No, the authors explained, you cherry picked. Fair enough, it's what deniers do.Ummm, no. That's what they did. Not me.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
No, the authors explained, you cherry picked. Fair enough, it's what deniers do.Ummm, no. That's what they did. Not me.
No, the authors explained, you cherry picked. Fair enough, it's what deniers do.Ummm, no. That's what they did. Not me.
So what do you reckon, Frank, is specific humidity in the lower atmosphere increasing or not?3. A ha! Just as predicted by our 100% Accurate Retroactive Model, DENIER!!!
So that's a don't know, run away.Let's see: it's increasing because of Global Warming, it's decreasing because of Global Warming
Fair enough, the classic Crusader tactic. Allah akubah.
United States Drought Monitor HomeI am wrong, my apologies. Both more and heavier precipitation has been predicted.When did they start stating that? Show me a link!
Does record snowfall disprove global warming?
Record snowfall
As climate warms, evaporation from the ocean increases. This results in more water vapour in the air. Globally, atmospheric water vapour has increased by about 5% over the 20th century. Most of the increase has occurred since 1970 (IPCC AR4 3.4.2.1). This is confirmed by satellites that find the total atmospheric moisture content has been increasing since measurements began in 1988 (Santer 2007).
The extra moisture in the air is expected to produce more precipitation, including more extreme precipitation events. Observations bear this out. A study of precipitation trends over the United States found that heavy precipitation events (over 50mm in a day) have increased 20% over the 20th Century (Groisman 2004). Most of this increase occured after 1970. Various analyses of precipitation over the globe have similarly found a widespread increase in heavy precipitation days since 1950 (Alexander 2006, Groisman 2006).
Snowstorms can occur if temperatures are in the range of -10°C to 0°C. Global warming decreases the likeliness of snowstorm conditions in warmer, southern regions. However, in northern, colder regions, temperatures are often too cold for very heavy snow so warming can bring more favourable snowstorm conditions (Kunkel 2008). This is borne out in observations. Over the last century, there has been a downward trend in snowstorms across the lower Midwest, South and West Coast. Conversely, there's been an increase in snowstorms in the upper Midwest East, and Northeast with the overall national trend also upwards (Changnon 2006).
As well as less and lighter precip. Funny how the global warmers always take both sides of an argument. Then, they claim "well, it will behave differently in different areas". Which sounds logical, but how then is that any different from what is already occurring?
That's the problem when you trot out a non testable hypothesis. You rapidly paint yourself into a corner....
I find this line hilarious for instance.....
"The decreased mean precipitation, on the other hand, is associated with less frequency for almost every rain events, except for very heavy and light rain events.
http://www.ntnu.edu.tw/acad/rep/r99/f990004-1.pdf
And you call this science!
Are you saying that water and snow have no connection?I think the way it works is that higher temperatures - and this decade has been the warmest on record - mean that more moisture is held in the atmosphere, which then translates to more precipitation/snow when temperatures drop. So one would expect increased snow levels with increased global temperatures.I was just thinking this morning when I woke up to 10 degrees, WHERE THE FUCK IS MY GLOBAL WARMING?!?!
Well holy AGW Batman! It's snowy!
And, if water vapor didn't have a residence time of 9 days you might have had a point. However, from the time the "warm" days have passed is weeks, if not months. And of course it's cold as hell. So, that "theory" don't hunt.
Are you saying that water and snow have no connection?I think the way it works is that higher temperatures - and this decade has been the warmest on record - mean that more moisture is held in the atmosphere, which then translates to more precipitation/snow when temperatures drop. So one would expect increased snow levels with increased global temperatures.I was just thinking this morning when I woke up to 10 degrees, WHERE THE FUCK IS MY GLOBAL WARMING?!?!
Well holy AGW Batman! It's snowy!
And, if water vapor didn't have a residence time of 9 days you might have had a point. However, from the time the "warm" days have passed is weeks, if not months. And of course it's cold as hell. So, that "theory" don't hunt.
nice graph, it looks normal for the region. What is it we're supposed to do with this?United States Drought Monitor HomeI am wrong, my apologies. Both more and heavier precipitation has been predicted.When did they start stating that? Show me a link!
