, math and science of all sorts. After all, if you weren't a retard, you wouldn't have gotten sucked into the right wing fringe extremist cult.

I FULLY understand how statistics work....and how they can be massaged to render the report you wish. You claim that we are witnessing extremes, prove it. First let us define the term. You give us your term of extreme and we'll how that jibes with reality.

Remember for the term to be meaningful it must be accurately defined and the paramaters of what extreme means, set. That way we have an accurate baseline upon which to compare.

C'mon monkey boy, let's see you do some real work here.

Extreme is just a buzzword that they picked up. I doubt that they have ever considered the meaning of the word or even attempted to apply the term to the climate.


ex·treme: adjective
1. of a character or kind farthest removed from the ordinary or average
2. utmost or exceedingly great in degree
3. farthest from the center or middle
4. farthest, utmost, or very far in any direction
5. exceeding the bounds of moderation

By any actual definition, the "extreme" weather that they claim isn't. Like that barely cat I hurricaine that was a tropical storm within minutes of hitting land was a super storm by their definition. They should ask the people who survived Camille in 1969 what a super storm looks like and if sandie was anything like one.

 

[westwall]

So you're dogshit ignorant of how statistics works.

But then, that goes along with your general complete ignorance of logic, math and science of all sorts. After all, if you weren't a retard, you wouldn't have gotten sucked into the right wing fringe extremist cult.

I FULLY understand how statistics work....and how they can be massaged to render the report you wish. You claim that we are witnessing extremes, prove it. First let us define the term. You give us your term of extreme and we'll how that jibes with reality.

Remember for the term to be meaningful it must be accurately defined and the paramaters of what extreme means, set. That way we have an accurate baseline upon which to compare.

C'mon monkey boy, let's see you do some real work here.

Extreme is just a buzzword that they picked up. I doubt that they have ever considered the meaning of the word or even attempted to apply the term to the climate.


ex·treme: adjective
1. of a character or kind farthest removed from the ordinary or average
2. utmost or exceedingly great in degree
3. farthest from the center or middle
4. farthest, utmost, or very far in any direction
5. exceeding the bounds of moderation

By any actual definition, the "extreme" weather that they claim isn't. Like that barely cat I hurricaine that was a tropical storm within minutes of hitting land was a super storm by their definition. They should ask the people who survived Camille in 1969 what a super storm looks like and if sandie was anything like one.

I know. And then they refuse to define it because if they DO define it we can rip it to shreds. They will do anything neccessary to avoid putting anything out that is actually measurable. Because if it's measurable it becomes quite obvious...very, very quickly, that they are full of crap.

 

[SSDD]

I know. And then they refuse to define it because if they DO define it we can rip it to shreds. They will do anything neccessary to avoid putting anything out that is actually measurable. Because if it's measurable it becomes quite obvious...very, very quickly, that they are full of crap.

I have been asking a couple of them (in all seriousness) to describe what my little corner of the world (southern US) might look like if there were a 2 degree increase in the global mean temperature. They only give vague hints of doom by insects and that sort of thing. No specifics. I doubt that they will because if you get down to specifics, the pros of increasing temperature a couple of degrees will far outweigh the cons. We know that mankind has already flourished in conditions a couple of degrees warmer than the present. Hell it was warmer temps than the present that let us change our mode from hunter gatherers to agriculture.

 

[bripat9643]

So you're dogshit ignorant of how statistics works.

But then, that goes along with your general complete ignorance of logic, math and science of all sorts. After all, if you weren't a retard, you wouldn't have gotten sucked into the right wing fringe extremist cult.

I FULLY understand how statistics work....and how they can be massaged to render the report you wish. You claim that we are witnessing extremes, prove it. First let us define the term. You give us your term of extreme and we'll how that jibes with reality.

Remember for the term to be meaningful it must be accurately defined and the paramaters of what extreme means, set. That way we have an accurate baseline upon which to compare.

C'mon monkey boy, let's see you do some real work here.

Extreme is just a buzzword that they picked up. I doubt that they have ever considered the meaning of the word or even attempted to apply the term to the climate.


ex·treme: adjective
1. of a character or kind farthest removed from the ordinary or average
2. utmost or exceedingly great in degree
3. farthest from the center or middle
4. farthest, utmost, or very far in any direction
5. exceeding the bounds of moderation

By any actual definition, the "extreme" weather that they claim isn't. Like that barely cat I hurricaine that was a tropical storm within minutes of hitting land was a super storm by their definition. They should ask the people who survived Camille in 1969 what a super storm looks like and if sandie was anything like one.

