Reply
Honored Contributor
Posts: 13,546
Registered: ‎06-09-2014

Re: Disaster strikes again

[ Edited ]

@Noel7 wrote:

@Laura14 wrote:

@Noel7  I believe the temperature records. I do not believe they are the cause of a lot of hurricanes in one year.  

 

Think about it.  If that was absolutely true, FL would be run over every year not just every 8-10.  

 

I am not leaving my common sense at the door just because someone with a science degree says I should.  PROVE IT and I'll jump on board.  They won't do it in my lifetime.

 

The scientists can't because they don't have enough data over enough time to say with certainty why some years are more active with storms than others.  

 

And never forget the other person's agenda.  Scientists do nothing without grant money.  They get a lot of it when people get whipped up on an idea that shows promise like global warming theories.  

 

By the way, didn't the MIdwest have one of its coldest winters ever two years ago?  I notice this conversation never comes up during harsh winters or less active storm seasons.  And that's my point.  No one really knows.     


It's already been proven @Laura14

 

It's your right not to believe.  There are still people who believe the world is flat.  Really, they have an online website.

 

No one is forcing either one of us to believe anything.  Luckily., many, many good people around the world are already working on ways to help.  The advances are paid for by corporations and investors, not taxpayers.


@Noel7  I really don't think you think governments don't support scientific research.  Whoever writes the check (government and private industry), it's an incentive.  

 

If the scientists came out tonight and said, you know what, I think we may have been off on that, how many CEOs would continue to write the checks?  Again, common sense.

 

Every company is in business to make money and that incentivizes scientists (even those who strive to be impartial) in a bad way.  They are only human and like their paychecks too.  

 

I am not saying don't believe. I am saying have your eyes and mind open.  WIDE open to all of the possibilities including the absolute fact that no scientist on earth can explain our planet's climate and weather patterns with 100% accuracy and clarity.  

 

One of the greatest scientists Leonardo da Vinci lived by that.  I think so should we.   The human race is still young and is always and still learning.  

Honored Contributor
Posts: 21,733
Registered: ‎03-09-2010

@Laura14 wrote:

@Noel7  I believe the temperature records. I do not believe they are the cause of a lot of hurricanes in one year.  

 

Think about it.  If that was absolutely true, FL would be run over every year not just every 8-10.  

 

I am not leaving my common sense at the door just because someone with a science degree says I should.  PROVE IT and I'll jump on board.  They won't do it in my lifetime.

 

The scientists can't because they don't have enough data over enough time to say with certainty why some years are more active with storms than others.  

 

And never forget the other person's agenda.  Scientists do nothing without grant money.  They get a lot of it when people get whipped up on an idea that shows promise like global warming theories.  

 

By the way, didn't the MIdwest have one of its coldest winters ever two years ago?  I notice this conversation never comes up during harsh winters or less active storm seasons.  And that's my point.  No one really knows and a good scientist should be man or woman enough to say it.     


@Laura14, you say this as if it's a bad thing. In the long-term, I can't think of anything more worthy of grants.

 

Scientists as a whole do not enjoy agreeing one another. To paraphrase Neil DeGrasse Tyson, just sit in on on of their conventions. :-)

 

So the fact that a full 97 percent agree on climate change is not something to try to tear down with specious logic.

 

Hurricanes or no hurricanes, we had better get our act together ASAP.


~Who in the world am I? Ah, that's the great puzzle~ Lewis Carroll, Alice in Wonderland
Honored Contributor
Posts: 28,171
Registered: ‎05-22-2016

Re: Disaster strikes again

[ Edited ]

Some scientists believe that the people who will land on Mars in the future are living among us today...our children. They, imo, will be returning to Mars as the race of people who once lived there. I've long believed that the humans that once lived on Mars are the ones that destroyed it and made it the way it is today. We should take a closer look at what may become of our Earth.

Respected Contributor
Posts: 3,970
Registered: ‎03-16-2010

@Laura14 wrote:

@Noel7  I believe the temperature records. I do not believe they are the cause of a lot of hurricanes in one year.  

 

Think about it.  If that was absolutely true, FL would be run over every year not just every 8-10.  

 

I am not leaving my common sense at the door just because someone with a science degree says I should.  PROVE IT and I'll jump on board.  They won't do it in my lifetime.

 

The scientists can't because they don't have enough data over enough time to say with certainty why some years are more active with storms than others.  

 

And never forget the other person's agenda.  Scientists do nothing without grant money.  They get a lot of it when people get whipped up on an idea that shows promise like global warming theories.  

 

By the way, didn't the MIdwest have one of its coldest winters ever two years ago?  I notice this conversation never comes up during harsh winters or less active storm seasons.  And that's my point.  No one really knows and a good scientist should be man or woman enough to say it.     