Does record snowfall disprove global warming?
Record snowfall
As climate warms, evaporation from the ocean increases. This results in more water vapour in the air. Globally, atmospheric water vapour has increased by about 5% over the 20th century. Most of the increase has occurred since 1970 (IPCC AR4 3.4.2.1). This is confirmed by satellites that find the total atmospheric moisture content has been increasing since measurements began in 1988 (Santer 2007).
The extra moisture in the air is expected to produce more precipitation, including more extreme precipitation events. Observations bear this out. A study of precipitation trends over the United States found that heavy precipitation events (over 50mm in a day) have increased 20% over the 20th Century (Groisman 2004). Most of this increase occured after 1970. Various analyses of precipitation over the globe have similarly found a widespread increase in heavy precipitation days since 1950 (Alexander 2006, Groisman 2006).
Snowstorms can occur if temperatures are in the range of -10°C to 0°C. Global warming decreases the likeliness of snowstorm conditions in warmer, southern regions. However, in northern, colder regions, temperatures are often too cold for very heavy snow so warming can bring more favourable snowstorm conditions (Kunkel 2008). This is borne out in observations. Over the last century, there has been a downward trend in snowstorms across the lower Midwest, South and West Coast. Conversely, there's been an increase in snowstorms in the upper Midwest East, and Northeast with the overall national trend also upwards (Changnon 2006).
As well as less and lighter precip. Funny how the global warmers always take both sides of an argument. Then, they claim "well, it will behave differently in different areas". Which sounds logical, but how then is that any different from what is already occurring?
That's the problem when you trot out a non testable hypothesis. You rapidly paint yourself into a corner....
I find this line hilarious for instance.....
"The decreased mean precipitation, on the other hand, is associated with less frequency for almost every rain events, except for very heavy and light rain events.
http://www.ntnu.edu.tw/acad/rep/r99/f990004-1.pdf
And you call this science!
You said: nice graph, it looks normal for the region. What is it we're supposed to do with this?nice graph, it looks normal for the region. What is it we're supposed to do with this?United States Drought Monitor HomeI am wrong, my apologies. Both more and heavier precipitation has been predicted.When did they start stating that? Show me a link!
Does record snowfall disprove global warming?
Record snowfall
As climate warms, evaporation from the ocean increases. This results in more water vapour in the air. Globally, atmospheric water vapour has increased by about 5% over the 20th century. Most of the increase has occurred since 1970 (IPCC AR4 3.4.2.1). This is confirmed by satellites that find the total atmospheric moisture content has been increasing since measurements began in 1988 (Santer 2007).
The extra moisture in the air is expected to produce more precipitation, including more extreme precipitation events. Observations bear this out. A study of precipitation trends over the United States found that heavy precipitation events (over 50mm in a day) have increased 20% over the 20th Century (Groisman 2004). Most of this increase occured after 1970. Various analyses of precipitation over the globe have similarly found a widespread increase in heavy precipitation days since 1950 (Alexander 2006, Groisman 2006).
Snowstorms can occur if temperatures are in the range of -10°C to 0°C. Global warming decreases the likeliness of snowstorm conditions in warmer, southern regions. However, in northern, colder regions, temperatures are often too cold for very heavy snow so warming can bring more favourable snowstorm conditions (Kunkel 2008). This is borne out in observations. Over the last century, there has been a downward trend in snowstorms across the lower Midwest, South and West Coast. Conversely, there's been an increase in snowstorms in the upper Midwest East, and Northeast with the overall national trend also upwards (Changnon 2006).
As well as less and lighter precip. Funny how the global warmers always take both sides of an argument. Then, they claim "well, it will behave differently in different areas". Which sounds logical, but how then is that any different from what is already occurring?
That's the problem when you trot out a non testable hypothesis. You rapidly paint yourself into a corner....
I find this line hilarious for instance.....