It's just like when Sen. Chuckie Schumer got caught saying over an open mic in a Democrat strategy meeting that they should label every position the Republicans take as "extreme." It's one of those words that has negative connotations for the public and it has no clear definition, so that's why Democrats and warmist cult members use it. Any warmist cult member who refers to any climate phenomenon as "extreme" only unmasks himself as a demagogue.

 

[skookerasbil]

Geez these people are complete mental cases. They really believe severe drought started a couple of years ago.

That's what keeps me coming back to this site......I cant help myself but for fucking with the nuttiest of the nutters.

 

[skookerasbil]

Ummmm......evidently, have to point out to the mental cases........ORANGE = DROUGHT

 

[Trakar]

Here's what I'm talking about..

(Don't ask me about the weird vertical normalization for "major hurricanes". That plot is NOT number of them, but has been crunched to be the probability or variance of them for some odd reason..) I would like to see NUMBER of major storms RAW because when your calculating the probability of ONE occurrence in a down season, it gets iffy..

The effect of AMO on hurricanes is a NATURAL effect.. And there SEEMS to be a relationship with number of major hurricanes (maybe). Not neccessarily TOTAL storms. For some reason, that's harder to find or is buried because it hurts the Global Weirding argument.

So if we would have to separate NATURAL effects like this from the weirding.

But the point is --- THERE is a NATURAL temperature forcing of the Ocean temp MEAN. It should cause the same magnitude effect of the earth gotting hotter (and they are additive of course).. So why doesn't Hansen just TELL US how many major storms to expect if he KNOWS where the mean is gonna be??

Not sure what you are trying to illustrate here, as the only bit of the graph that even demonstrates a weak correlation of any strength is over the 1990-2000 decade. The correlation over the entire century period is inconsistent and statistically very nearly non-existent.

I'm not sure on how you are tying this in with the thread's topic of adapting to the changes we are already witnessing and the best available science indicates will continue to increase over the coming centuries, but would be interested in seeing the connections you are trying to make.

Exactly, remind me to thank-you for playing..

The point was carried from a previous post where I opined that we should be able to MEASURE the effect of one or two degrees on storm formation and intensity.. Without all this primal dancing and magic incants.

So if you LOOK at the effect of a PDO or AMO where the ocean surface cyclically warms in Hurricane alley, it should show an OBVIOUS effect --- dontchathink.. And instead neither you or me can discern a seriously real effect from that experiment..

NOT FINDING a convincing cause/effect should give you some pause on this "Global Weirding" incarnation.

We need to KNOW what the effect of 1degC is on a thunderstorm or hurricane or low pressure area.. Seems like knowing the "extremes" would be so much more "scientific".

Completely irrelevant to the topic of discussion in this thread, and as you further illustrate, without merit or value in this thread's discussion. Not that I expect such would be a concern among those here with their political conspiracy theories to push. If you have noting to say about this thread's topic I will leave you to ramble about black helicopters and such amongst yourselves.

 

[westwall]

Not sure what you are trying to illustrate here, as the only bit of the graph that even demonstrates a weak correlation of any strength is over the 1990-2000 decade. The correlation over the entire century period is inconsistent and statistically very nearly non-existent.

I'm not sure on how you are tying this in with the thread's topic of adapting to the changes we are already witnessing and the best available science indicates will continue to increase over the coming centuries, but would be interested in seeing the connections you are trying to make.

Exactly, remind me to thank-you for playing..

The point was carried from a previous post where I opined that we should be able to MEASURE the effect of one or two degrees on storm formation and intensity.. Without all this primal dancing and magic incants.

So if you LOOK at the effect of a PDO or AMO where the ocean surface cyclically warms in Hurricane alley, it should show an OBVIOUS effect --- dontchathink.. And instead neither you or me can discern a seriously real effect from that experiment..

NOT FINDING a convincing cause/effect should give you some pause on this "Global Weirding" incarnation.

We need to KNOW what the effect of 1degC is on a thunderstorm or hurricane or low pressure area.. Seems like knowing the "extremes" would be so much more "scientific".

