Possible Record Cold Coming

I didn't get past the ridiculous first sentence. There wasn't any reason to read more after such a ridiculous statement.

If I had a penny for every time someone claimed that Rainier is going to blow up I would be richer than Bill Gates.

May I suggest you quit bragging about living in the most beautiful, pristine and friendly place in the world ... we don't want to hear about how lush and green it is, and your damn 300 foot trees that grow like weeds ... all that 10,000 square miles old growth forest you see off your front porch is overrated ...

Now, unless you want 2,000,000 Californians moving in next to you, I suggest "rains every day all day long" ... (that shovelful of dirt in my yard used to be Mt Mazama ... just saying) ...





Again, I couldn't get past the ridiculous first sentence.

I'm not bragging. I was telling another poster how this area is different from where they live. That person posted about the area they live in. I replied how it's different here.

Stop projecting what you would do on me.

If you don't like where you live move.

Stop getting upset by someone else who doesn't live where you do.

Pick a fight with someone else. I don't play those childish games.
 
You really , really are uneducated, particularly to claim how educated you supposedly are.
Irrelevant crybabying. Small children know the basics of climate change. You think i am claiming to be smart and educated, but that's an illusion. It's just that you are so ignorant and stupid, it appears this way to you.
Crybaby? Who is doing the crying in this thread? Not me. I have read many of the research reports that have come out and invariably they all issue some sort of caveat. Now, maybe you should read past the articles and actually read the research reports themselves.
Sure you have.

The IPCC report is very clear.
The one that got busted cooking the books?
 
Made up nonsense...
I know you have to say this ... those were awful times for the Hysterics ... detente was working, gas was 15¢/gal, no one had heard of Watergate ... worst still when "meathead" entered the American lexicon a few years later ... them folks still have their ears covered singing "nah nah nah I can't hear you" ...
 
Made up nonsense...
I know you have to say this ... those were awful times for the Hysterics ... detente was working, gas was 15¢/gal, no one had heard of Watergate ... worst still when "meathead" entered the American lexicon a few years later ... them folks still have their ears covered singing "nah nah nah I can't hear you" ...
Irrelevant nonsense.
 
3913

~S~
 
You really , really are uneducated, particularly to claim how educated you supposedly are.
Irrelevant crybabying. Small children know the basics of climate change. You think i am claiming to be smart and educated, but that's an illusion. It's just that you are so ignorant and stupid, it appears this way to you.
Crybaby? Who is doing the crying in this thread? Not me. I have read many of the research reports that have come out and invariably they all issue some sort of caveat. Now, maybe you should read past the articles and actually read the research reports themselves.
Sure you have.

The IPCC report is very clear.

Maybe it is....but nobody knows what the IPCC is. Most of the voting public has never heard of it nor do they care.

The progressive bozos still think it is all about the science. No its not.....its about the politics. Its all about the politics which are sucking if one is an AGW climate crusader. Voters dont care. Never have. A huge majority have waaaaaaaaay more pressing concerns than 3mm of sea rise!!:2up::113::113:
 
Last edited:
Here in Indiana, it looks like we'll be getting a snow/rain mix on Monday and a 22 high on Tuesday, with both nights dropping into the teens. I can live with that.
 
You're more interested in where I read it than the explanation itself?

I take it you just wanna attack the source, and not deal with the facts?

I just wanted to save you the time typing it all in again ... if there's someplace else you've typed it in before ... but either way is fine with me ...
Record cold snaps are almost always caused by variations in the jet stream. The stream is fueled by the temperature difference between the northern and southern latitudes. The arctic is warming faster than the tropics. This means less temperature difference (less fuel) and a weaker stream. The weaker stream is more prone to wandering, letting cold arctic air masses come much further south than usual. Poof! Record cold temperatures. The same phenomenon is responsible for record heat waves in Alaska and Canada when the stream wanders north.

Hide the Decline!!!
What decline?
 
Record cold snaps are almost always caused by variations in the jet stream. The stream is fueled by the temperature difference between the northern and southern latitudes. The arctic is warming faster than the tropics. This means less temperature difference (less fuel) and a weaker stream. The weaker stream is more prone to wandering, letting cold arctic air masses come much further south than usual. Poof! Record cold temperatures. The same phenomenon is responsible for record heat waves in Alaska and Canada when the stream wanders north.