"The decreased mean precipitation, on the other hand, is associated with less frequency for almost every rain events, except for very heavy and light rain events.
http://www.ntnu.edu.tw/acad/rep/r99/f990004-1.pdf
And you call this science!
dude, if you'd like to learn, then please go to a library and look up regional climate. See, this is all normal for the region. now how much more stupid would you like to post on here, because you are running neck and neck with the other deniers posting stupid. But please, at least read about the region. BTW, here a quick lesson on the region:You said: nice graph, it looks normal for the region. What is it we're supposed to do with this?nice graph, it looks normal for the region. What is it we're supposed to do with this?United States Drought Monitor HomeI am wrong, my apologies. Both more and heavier precipitation has been predicted.When did they start stating that? Show me a link!
Does record snowfall disprove global warming?
Record snowfall
As climate warms, evaporation from the ocean increases. This results in more water vapour in the air. Globally, atmospheric water vapour has increased by about 5% over the 20th century. Most of the increase has occurred since 1970 (IPCC AR4 3.4.2.1). This is confirmed by satellites that find the total atmospheric moisture content has been increasing since measurements began in 1988 (Santer 2007).
The extra moisture in the air is expected to produce more precipitation, including more extreme precipitation events. Observations bear this out. A study of precipitation trends over the United States found that heavy precipitation events (over 50mm in a day) have increased 20% over the 20th Century (Groisman 2004). Most of this increase occured after 1970. Various analyses of precipitation over the globe have similarly found a widespread increase in heavy precipitation days since 1950 (Alexander 2006, Groisman 2006).
Snowstorms can occur if temperatures are in the range of -10°C to 0°C. Global warming decreases the likeliness of snowstorm conditions in warmer, southern regions. However, in northern, colder regions, temperatures are often too cold for very heavy snow so warming can bring more favourable snowstorm conditions (Kunkel 2008). This is borne out in observations. Over the last century, there has been a downward trend in snowstorms across the lower Midwest, South and West Coast. Conversely, there's been an increase in snowstorms in the upper Midwest East, and Northeast with the overall national trend also upwards (Changnon 2006).
As well as less and lighter precip. Funny how the global warmers always take both sides of an argument. Then, they claim "well, it will behave differently in different areas". Which sounds logical, but how then is that any different from what is already occurring?
That's the problem when you trot out a non testable hypothesis. You rapidly paint yourself into a corner....
I find this line hilarious for instance.....
"The decreased mean precipitation, on the other hand, is associated with less frequency for almost every rain events, except for very heavy and light rain events.
http://www.ntnu.edu.tw/acad/rep/r99/f990004-1.pdf
And you call this science!
All of California, including the San Joaquin and Sacramento Valley's way past San Francisco and the Sierra Nevada's and the in a drought is normal? What are we supposed to do with this???? Pray? That's what Rick Perry suggests.
I give up. These people can't learn.
United States Drought Monitor HomeI am wrong, my apologies. Both more and heavier precipitation has been predicted.When did they start stating that? Show me a link!
Does record snowfall disprove global warming?
Record snowfall
As climate warms, evaporation from the ocean increases. This results in more water vapour in the air. Globally, atmospheric water vapour has increased by about 5% over the 20th century. Most of the increase has occurred since 1970 (IPCC AR4 3.4.2.1). This is confirmed by satellites that find the total atmospheric moisture content has been increasing since measurements began in 1988 (Santer 2007).
The extra moisture in the air is expected to produce more precipitation, including more extreme precipitation events. Observations bear this out. A study of precipitation trends over the United States found that heavy precipitation events (over 50mm in a day) have increased 20% over the 20th Century (Groisman 2004). Most of this increase occured after 1970. Various analyses of precipitation over the globe have similarly found a widespread increase in heavy precipitation days since 1950 (Alexander 2006, Groisman 2006).
Snowstorms can occur if temperatures are in the range of -10°C to 0°C. Global warming decreases the likeliness of snowstorm conditions in warmer, southern regions. However, in northern, colder regions, temperatures are often too cold for very heavy snow so warming can bring more favourable snowstorm conditions (Kunkel 2008). This is borne out in observations. Over the last century, there has been a downward trend in snowstorms across the lower Midwest, South and West Coast. Conversely, there's been an increase in snowstorms in the upper Midwest East, and Northeast with the overall national trend also upwards (Changnon 2006).