Completely irrelevant to the topic of discussion in this thread, and as you further illustrate, without merit or value in this thread's discussion. Not that I expect such would be a concern among those here with their political conspiracy theories to push. If you have noting to say about this thread's topic I will leave you to ramble about black helicopters and such amongst yourselves.

Then enlighten us. Present us with something MEASURABLE which supports your claim.

 

[Trakar]

Then enlighten us. Present us with something MEASURABLE which supports your claim.

What claim would that be?

 

[skookerasbil]

Trakar s0n.....you are such a naïve dumbass, its not even real. Its guys like you that keep overnight cable advertisements a booming business selling things like the Turbonator and Feel Good wrist bands.







Chronology of Extreme Weather

 

[Old Rocks]

Hmmmmm................... Interesting. I bet you can get a definition of extreme weather from people in Calgary.

 

[flacaltenn]

Not sure what you are trying to illustrate here, as the only bit of the graph that even demonstrates a weak correlation of any strength is over the 1990-2000 decade. The correlation over the entire century period is inconsistent and statistically very nearly non-existent.

I'm not sure on how you are tying this in with the thread's topic of adapting to the changes we are already witnessing and the best available science indicates will continue to increase over the coming centuries, but would be interested in seeing the connections you are trying to make.

Exactly, remind me to thank-you for playing..

The point was carried from a previous post where I opined that we should be able to MEASURE the effect of one or two degrees on storm formation and intensity.. Without all this primal dancing and magic incants.

So if you LOOK at the effect of a PDO or AMO where the ocean surface cyclically warms in Hurricane alley, it should show an OBVIOUS effect --- dontchathink.. And instead neither you or me can discern a seriously real effect from that experiment..

NOT FINDING a convincing cause/effect should give you some pause on this "Global Weirding" incarnation.

We need to KNOW what the effect of 1degC is on a thunderstorm or hurricane or low pressure area.. Seems like knowing the "extremes" would be so much more "scientific".

Completely irrelevant to the topic of discussion in this thread, and as you further illustrate, without merit or value in this thread's discussion. Not that I expect such would be a concern among those here with their political conspiracy theories to push. If you have noting to say about this thread's topic I will leave you to ramble about black helicopters and such amongst yourselves.

Not irrelevent at all.. In fact --- totally to the heart of the topic.. Did you get the message of Hansen's paper on "extreme weather"?

The theory goes that a small shift in the temp mean greatly amplifies the statistical probability of EVERY EVIL EVENT, including flying monkeys I suppose..

So if this is the theory, we should be able to find EXISTING ways to measure a temp mean shift on weather. Locally, Nationally, even INTERGALACTIC for that matter.

So I pop up the 1st chart I find on MAJOR hurricanes and the AMO.. And you tell me --- not bothering to engage your brains as to WHY this is relevent, that you find NO RELATIONSHIP implied in the TEMPERATURE MEAN SHIFT and frequency of occurrence of those major Atlantic storms..

Are you getting this yet? Has anyone studied surface temp mean changes and the INTENSITY LEVEL of tornadoes? Most probably.. Surface temp mean changes and the formation of HAIL? Possibly.. Why the fuck isn't there a RUSH ON to do the science thing here to open a NEW Global Weirding franchise with some scientific chest-pounding EXAMPLES?

The cynic in me says they've TRIED to put rational tests of convienient data to the theory and failed --- so you and i aren't hearing and WONT hear much to support the "extremes" bandwagon..

Gee -- if that's NOT the OP --- I apologize professor Doom..

 

[bripat9643]

Geez these people are complete mental cases. They really believe severe drought started a couple of years ago.

That's what keeps me coming back to this site......I cant help myself but for fucking with the nuttiest of the nutters.

Leftwing nutburgers are not used to having all their premises questioned. As a result, they don't know how to react when it happens. They are like deer in the headlights. All they can do is mindlessly repeat the talking points that have been rammed into them.

 

[bripat9643]

Trakar s0n.....you are such a naïve dumbass, its not even real. Its guys like you that keep overnight cable advertisements a booming business selling things like the Turbonator and Feel Good wrist bands.





Chronology of Extreme Weather

I'll bet Old Fart has a dozen of those.