That makes sense ... I seem to remember reading a paper about this (do you remember the author's name?) ... these waves in the jet stream would have a higher amplitude and slower progression ... but this is a two-edged sword; inclement weather will be more inclement and last longer, but fair weather will be fairer and again last longer ... these are averages, which produce the larger wandering due to less power (less fuel), but today the Arctic is getting colder than the tropics, returning the power and driving the existing wander further south ... if by chance this has not happened on these dates before, then we set record lows for that date ... the better metric is comparing these lows to the records two weeks fore and aft, closer to a monthly record low ...

I do think you're wrong about the Polar Front being driven further south than usual ... usual means all the way to the Gulf Coast and stopped by the Gulf's sub-tropical waters off-shore ... not that the front doesn't push further, infamously the morning of the Challenger tragedy; although infrequent, still usual ... unusual being snowfall in Havana ...

The corollary to this Arctic Amplification is that it's not just the jet streams that will be weaker, all the large-scale flow patterns will be weaker ... less of a temperature difference weakens the forces driving warm tropical air towards the poles and cold polar air towards the equator ... thus lower average power in the atmosphere ... the probabilities of more powerful weather events become less likely ...

What I like best about your explanation is that not only is it theoretically sound, we have empirical data to back it up ... a case where statistics sends us to the right place to look, and we seemed to have found it ... good science ...
Fairer weather doesn't necessarily last longer, we spend the time swinging between the two extremes. It was °75 degrees here today, unseasonably warm. Admittedly °75 degrees is not an uncomfortable temp, but it is way out of normal for november.

As the pattern gets weaker the weather will get more extreme because the contrasting airmasses are not being separated by the jet stream.
 
Record cold snaps are almost always caused by variations in the jet stream. The stream is fueled by the temperature difference between the northern and southern latitudes. The arctic is warming faster than the tropics. This means less temperature difference (less fuel) and a weaker stream. The weaker stream is more prone to wandering, letting cold arctic air masses come much further south than usual. Poof! Record cold temperatures. The same phenomenon is responsible for record heat waves in Alaska and Canada when the stream wanders north.

That makes sense ... I seem to remember reading a paper about this (do you remember the author's name?) ... these waves in the jet stream would have a higher amplitude and slower progression ... but this is a two-edged sword; inclement weather will be more inclement and last longer, but fair weather will be fairer and again last longer ... these are averages, which produce the larger wandering due to less power (less fuel), but today the Arctic is getting colder than the tropics, returning the power and driving the existing wander further south ... if by chance this has not happened on these dates before, then we set record lows for that date ... the better metric is comparing these lows to the records two weeks fore and aft, closer to a monthly record low ...

I do think you're wrong about the Polar Front being driven further south than usual ... usual means all the way to the Gulf Coast and stopped by the Gulf's sub-tropical waters off-shore ... not that the front doesn't push further, infamously the morning of the Challenger tragedy; although infrequent, still usual ... unusual being snowfall in Havana ...

The corollary to this Arctic Amplification is that it's not just the jet streams that will be weaker, all the large-scale flow patterns will be weaker ... less of a temperature difference weakens the forces driving warm tropical air towards the poles and cold polar air towards the equator ... thus lower average power in the atmosphere ... the probabilities of more powerful weather events become less likely ...

What I like best about your explanation is that not only is it theoretically sound, we have empirical data to back it up ... a case where statistics sends us to the right place to look, and we seemed to have found it ... good science ...
Fairer weather doesn't necessarily last longer, we spend the time swinging between the two extremes. It was °75 degrees here today, unseasonably warm. Admittedly °75 degrees is not an uncomfortable temp, but it is way out of normal for november.

As the pattern gets weaker the weather will get more extreme because the contrasting airmasses are not being separated by the jet stream.


Uhm climate change is not local
 
I've explained how global warming can cause record cold for you denier idiots every time it gets cold.

Do I have to do it again?
Yes indeed, warming can cause cold, just like night can cause day.
I'd explain night and day to you but first you'd have to understand that the Earth is round.

So mr scientist here claims the earth is round?


WTF?
Spherical.

Don't split hairs.
 

Forum List

Back
Top