As well as less and lighter precip. Funny how the global warmers always take both sides of an argument. Then, they claim "well, it will behave differently in different areas". Which sounds logical, but how then is that any different from what is already occurring?
That's the problem when you trot out a non testable hypothesis. You rapidly paint yourself into a corner....
I find this line hilarious for instance.....
"The decreased mean precipitation, on the other hand, is associated with less frequency for almost every rain events, except for very heavy and light rain events.
http://www.ntnu.edu.tw/acad/rep/r99/f990004-1.pdf
And you call this science!
here is a map of the NA climate...You said: nice graph, it looks normal for the region. What is it we're supposed to do with this?nice graph, it looks normal for the region. What is it we're supposed to do with this?United States Drought Monitor HomeI am wrong, my apologies. Both more and heavier precipitation has been predicted.When did they start stating that? Show me a link!
Does record snowfall disprove global warming?
Record snowfall
As climate warms, evaporation from the ocean increases. This results in more water vapour in the air. Globally, atmospheric water vapour has increased by about 5% over the 20th century. Most of the increase has occurred since 1970 (IPCC AR4 3.4.2.1). This is confirmed by satellites that find the total atmospheric moisture content has been increasing since measurements began in 1988 (Santer 2007).
The extra moisture in the air is expected to produce more precipitation, including more extreme precipitation events. Observations bear this out. A study of precipitation trends over the United States found that heavy precipitation events (over 50mm in a day) have increased 20% over the 20th Century (Groisman 2004). Most of this increase occured after 1970. Various analyses of precipitation over the globe have similarly found a widespread increase in heavy precipitation days since 1950 (Alexander 2006, Groisman 2006).
Snowstorms can occur if temperatures are in the range of -10°C to 0°C. Global warming decreases the likeliness of snowstorm conditions in warmer, southern regions. However, in northern, colder regions, temperatures are often too cold for very heavy snow so warming can bring more favourable snowstorm conditions (Kunkel 2008). This is borne out in observations. Over the last century, there has been a downward trend in snowstorms across the lower Midwest, South and West Coast. Conversely, there's been an increase in snowstorms in the upper Midwest East, and Northeast with the overall national trend also upwards (Changnon 2006).
As well as less and lighter precip. Funny how the global warmers always take both sides of an argument. Then, they claim "well, it will behave differently in different areas". Which sounds logical, but how then is that any different from what is already occurring?
That's the problem when you trot out a non testable hypothesis. You rapidly paint yourself into a corner....
I find this line hilarious for instance.....
"The decreased mean precipitation, on the other hand, is associated with less frequency for almost every rain events, except for very heavy and light rain events.
http://www.ntnu.edu.tw/acad/rep/r99/f990004-1.pdf
And you call this science!
All of California, including the San Joaquin and Sacramento Valley's way past San Francisco and the Sierra Nevada's and the in a drought is normal? What are we supposed to do with this???? Pray? That's what Rick Perry suggests.
I give up. These people can't learn.
Hellooo. Knock knock. Do you see all of California is GREEN? Duh. Because the Sierra Nevada's block moisture from getting to the Nevada desert. But between the mountains and the ocean, your map is green. Mine shows it to be in a severe drought. That's the point.dude, if you'd like to learn, then please go to a library and look up regional climate. See, this is all normal for the region. now how much more stupid would you like to post on here, because you are running neck and neck with the other deniers posting stupid. But please, at least read about the region. BTW, here a quick lesson on the region:You said: nice graph, it looks normal for the region. What is it we're supposed to do with this?nice graph, it looks normal for the region. What is it we're supposed to do with this?United States Drought Monitor HomeI am wrong, my apologies. Both more and heavier precipitation has been predicted.
Does record snowfall disprove global warming?
Record snowfall
As climate warms, evaporation from the ocean increases. This results in more water vapour in the air. Globally, atmospheric water vapour has increased by about 5% over the 20th century. Most of the increase has occurred since 1970 (IPCC AR4 3.4.2.1). This is confirmed by satellites that find the total atmospheric moisture content has been increasing since measurements began in 1988 (Santer 2007).
