Meteorologists Rip Into Anti Science Bill Nye Again

[Weatherman2020]

The left simply hate science.

 

[daws101]

The left simply hate science.
View attachment 74507
View attachment 74508
View attachment 74509

source ?

 

[Weatherman2020]

The left simply hate science.
View attachment 74507
View attachment 74508
View attachment 74509

source ?

3 guesses, first 2 don't count.

 

[ScienceRocks]

I love science and I wouldn't consider myself a hard leftist for listening to peer reviewed science and leaders in the field of climate.

 

[ScienceRocks]

Says the op that wants to defund most of science and our nations ability to track meteorological events. The republican party that I use to be apart of has become something I oppose.

 

[ScienceRocks]

Also, extreme weather like tornadoes and floods has a lot to do with the meteorological set-up of the jet-stream. One year is going to be calmer then the other...This is the way it works. Just how often a decent set-up can do a lot more damage or go outside the means is what Nye is talking about.

 

[elektra]

Also, extreme weather like tornadoes and floods has a lot to do with the meteorological set-up of the jet-stream. One year is going to be calmer then the other...This is the way it works. Just how often a decent set-up can do a lot more damage or go outside the means is what Nye is talking about.

Meteorological set-up? Where in the hell do you come up with that terminology, it is ridiculous.

 

[mogur]

The left simply hate science.

Droll, Weatherman, very droll. Progressives hate science, huh? That is wrong on so many levels. Science doesn't give a crap about politics. Science advances as new evidence comes to light, not by sticking to religious, social, or political dogma at the expense of better science.

Lets be honest, the left tends to reject the science behind the safety of nuclear power, fracking, and GMOs. The right tends to reject the science behind climate change, evolution, stem cell research, and the age of the universe. They both reject specific science evidence that doesn't reinforce their religious, political, or social tenets. Humans are just simply prejudiced like that.

But it is also ridiculous to say that one part of the political spectrum has a monopoly on that idiocy. Especially 'the left'. There are many recent studies looking into this very subject, and while finding little difference in the total bias against science between liberals and conservatives, the study also concluded that "Conservatives reacted more strongly than liberals."

Both liberals, conservatives can have science bias

 

[ClosedCaption]

The left simply hate science.

And that's why the majority of scientists identify as democrats duuuurrrrr

 

[daws101]

The left simply hate science.
View attachment 74507
View attachment 74508
View attachment 74509

source ?

3 guesses, first 2 don't count.

I'll take that as a no.

 

[skookerasbil]

Nye is a fraud....go watch ANY YouTube video for just two minutes.........one of the high priests of the religion.

 

[Weatherman2020]

Also, extreme weather like tornadoes and floods has a lot to do with the meteorological set-up of the jet-stream. One year is going to be calmer then the other...This is the way it works. Just how often a decent set-up can do a lot more damage or go outside the means is what Nye is talking about.

Hilarious. First global warming has the ocean risen 150 feet and covered islands now it causes tornados in May in the Midwest.

Yep. The left are anti science.

 

[Weatherman2020]

The left simply hate science.
View attachment 74507
View attachment 74508
View attachment 74509

source ?

3 guesses, first 2 don't count.

I'll take that as a no.

Moron doesn't even know what Twitter is.

 

[Weatherman2020]

The left simply hate science.

And that's why the majority of scientists identify as democrats duuuurrrrr

Link away. But we won't wait.

 

[Crick]

Also, extreme weather like tornadoes and floods has a lot to do with the meteorological set-up of the jet-stream. One year is going to be calmer then the other...This is the way it works. Just how often a decent set-up can do a lot more damage or go outside the means is what Nye is talking about.

Hilarious. First global warming has the ocean risen 150 feet and covered islands now it causes tornados in May in the Midwest.

Yep. The left are anti science.

No, but you are a liar. No one has suggested the ocean has risen 150 feet (at least in the last few centuries). And global warming has and will increase the incidence and the intensity of weather extremes.

