Ohhh....man. No kidding, I come back from a week long
climatology conference to this? Are you guys trying to kill me?
First--I invite you over
here for a global warming discussion.
I've seen some pretty ridiculous stabs in the dark in this thread. I have to question a few:
cheezydemon said:
Wow...the founder of the weather channel.....
Does that make Oral Roberts God's personal advisor because he started the religeous channel?
It is OK to hate Al Gore, but to deny global warming because you don't like Al Gore is about the most politically minded thing that I have ever heard.
Glacier National park has 5 or 6 glaciers left...there were 50-60 of them in the forties.
The ice that has melted at the caps will not "grow" back unless there is an ice age. The ocean and land that are now exposed after thousands of years are darker than the snow and therefore absorb more heat from the sun, melting more snow and so on and so forth.
Did you fail to notice the drought in Atlanta?
Some people need to flip it over to the discovery channel once in a while. Oh wait! Al gore or some other weather channel hating democrat probably runs the discovery channel, right?
You are stabbing blindly at elements that have no relevance to global warming.
Atlanta drought? What does that have to do with global warming? The world never had a drought before? If you are going to spout off random indices of supposed global warming, please, post some facts. I have a meteo background so I'm not going to accept just anything. Let's make this a discussion with some truth.
mrfocus said:
Ehh... right.
The Sun has a hot cycle of 11 years. The end of the last cycle was in 2002, that means that 2002 would have been the year where the average temperature on Earth would have been the highest since 1993. Funny how we're now in the lower part of the cycle and how the NASA (you know those guys with all the money and the best scientests on Earth, they went to the Moon and Mars...) said that this year is the worst in terms of the thickness of the Arctic Ice caps. But of course, just cause you bring a few (dozen) men to the Moon and back, you don't know sh** about using satellite imagery to calculate the volume of an ice cap. I mean, it's such hard science compared to building a full-bodied suit that can resist -280F (on the Moon) and ceramic tiles that can withstand near 3000F temperatures on reentry of the atmosphere... They know how to do all the different kinds of physics, but they can't do simple math to calculate the volume of an ice cap...
Ummmm... Who says the solar cycle is related at all? That theory doesn't add up.
Vermicous said:
You are right Mr. Weatherman, I don't believe you. Not just because when I hear the word liberal, I tend to tune out whatever is being said. But because numerous points are factually incorrect. Unless this was stated in the 1950's, I don't see how anyone with any sort of scientific background can believe these statements.
Help me here. What is incorrect?
Sea said:
I'm so damn sick of fear mongering scare tactics: global warming, war on Terror etc..... The Jury is still out, and will be for a long time. There is no dissent that average temps are going up, however, there is no credible proof (nor may there aver be), that we have a lot to do with it.
Basic social science: A population in fear is easier to control.
Besides, aren't we all having this discussion as we sip on a albeit tasty, but alas proven poison?
Ahhhhh. Some common sense.
abracadabra said:
NASA admits error in gobal warming data only after someone else found it and pointed it out.
http://news.mongabay.com/2007/0817-nasa_snafu.html
Here in Atlanta the data is based on flawed data collected at ATL airport.
As an example when the official reporting center at ATL report temps as high as
42* F. I am less than 20 miles away and am regularly scraping frost off my winsheld unless I'm sadly mistaken water freezes at 32*F or less.
The largest temp difference was 44*F and I had frost 20 miles away. And this is not California we don't have micro climates down here.
Maybe gobal warming is happening, maybe it isn't. Maybe we are causing it, maybe we aren't. But how can anyone with a oz. of common sense think the govt can make things better. They can't even deliver disaster relief to huricane victims in a timely manner or secure the borders and that's their main freakin jobs.
Rant over
Ahhhhhh.....some more common sense. However, you CAN have frost at a warmer temp than 32°. Just for future reference.
abracadabra said:
Here on earth life is carbon based if you control carbon, you control life itself, a bureaucrats dream come true.
And it has been proven already, temperature drives carbon dioxide levels, not vice versa. Think about that. Al Gore was wrong, sorry.
Cheesefood said:
I live in Chicago. Randomly pick a weather scenario and there's a good chance it'll happen that day. I've seen snow in June and put on shorts in February. Still, they're almost never correct. Unless you're living in Hawaii where the forecast is "Sunny, 80º with light morning and afternoon showers" or England with "Cloudy", the chance of being an accurate weatherman is about the same as being an American League pitcher and having a high batting average.
So when a meteorologist (a word shockingly similar in nature to astrologist) tells me his thoughts on global warming, my first thought is this: You can't predict noon warming.
Dude, I know I'm sh!tting on your career here. No offense.
They have billions worth of sattelite, radar and doplar and the best I can get is "30% Chance of Rain", when we're in the middle of a 20 day drought. So yeah, I trust Al Gore over a dude from the Weather Channel. People actually return Al Gore's phone calls.
First, no offense taken. I've been wrong many times.
Please don't generalize meteorologists though. Just because the National Weather Service chooses to dilute their forecast accuracy by giving percentages, doesn't mean every meteorologist does. The Air Force has a strict time-based forecast that gives very little leeway on accuracy. Either you are right, or you are amending to be right. It is a complicated process, but I'll tell you--over the past 16 years I've worked with some
amazing weather forecasters. I've also worked with some really bad ones too. I think however, that you'd be amazed at how accurate we can get. Of course the AF doesn't hedge like the NWS does.
mrkristofo said:
Finally, on topic!!!!!!
I was actually going to post this as well. IIRC, when we toured the NB brewery, they said they were operating at close to 98% "green". They even have a water purification plant of their own. It was all pretty amazing.