The extra moisture in the air is expected to produce more precipitation, including more extreme precipitation events. Observations bear this out. A study of precipitation trends over the United States found that heavy precipitation events (over 50mm in a day) have increased 20% over the 20th Century (Groisman 2004). Most of this increase occured after 1970. Various analyses of precipitation over the globe have similarly found a widespread increase in heavy precipitation days since 1950 (Alexander 2006, Groisman 2006).
Snowstorms can occur if temperatures are in the range of -10°C to 0°C. Global warming decreases the likeliness of snowstorm conditions in warmer, southern regions. However, in northern, colder regions, temperatures are often too cold for very heavy snow so warming can bring more favourable snowstorm conditions (Kunkel 2008). This is borne out in observations. Over the last century, there has been a downward trend in snowstorms across the lower Midwest, South and West Coast. Conversely, there's been an increase in snowstorms in the upper Midwest East, and Northeast with the overall national trend also upwards (Changnon 2006).
As well as less and lighter precip. Funny how the global warmers always take both sides of an argument. Then, they claim "well, it will behave differently in different areas". Which sounds logical, but how then is that any different from what is already occurring?
That's the problem when you trot out a non testable hypothesis. You rapidly paint yourself into a corner....
I find this line hilarious for instance.....
"The decreased mean precipitation, on the other hand, is associated with less frequency for almost every rain events, except for very heavy and light rain events.
http://www.ntnu.edu.tw/acad/rep/r99/f990004-1.pdf
And you call this science!
All of California, including the San Joaquin and Sacramento Valley's way past San Francisco and the Sierra Nevada's and the in a drought is normal? What are we supposed to do with this???? Pray? That's what Rick Perry suggests.
I give up. These people can't learn.
Hmmm desert conditions. Maybe you should also read up on how a desert develops. Holy crap!!!!
come on man, don't be that stupid. Just don't, I asked you if you knew the region. You obviously didn't go and read up on weather in California, did ya? You know, it's a shame that minds go to waste like yours.Hellooo. Knock knock. Do you see all of California is GREEN? Duh. Because the Sierra Nevada's block moisture from getting to the Nevada desert. But between the mountains and the ocean, your map is green. Mine shows it to be in a severe drought. That's the point.dude, if you'd like to learn, then please go to a library and look up regional climate. See, this is all normal for the region. now how much more stupid would you like to post on here, because you are running neck and neck with the other deniers posting stupid. But please, at least read about the region. BTW, here a quick lesson on the region:You said: nice graph, it looks normal for the region. What is it we're supposed to do with this?nice graph, it looks normal for the region. What is it we're supposed to do with this?United States Drought Monitor HomeAs well as less and lighter precip. Funny how the global warmers always take both sides of an argument. Then, they claim "well, it will behave differently in different areas". Which sounds logical, but how then is that any different from what is already occurring?
That's the problem when you trot out a non testable hypothesis. You rapidly paint yourself into a corner....
I find this line hilarious for instance.....
"The decreased mean precipitation, on the other hand, is associated with less frequency for almost every rain events, except for very heavy and light rain events.
http://www.ntnu.edu.tw/acad/rep/r99/f990004-1.pdf
And you call this science!
All of California, including the San Joaquin and Sacramento Valley's way past San Francisco and the Sierra Nevada's and the in a drought is normal? What are we supposed to do with this???? Pray? That's what Rick Perry suggests.
I give up. These people can't learn.
Hmmm desert conditions. Maybe you should also read up on how a desert develops. Holy crap!!!!
I've been warned I'm too severe on Republicans, but come on. They print a map that shows exactly what I'm talking about and can't even see what their own map is showing them. This is what's called "determined ignorance".
Hellooo. Knock knock. Do you see all of California is GREEN? Duh. Because the Sierra Nevada's block moisture from getting to the Nevada desert. But between the mountains and the ocean, your map is green. Mine shows it to be in a severe drought. That's the point.dude, if you'd like to learn, then please go to a library and look up regional climate. See, this is all normal for the region. now how much more stupid would you like to post on here, because you are running neck and neck with the other deniers posting stupid. But please, at least read about the region. BTW, here a quick lesson on the region:You said: nice graph, it looks normal for the region. What is it we're supposed to do with this?nice graph, it looks normal for the region. What is it we're supposed to do with this?United States Drought Monitor HomeAs well as less and lighter precip. Funny how the global warmers always take both sides of an argument. Then, they claim "well, it will behave differently in different areas". Which sounds logical, but how then is that any different from what is already occurring?