 

[Crick]

Strong and Violent Tornado Climatology

5. DISCUSSION
This work is part of a larger effort to estimate and describe the threat of a variety of weather hazards in the US and, eventually, make estimates of those threats around the world. We would like to emphasize several points that are particularly important.

First, any efforts to make climatological estimates require careful consideration of the nature of the problem at hand and available datasets. One of the most challenging aspects of dealling with convective storm reports is gathering a sufficiently large sample to have confidence in the meaning of the results, but to avoid the problems of large changes in the reporting database over time. Clearly, using the overall reports of severe weather back until 1950 will cause significant difficulties unless the temporal changes in the reports are accounted for (Schaefer and Brooks, 2000). Blindly analyzing data without regard for the ways in which the data were collected can lead to serious problems. In this case, we have attempted to use as homogeneous of a dataset as possible, but using G93. It is not a perfect representation of what occurred, but we believe it to be as consistent of a dataset as there is. We have enhanced its consistency even further by considering our 'event' to be a tornado day.

As far as results of the study are concerned, the primary area of the US in which significant tornadoes occur most often is in a L-shaped region from Iowa to Oklahoma to Mississippi, with the highest threat in Oklahoma. It is important to remember that this is based solely upon the reports in G93. It is possible that low population densities and the accompanying small number of structures (Rasmussen and Crosbie 1996), particularly west of 100� W longitude, may lead to an underreporting of events. This problem is likely to be most severe for the violent tornadoes, since the sample size is much smaller for them. With these caveats in mind, we believe the overall general pattern is reasonable.

The movement of the peak in tornado threat during the year is consistent with changes in the annual cycle of meteorological variables. As moisture from the Gulf of Mexico is advected northward and westward over the Great Plains during the spring and early summer, the timing of the maximum in the annual cycle moves with it. The threat at southern locations weakens in summer as the jet stream retreats northward.

We can find no evidence for a long-term increase or decrease in the threat from significant tornadoes. The evidence of variability between different subperiods in the record indicates that changes in the frequency of significant tornado days on the order of 25% have occurred in this century. Detecting any changes related to climate change may be very difficult, given the apparently high natural variability.

The maximum frequency for having strong tornadoes come close to any location, in our case approximately 25 miles, is roughly once every two to three years. It is, obviously much less outside of the peak region and, if a smaller area of concern is defined, the return time between events is even longer. If we limit our concern to violent tornadoes, such as the 3 May 1999 Oklahoma City tornado, they occur near a location on one day once every 20 years or longer. As a result, people experience these events very rarely and it is a difficult challenge to keep people prepared for these events. Education in the schools appears to be an excellent way to increase knowledge of how to respond to tornadoes and it may have played a major role in the fact that there were no fatalities between the ages of 4 and 24 in the Oklahoma City tornado.

Insurance companies could increase the tornado-resistant properties of buildings by giving advantageous rates to structures that are built to be survivable. While individual residents may not be in a particular house long enough to experience a tornado in their vicinity, it is much more likely that, over the longer lifetime of the house, a violent tornado will occur relatively close to the house. Tying the preferred rates to the property and not to the individual who makes the improvements would increase the use of such structures. Similarly, development and enforcement of building codes designed to enhance tornado survival could be useful in high-risk regions.

The conjunction of high frequency of strong and violent tornadoes and the relative consistency of the season from year to year from north Texas up into western Iowa is a natural, objective way to define "Tornado Alley". The concept of Tornado Alley may be very important for the emergency management community. It is relatively easy to keep awareness up in a region where events happen frequently and where the threat is confined to a relatively short period of time. In addition, it is typically easier to recruit volunteer storm spotters in such an area and to maintain their enthusiasm. For instance, public awareness was extremely high in the 3 May 1999 Oklahoma City tornado. Despite damaging almost 8000 structures, fewer than 40 direct fatalities occurred. In contrast, heightening awareness in an area where tornadoes rarely occur or occur over a broader season of the year is much more difficult.