 

[westwall]

Then enlighten us. Present us with something MEASURABLE which supports your claim.

What claim would that be?

You claim the climate is experiencing wider and wilder extremes. Back it up with a measurable list of events that supports your claim.

 

[westwall]

Hmmmmm................... Interesting. I bet you can get a definition of extreme weather from people in Calgary.

You think that's bad? Really? Dude you need to read some history some time....Let's go back to 1861-62, California, Oregon and Washington what happened back then bfore all that nasty CO2 got pumped into the atmosphere...let's see what was it...oh yes here it is..the WORST FLOOD IN US HISTORY!

The entire Central Valley of California was a LAKE. And you think the Calgary flood is bad? You are truly a silly, ignorant twerp...

Here's the wiki link for you learning impaired types...


"The Great Flood of 1862 or Noachian Deluge was the largest flood in the recorded history of Oregon, Nevada and California, occurring from December 1861 to January 1862. It was preceded by weeks of continuous rains (or snows in the very high elevations) that began in Oregon in November 1861 and continued into January 1862. This was followed by a record amount of rain from January 9th-12th, and contributed to a flood which extended from the Columbia River southward in western Oregon and through California to San Diego, and extended as far inland as Idaho in Washington Territory, Nevada and Utah in Utah Territory and Arizona in western New Mexico Territory.

It was climaxed by a warmer, more intense storm with much more rain that was made more serious by the earlier large accumulation of snow, now melted by the rain in the lower elevations of the mountains. Throughout the affected area, all the streams and rivers rose to great heights, flooded the valleys, inundated or swept away towns, mills, dams, flumes, houses, fences, and domestic animals, and ruined fields. An early estimate of property damage was $10,000,000.[1] However, later it was estimated that approximately one-quarter of the taxable real estate in the state of California was destroyed in the flood. Dependent on property taxes, the State of California went bankrupt. The governor, state legislature, and state employees were not paid for a year and a half.[2]"


Great Flood of 1862 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[westwall]

Exactly, remind me to thank-you for playing..

The point was carried from a previous post where I opined that we should be able to MEASURE the effect of one or two degrees on storm formation and intensity.. Without all this primal dancing and magic incants.

So if you LOOK at the effect of a PDO or AMO where the ocean surface cyclically warms in Hurricane alley, it should show an OBVIOUS effect --- dontchathink.. And instead neither you or me can discern a seriously real effect from that experiment..

NOT FINDING a convincing cause/effect should give you some pause on this "Global Weirding" incarnation.

We need to KNOW what the effect of 1degC is on a thunderstorm or hurricane or low pressure area.. Seems like knowing the "extremes" would be so much more "scientific".

Completely irrelevant to the topic of discussion in this thread, and as you further illustrate, without merit or value in this thread's discussion. Not that I expect such would be a concern among those here with their political conspiracy theories to push. If you have noting to say about this thread's topic I will leave you to ramble about black helicopters and such amongst yourselves.

Not irrelevent at all.. In fact --- totally to the heart of the topic.. Did you get the message of Hansen's paper on "extreme weather"?

The theory goes that a small shift in the temp mean greatly amplifies the statistical probability of EVERY EVIL EVENT, including flying monkeys I suppose..

So if this is the theory, we should be able to find EXISTING ways to measure a temp mean shift on weather. Locally, Nationally, even INTERGALACTIC for that matter.

So I pop up the 1st chart I find on MAJOR hurricanes and the AMO.. And you tell me --- not bothering to engage your brains as to WHY this is relevent, that you find NO RELATIONSHIP implied in the TEMPERATURE MEAN SHIFT and frequency of occurrence of those major Atlantic storms..

Are you getting this yet? Has anyone studied surface temp mean changes and the INTENSITY LEVEL of tornadoes? Most probably.. Surface temp mean changes and the formation of HAIL? Possibly.. Why the fuck isn't there a RUSH ON to do the science thing here to open a NEW Global Weirding franchise with some scientific chest-pounding EXAMPLES?

The cynic in me says they've TRIED to put rational tests of convienient data to the theory and failed --- so you and i aren't hearing and WONT hear much to support the "extremes" bandwagon..

Gee -- if that's NOT the OP --- I apologize professor Doom..

Exactly correct. If it can't be measured, it is by definition, NOT SCIENCE!