That's the problem when you trot out a non testable hypothesis. You rapidly paint yourself into a corner....
I find this line hilarious for instance.....
"The decreased mean precipitation, on the other hand, is associated with less frequency for almost every rain events, except for very heavy and light rain events.
http://www.ntnu.edu.tw/acad/rep/r99/f990004-1.pdf
And you call this science!
All of California, including the San Joaquin and Sacramento Valley's way past San Francisco and the Sierra Nevada's and the in a drought is normal? What are we supposed to do with this???? Pray? That's what Rick Perry suggests.
I give up. These people can't learn.
Hmmm desert conditions. Maybe you should also read up on how a desert develops. Holy crap!!!!
I've been warned I'm too severe on Republicans, but come on. They print a map that shows exactly what I'm talking about and can't even see what their own map is showing them. This is what's called "determined ignorance".
Hellooo. Knock knock. Do you see all of California is GREEN? Duh. Because the Sierra Nevada's block moisture from getting to the Nevada desert. But between the mountains and the ocean, your map is green. Mine shows it to be in a severe drought. That's the point.dude, if you'd like to learn, then please go to a library and look up regional climate. See, this is all normal for the region. now how much more stupid would you like to post on here, because you are running neck and neck with the other deniers posting stupid. But please, at least read about the region. BTW, here a quick lesson on the region:You said: nice graph, it looks normal for the region. What is it we're supposed to do with this?nice graph, it looks normal for the region. What is it we're supposed to do with this?United States Drought Monitor HomeAs well as less and lighter precip. Funny how the global warmers always take both sides of an argument. Then, they claim "well, it will behave differently in different areas". Which sounds logical, but how then is that any different from what is already occurring?
That's the problem when you trot out a non testable hypothesis. You rapidly paint yourself into a corner....
I find this line hilarious for instance.....
"The decreased mean precipitation, on the other hand, is associated with less frequency for almost every rain events, except for very heavy and light rain events.
http://www.ntnu.edu.tw/acad/rep/r99/f990004-1.pdf
And you call this science!
All of California, including the San Joaquin and Sacramento Valley's way past San Francisco and the Sierra Nevada's and the in a drought is normal? What are we supposed to do with this???? Pray? That's what Rick Perry suggests.
I give up. These people can't learn.
Hmmm desert conditions. Maybe you should also read up on how a desert develops. Holy crap!!!!
I've been warned I'm too severe on Republicans, but come on. They print a map that shows exactly what I'm talking about and can't even see what their own map is showing them. This is what's called "determined ignorance".
Ah yes, since all of the Scientific Societies, all of the National Academies of Science and and all of the major Universities state that AGW is real, and a clear and present danger, them thar pointy headed librul scientists are deniers of science.No, the authors explained, you cherry picked. Fair enough, it's what deniers do.Ummm, no. That's what they did. Not me.
Yes the AGW cult are the true deniers of science..
The question was 'So what do you reckon, Frank, is specific humidity in the lower atmosphere increasing or not?' If you are too scared to answer, that is considered perfectly reasonable and understandable from a crusader.In Al Gores peer reviewed Bible "Earth in the Balance", he said that water vapor was responsible for the warming and that a wisp of CO2 magically made more water vapor. He was understandably very short on specifics.
Consider this a teachable moment and enlighten us as to how this hapoens
Ah yes, since all of the Scientific Societies, all of the National Academies of Science and and all of the major Universities state that AGW is real, and a clear and present danger, them thar pointy headed librul scientists are deniers of science.No, the authors explained, you cherry picked. Fair enough, it's what deniers do.Ummm, no. That's what they did. Not me.
Yes the AGW cult are the true deniers of science..
You guys remind me of the hayseed that sits in the back of the class in grade school, commenting 'Pi aren't square, pi are round, hiyuck, hiyuch".
Yes, Southern California is a desert. But even deserts have periods of more and less water than normal. And Southern California has had far less than normal.
California Drought