We believe that the problem of public awareness in regions where the climatological threat of a tornado on any particular day is low is one reason for many of the high death toll events over the last 20 years. During that period of time, only two of the 22 tornadoes in the US that have caused at least 8 fatalities (representing the highest 10% of death tolls) in what we have defined objectively as "Tornado Alley" with this dataset (26 April 1991-Andover, Kansas, and 3 May 1999-Oklahoma City). One of those had its fatalities in a trailer park and the other was the (inflation-adjusted) biggest property damage tornado in US history. Almost one-fourth of all significant tornadoes occur in this objective Tornado Alley, but only 9% of the major killers have. Thus, the vast majority of high fatality tornadoes in recent years have occurred in areas where tornadoes are an especially rare event on any given day. Eliminating those events will be extremely difficult, given the challenge of getting people to respond when their basic state of awareness is very low. As the recent Salt Lake City tornado reminded people, tornadoes can occur almost anywhere in the US and there is no reason to believe that if the atmosphere is capable of producing a tornado somewhere, it is also capable of producing a strong tornado. Rare events do occur. Preparing the public to be ready for them is a difficult task, but recognizing the nature of the threat has long-term potential rewards for emergency management and response and insurance interests.

 

[ClosedCaption]

The left simply hate science.

And that's why the majority of scientists identify as democrats duuuurrrrr

Link away. But we won't wait.

Why? You aren't denying it.

 

[Weatherman2020]

Also, extreme weather like tornadoes and floods has a lot to do with the meteorological set-up of the jet-stream. One year is going to be calmer then the other...This is the way it works. Just how often a decent set-up can do a lot more damage or go outside the means is what Nye is talking about.

Hilarious. First global warming has the ocean risen 150 feet and covered islands now it causes tornados in May in the Midwest.

Yep. The left are anti science.

No, but you are a liar. No one has suggested the ocean has risen 150 feet (at least in the last few centuries). And global warming has and will increase the incidence and the intensity of weather extremes.

How many feet has the ocean risen to cover islands?

 

[Weatherman2020]

Strong and Violent Tornado Climatology

5. DISCUSSION
This work is part of a larger effort to estimate and describe the threat of a variety of weather hazards in the US and, eventually, make estimates of those threats around the world. We would like to emphasize several points that are particularly important.

First, any efforts to make climatological estimates require careful consideration of the nature of the problem at hand and available datasets. One of the most challenging aspects of dealling with convective storm reports is gathering a sufficiently large sample to have confidence in the meaning of the results, but to avoid the problems of large changes in the reporting database over time. Clearly, using the overall reports of severe weather back until 1950 will cause significant difficulties unless the temporal changes in the reports are accounted for (Schaefer and Brooks, 2000). Blindly analyzing data without regard for the ways in which the data were collected can lead to serious problems. In this case, we have attempted to use as homogeneous of a dataset as possible, but using G93. It is not a perfect representation of what occurred, but we believe it to be as consistent of a dataset as there is. We have enhanced its consistency even further by considering our 'event' to be a tornado day.

As far as results of the study are concerned, the primary area of the US in which significant tornadoes occur most often is in a L-shaped region from Iowa to Oklahoma to Mississippi, with the highest threat in Oklahoma. It is important to remember that this is based solely upon the reports in G93. It is possible that low population densities and the accompanying small number of structures (Rasmussen and Crosbie 1996), particularly west of 100� W longitude, may lead to an underreporting of events. This problem is likely to be most severe for the violent tornadoes, since the sample size is much smaller for them. With these caveats in mind, we believe the overall general pattern is reasonable.

