NASA scientists report the weather

[Crick]

Don't be this stupid. It doesn't refute jack shit. The WORLD'S temperature is rising somewhat radically.

and yet you can't demonstrate that with any evidence, so really all you have is your washed up fairy dust of warm that doesn't exist.

I have mountains of evidence but you've chosen the easiest way out: just insist that it's all a lie. No work involved there. No need to present YOUR data. YOUR temperatures. Even YOUR evidence that it's a lie. Just claim it over and over again. Lazy ass.

http://www.cnbc.com/2016/03/26/polar...ek-report.html

"'Polar Vortex' set to menace US in a week: Report
Javier E. David | @TeflonGeek
Saturday, 26 Mar 2016 | 5:03 PM ET"

Are you really this stupid? What happened to global temperatures the last time we got Rossby waves? The time before that? Before that? Certainly no cooling.

Climate change
A study in 2001 found that stratospheric circulation can have anomalous effects on weather regimes.[30]In the same year researchers found a statistical correlation between weak polar vortex and outbreaks of severe cold in the Northern Hemisphere.[31][32] In more recent years scientists identified interactions with Arctic sea ice decline, reduced snow cover, evapotranspiration patterns, NAO anomalies or weather anomalies which are linked to the polar vortex and jet stream configuration.[30][32][33][34][35][36][37][38] However, because the specific observations are considered short-term observations (starting c. 13 years ago) there is considerable uncertainty in the conclusions. Climatology observations require several decades to definitively distinguish natural variability from climate trends.

The general assumption is that reduced snow cover and sea ice reflect less sunlight and therefore evaporation and transpiration increases, which in turn alters the pressure and temperature gradient of the polar vortex, causing it to weaken or collapse. This becomes apparent when the jet stream amplitude increases (meanders) over the northern hemisphere, causing Rossby waves to propagate farther to the south or north, which in turn transports warmer air to the north pole and polar air into lower latitudes. The jet stream amplitude increases with a weaker polar vortex, hence increases the chance for weather systems to become blocked. A recent blocking event emerged when a high-pressure over Greenland steered Hurricane Sandy into the northern Mid-Atlantic states.[39]

Pull up a global temperature graph and show us where the polar vortex has caused cooling.

Fucking idiot.

 

[jc456]

Don't be this stupid. It doesn't refute jack shit. The WORLD'S temperature is rising somewhat radically.

and yet you can't demonstrate that with any evidence, so really all you have is your washed up fairy dust of warm that doesn't exist.

I have mountains of evidence but you've chosen the easiest way out: just insist that it's all a lie. No work involved there. No need to present YOUR data. YOUR temperatures. Even YOUR evidence that it's a lie. Just claim it over and over again. Lazy ass.

http://www.cnbc.com/2016/03/26/polar...ek-report.html

"'Polar Vortex' set to menace US in a week: Report
Javier E. David | @TeflonGeek
Saturday, 26 Mar 2016 | 5:03 PM ET"

Are you really this stupid? What happened to global temperatures the last time we got Rossby waves? The time before that? Before that? Certainly no cooling.

Climate change
A study in 2001 found that stratospheric circulation can have anomalous effects on weather regimes.[30]In the same year researchers found a statistical correlation between weak polar vortex and outbreaks of severe cold in the Northern Hemisphere.[31][32] In more recent years scientists identified interactions with Arctic sea ice decline, reduced snow cover, evapotranspiration patterns, NAO anomalies or weather anomalies which are linked to the polar vortex and jet stream configuration.[30][32][33][34][35][36][37][38] However, because the specific observations are considered short-term observations (starting c. 13 years ago) there is considerable uncertainty in the conclusions. Climatology observations require several decades to definitively distinguish natural variability from climate trends.

The general assumption is that reduced snow cover and sea ice reflect less sunlight and therefore evaporation and transpiration increases, which in turn alters the pressure and temperature gradient of the polar vortex, causing it to weaken or collapse. This becomes apparent when the jet stream amplitude increases (meanders) over the northern hemisphere, causing Rossby waves to propagate farther to the south or north, which in turn transports warmer air to the north pole and polar air into lower latitudes. The jet stream amplitude increases with a weaker polar vortex, hence increases the chance for weather systems to become blocked. A recent blocking event emerged when a high-pressure over Greenland steered Hurricane Sandy into the northern Mid-Atlantic states.[39]

Pull up a global temperature graph and show us where the polar vortex has caused cooling.