______________________________________________________

@Laura14 

Predictive science is always harder and uncertain than science that takes a retrospective look at correlations.  For example, I can look back at medical records of 100,000 patients that died due to a heart attack and probably identify a cadre of factors that correlate leading to death from a heart attack.  Then one can identify risk factors from those studies.  But it doesn't mean that every single person with those risk factors will die of a heart attack.  But it does mean that those factors have a fairly high correleation coefficient to say there is a strong risk that if these factors are there then one is at risk of situation A occuring is substantially higher.

 

One common misconception  about any global warming is that there will not be rough or brutal winters.   Warmer ocean temps causes increased evaporation of ocean water.  The temp of the evaportation actually causes the "air" to expand if you will due to heat and increased moisture.  That in turn is then circulated via current air mass systems over the earth.  When it circulates over a colder land mass it leads to more snow, etc...which chills the land mass further.  Furthermore, moisture from that snow evaporates into circulation in that particular land mass and can result in more snow somewhere else. But the snow would not have occurred if it weren't for the moisture from ocean evaporation from thousands of miles away.    

 

So increase ocean temps results in increased evaporation which increases moisture in the air leading to increased snowfall in some areas.  Snow in and of itself will cause lower land temps, the snow evaporates, leading to more moisture aloft to be carried somewhere else.  An expanded snow blanket in any area with cause lower air temps.

 

I can't remember the stats, but the vast majority of all rainfall that occurs is due to evaporation that takes place over an ocean or uptake from a significant rainfall somewhere else.  So even when we have rain here in Ky. on a nice summer day....the moisture aloft is usually associated with ocean evaporation (in Ky. probably from the Gulf of Mexico)  along with an air circulation that moves the system over the state. 

 

I believe NOAA is doing quite a bit of work with developing a water vapor computer model to help "predict", but to also really research patterns of water vapor and other associated factors. 


* Freedom has a taste the protected will never know *
Valued Contributor
Posts: 582
Registered: ‎08-26-2017

We did have a dozen years without bad hurricanes, though, or at least that's what I saw on the news.  Oddly, only CNN is covering the Puerto Rico hurricane.  Prayers for the people in its path.

Honored Contributor
Posts: 13,546
Registered: ‎06-09-2014

@suzyQ3 wrote:

@Laura14 wrote:

@Noel7  I believe the temperature records. I do not believe they are the cause of a lot of hurricanes in one year.  

 

Think about it.  If that was absolutely true, FL would be run over every year not just every 8-10.  

 

I am not leaving my common sense at the door just because someone with a science degree says I should.  PROVE IT and I'll jump on board.  They won't do it in my lifetime.

 

The scientists can't because they don't have enough data over enough time to say with certainty why some years are more active with storms than others.  

 

And never forget the other person's agenda.  Scientists do nothing without grant money.  They get a lot of it when people get whipped up on an idea that shows promise like global warming theories.  

 

By the way, didn't the MIdwest have one of its coldest winters ever two years ago?  I notice this conversation never comes up during harsh winters or less active storm seasons.  And that's my point.  No one really knows and a good scientist should be man or woman enough to say it.     


@Laura14, you say this as if it's a bad thing. In the long-term, I can't think of anything more worthy of grants.

 

Scientists as a whole do not enjoy agreeing one another. To paraphrase Neil DeGrasse Tyson, just sit in on on of their conventions. :-)

 

So the fact that a full 97 percent agree on climate change is not something to try to tear down with specious logic.

 

Hurricanes or no hurricanes, we had better get our act together ASAP.


@suzyQ3  Not a bad thing at all.  Just something to keep in mind that admitting they may be wrong about anything they are studying cost them money.  

Honored Contributor
Posts: 13,324
Registered: ‎01-02-2011

Some people's *common sense* is going to kill us all😕

 

Better to prepare than not.

Honored Contributor
Posts: 13,546
Registered: ‎06-09-2014

@pitdakota wrote:

@Laura14 wrote:

@Noel7  I believe the temperature records. I do not believe they are the cause of a lot of hurricanes in one year.  

 

Think about it.  If that was absolutely true, FL would be run over every year not just every 8-10.  

 

I am not leaving my common sense at the door just because someone with a science degree says I should.  PROVE IT and I'll jump on board.  They won't do it in my lifetime.

 

The scientists can't because they don't have enough data over enough time to say with certainty why some years are more active with storms than others.  

 

And never forget the other person's agenda.  Scientists do nothing without grant money.  They get a lot of it when people get whipped up on an idea that shows promise like global warming theories.  

 

By the way, didn't the MIdwest have one of its coldest winters ever two years ago?  I notice this conversation never comes up during harsh winters or less active storm seasons.  And that's my point.  No one really knows and a good scientist should be man or woman enough to say it.     