The movement of the peak in tornado threat during the year is consistent with changes in the annual cycle of meteorological variables. As moisture from the Gulf of Mexico is advected northward and westward over the Great Plains during the spring and early summer, the timing of the maximum in the annual cycle moves with it. The threat at southern locations weakens in summer as the jet stream retreats northward.

We can find no evidence for a long-term increase or decrease in the threat from significant tornadoes. The evidence of variability between different subperiods in the record indicates that changes in the frequency of significant tornado days on the order of 25% have occurred in this century. Detecting any changes related to climate change may be very difficult, given the apparently high natural variability.

The maximum frequency for having strong tornadoes come close to any location, in our case approximately 25 miles, is roughly once every two to three years. It is, obviously much less outside of the peak region and, if a smaller area of concern is defined, the return time between events is even longer. If we limit our concern to violent tornadoes, such as the 3 May 1999 Oklahoma City tornado, they occur near a location on one day once every 20 years or longer. As a result, people experience these events very rarely and it is a difficult challenge to keep people prepared for these events. Education in the schools appears to be an excellent way to increase knowledge of how to respond to tornadoes and it may have played a major role in the fact that there were no fatalities between the ages of 4 and 24 in the Oklahoma City tornado.

Insurance companies could increase the tornado-resistant properties of buildings by giving advantageous rates to structures that are built to be survivable. While individual residents may not be in a particular house long enough to experience a tornado in their vicinity, it is much more likely that, over the longer lifetime of the house, a violent tornado will occur relatively close to the house. Tying the preferred rates to the property and not to the individual who makes the improvements would increase the use of such structures. Similarly, development and enforcement of building codes designed to enhance tornado survival could be useful in high-risk regions.

The conjunction of high frequency of strong and violent tornadoes and the relative consistency of the season from year to year from north Texas up into western Iowa is a natural, objective way to define "Tornado Alley". The concept of Tornado Alley may be very important for the emergency management community. It is relatively easy to keep awareness up in a region where events happen frequently and where the threat is confined to a relatively short period of time. In addition, it is typically easier to recruit volunteer storm spotters in such an area and to maintain their enthusiasm. For instance, public awareness was extremely high in the 3 May 1999 Oklahoma City tornado. Despite damaging almost 8000 structures, fewer than 40 direct fatalities occurred. In contrast, heightening awareness in an area where tornadoes rarely occur or occur over a broader season of the year is much more difficult.

We believe that the problem of public awareness in regions where the climatological threat of a tornado on any particular day is low is one reason for many of the high death toll events over the last 20 years. During that period of time, only two of the 22 tornadoes in the US that have caused at least 8 fatalities (representing the highest 10% of death tolls) in what we have defined objectively as "Tornado Alley" with this dataset (26 April 1991-Andover, Kansas, and 3 May 1999-Oklahoma City). One of those had its fatalities in a trailer park and the other was the (inflation-adjusted) biggest property damage tornado in US history. Almost one-fourth of all significant tornadoes occur in this objective Tornado Alley, but only 9% of the major killers have. Thus, the vast majority of high fatality tornadoes in recent years have occurred in areas where tornadoes are an especially rare event on any given day. Eliminating those events will be extremely difficult, given the challenge of getting people to respond when their basic state of awareness is very low. As the recent Salt Lake City tornado reminded people, tornadoes can occur almost anywhere in the US and there is no reason to believe that if the atmosphere is capable of producing a tornado somewhere, it is also capable of producing a strong tornado. Rare events do occur. Preparing the public to be ready for them is a difficult task, but recognizing the nature of the threat has long-term potential rewards for emergency management and response and insurance interests.

Like Cat 5 hurricanes will pummel America every year because of global warming.
And learn to read what you copy and paste.
We can find no evidence for a long-term increase or decrease in the threat from significant tornadoes.

 

[Weatherman2020]

The left simply hate science.

And that's why the majority of scientists identify as democrats duuuurrrrr

Link away. But we won't wait.

Why? You aren't denying it.

You're busted in yet another lie.