Fucking idiot.

so you have no evidence. You merely claim you have it, mountains of it. fk, you have the Mount Everest of fkn evidence, and yet you can't spit out one piece that supports your silly claim.

Dude, does your back radiation add heat?

 

[Crick]

WG-I, AR5. Mountains of evidence.

Back radiation increases the temperature at the surface (land and ocean) and lower atmosphere because it slows the release of the climate's thermal energy to space.

 

[jc456]

WG-I, AR5. Mountains of evidence.

Back radiation increases the temperature at the surface (land and ocean) and lower atmosphere because it slows the release of the climate's thermal energy to space.

is back radiation heat?

 

[jc456]

WG-I, AR5. Mountains of evidence.

Back radiation increases the temperature at the surface (land and ocean) and lower atmosphere because it slows the release of the climate's thermal energy to space.

AR5 only discussed projection, so you still have no facts. the only factual observation that is mentioned in the report is the 15 year pause, and you won't even acknowledge they make that observation. So you is cuckoo.

 

[Crick]

Back radiation increases the temperature at the surface (land and ocean) and lower atmosphere because it slows the release of the climate's thermal energy to space.

AR5 only discussed projection, so you still have no facts.

So... you obviously have not read it.

the only factual observation that is mentioned in the report is the 15 year pause, and you won't even acknowledge they make that observation.

Really, really haven't read any of it

I have acknowledged, repeatedly, that AR5 accepts and describes the pause. It would be a little stupid of me to do otherwise. I simply declined to repeat my acknowledgement three posts after having just done so.

So you is cuckoo.

"So you" is extraordinarily stupid and apparently proud of it.

 

[elektra]

NASA, somehow I did not include this link of NASA weather reports;

Climate Change: Vital Signs of the Planet: 2016 had hottest March on record

 

[Crick]

Perhaps you did not include it because it isn't a weather report

 

[elektra]

Perhaps you did not include it because it isn't a weather report

Reporting the temperature is very much a weather report.

 

[Crick]

Reporting monthly records being broken is not a weather report. What do you get from your local weatherman? You get the what's happened that day and what he believes will happen in the next week at most. You could find this same information (the whole year of monthly records) in any news magazine.

Why do you not give this stupid point up? You've lost this long ago and nothing you do is going to fix it. Continuing this desperation is just making you look more and more foolish. No one really cares. Listen to Skookerasshole. Just drop this and move on.

 

[elektra]

Reporting monthly records being broken is not a weather report. What do you get from your local weatherman? You get the what's happened that day and what he believes will happen in the next week at most. You could find this same information (the whole year of monthly records) in any news magazine.

Why do you not give this stupid point up? You've lost this long ago and nothing you do is going to fix it. Continuing this desperation is just making you look more and more foolish. No one really cares. Listen to Skookerasshole. Just drop this and move on.

NASA does report the weather.

Tropical Depression 1E Dissipates

At 1000 AM CDT (1500 UTC), on June 8 the National Hurricane issued their last public advisory on TD1E. The center of the remnants of One-E were located near latitude 16.4 North, longitude 94.8 West. That's about 30 miles (50 km) east-northeast of Salina Cruz Mexico. The remnants of One-E were moving toward the north near 3 mph (6 km/h). Maximum sustained winds are near 25 mph (35 kph) with higher gusts. The National Hurricane Center said those winds over the Gulf of Tehuantepec will diminish later today. The estimated minimum central pressure is 1008 millibar

 

[Old Rocks]

LOL The loser posts another post demonstrating his terminal stupidity. NASA posts what it sees. NOAA interprets what NASA sees concerning weather.

 

[elektra]

LOL The loser posts another post demonstrating his terminal stupidity. NASA posts what it sees. NOAA interprets what NASA sees concerning weather.

Now that is funny, NASA "posts" what it sees, and another government agency tells NASA they are looking at a hurricane, and NASA says, "oh, I knew that".

 

[Crick]

Why is this point worth the effort you've put into it? To validate your comment about an unexpected snowstorm eight weeks back? Big fucking whoop. Who the fuck cares?