______________________________________________________

@Laura14 

Predictive science is always harder and uncertain than science that takes a retrospective look at correlations.  For example, I can look back at medical records of 100,000 patients that died due to a heart attack and probably identify a cadre of factors that correlate leading to death from a heart attack.  Then one can identify risk factors from those studies.  But it doesn't mean that every single person with those risk factors will die of a heart attack.  But it does mean that those factors have a fairly high correleation coefficient to say there is a strong risk that if these factors are there then one is at risk of situation A occuring is substantially higher.

 

One common misconception  about any global warming is that there will not be rough or brutal winters.   Warmer ocean temps causes increased evaporation of ocean water.  The temp of the evaportation actually causes the "air" to expand if you will due to heat and increased moisture.  That in turn is then circulated via current air mass systems over the earth.  When it circulates over a colder land mass it leads to more snow, etc...which chills the land mass further.  Furthermore, moisture from that snow evaporates into circulation in that particular land mass and can result in more snow somewhere else. But the snow would not have occurred if it weren't for the moisture from ocean evaporation from thousands of miles away.    

 

So increase ocean temps results in increased evaporation which increases moisture in the air leading to increased snowfall in some areas.  Snow in and of itself will cause lower land temps, the snow evaporates, leading to more moisture aloft to be carried somewhere else.  An expanded snow blanket in any area with cause lower air temps.

 

I can't remember the stats, but the vast majority of all rainfall that occurs is due to evaporation that takes place over an ocean or uptake from a significant rainfall somewhere else.  So even when we have rain here in Ky. on a nice summer day....the moisture aloft is usually associated with ocean evaporation (in Ky. probably from the Gulf of Mexico)  along with an air circulation that moves the system over the state. 

 

I believe NOAA is doing quite a bit of work with developing a water vapor computer model to help "predict", but to also really research patterns of water vapor and other associated factors. 


@pitdakota  And you can be wrong which is why the FDA does recalls all the time and health recommendations change.  That's my one and only point here.

 

I am not going to debate climate change.  It's obviously happening and will happen forever.  My gripe is saying it's absolutely the cause of what's happening now and we need to make far reaching public policy based on a good guess for one particular aspect of it.  That's when I say slow down and be aware that these are still theories not facts.

Super Contributor
Posts: 487
Registered: ‎09-05-2013

There's a big difference between climate change and weather.  By the middle of this century the north pole ice cap will be mostly gone and that hasn't happened for thousands of years. 

 

I recently heard a college professor speak and he explained that the ocean temperature is what fuels hurricanes.  We may not see more hurricanes, but those we do see may be more vicious.  

 

97% of the world's scientists agree that climate is changing; and whether its due to humans or whether  its cyclical, wouldn't it be prudent to do what we can as a society to slow what could be disasterous? 

 

 

Honored Contributor
Posts: 21,733
Registered: ‎03-09-2010

@Laura14 wrote:

@suzyQ3 wrote:

@Laura14 wrote:

@Noel7  I believe the temperature records. I do not believe they are the cause of a lot of hurricanes in one year.  

 

Think about it.  If that was absolutely true, FL would be run over every year not just every 8-10.  

 

I am not leaving my common sense at the door just because someone with a science degree says I should.  PROVE IT and I'll jump on board.  They won't do it in my lifetime.

 

The scientists can't because they don't have enough data over enough time to say with certainty why some years are more active with storms than others.  

 

And never forget the other person's agenda.  Scientists do nothing without grant money.  They get a lot of it when people get whipped up on an idea that shows promise like global warming theories.  

 

By the way, didn't the MIdwest have one of its coldest winters ever two years ago?  I notice this conversation never comes up during harsh winters or less active storm seasons.  And that's my point.  No one really knows and a good scientist should be man or woman enough to say it.     


@Laura14, you say this as if it's a bad thing. In the long-term, I can't think of anything more worthy of grants.

 

Scientists as a whole do not enjoy agreeing one another. To paraphrase Neil DeGrasse Tyson, just sit in on on of their conventions. :-)

 

So the fact that a full 97 percent agree on climate change is not something to try to tear down with specious logic.

 

Hurricanes or no hurricanes, we had better get our act together ASAP.


@suzyQ3  Not a bad thing at all.  Just something to keep in mind that admitting they may be wrong about anything they are studying cost them money.  


@Laura14, we all have our fears. Mine is about our planet and what we must do to save it. Yes, I think that it's that serious. So pardon me if I'm not fretting over the idea that a scientist might not be in earnest simply because he or she received a grant.


~Who in the world am I? Ah, that's the great puzzle~ Lewis Carroll, Alice in Wonderland