LTBEWR From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 12338 posts, RR: 12 Posted (7 years 4 months 2 weeks 1 day ago) and read 2220 times:
Is Global Warming why we are having Extreme warm winter? Almost all of the USA has had an extremely warm winter. Since late December, most days have seen tempatures 10-15 degrees F (+5-7C) above normal. In Texas and Oklahoma, extremely hot and dry conditions have led to many huge fires. Many places in the Southern half of the USA have had little snow/rain. Other places (like Washington and Oregon) have had many days of rain. Conditions have also been very warm and dry in much of Europe, especially in Spain, Southern France, Switzerland, Italy and other Southern countries of Europe. Glaciers have been melting in Switzerland and there has been little snow so far this season. Earlier this winter, we saw snow and icy conditions for a few days in the UK/Ireland.
Do you believe that global warming is the cause of this wacky weather?
Flyingbabydoc From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 1, posted (7 years 4 months 2 weeks 1 day ago) and read 2213 times:
The weather in Germany has been pretty much what is expected for this time of the year. I think most of these phenomena can be explained by normal variations (cyclical changes). Southern Europe seemed cold enough for me while watching the weather report this morning on TV.
I remember that the winter of 96/97 was brutally cold in Wisconsin, where I was living at that time; 97/98 was a really mild winter with almost no snow. Maybe it is just a pattern repeating itself.
Wukka From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 1013 posts, RR: 17 Reply 2, posted (7 years 4 months 2 weeks 1 day ago) and read 2203 times:
I recall hearing that this mild winter for the US was predicted by the Farmer's Alminac a year or two ago. They're generally more spot-on than the NWS as far as mid-to-long-term predictions. I'd love to know what kind of divine intervention they have to publish such accurate stuff year after year without the benefit of DOPPLERSUPERRADARSATELLITENET2006 since the 1800s.
Personally, I think it's just cyclical weather patterns and not imminent doom.
I can't speak for the rest of the world's current weather patterns, but from what I've read, we're at just about what was expected for this year. Warmer temps and higher rainfall.
It's a real pain in the ass for my manmade snow-skiing this year, living in the Midwest.
ANCFlyer From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 3, posted (7 years 4 months 2 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 2201 times:
We've got pretty normal weather for northern Alaska right now - we've been fairly normal all winter. Currently, -36.1F. That certainly isn't representative of any unusual warming in my book. . . . average snow fall, average temperatures . . . below average number of days with high winds (25mph or greater).
AeroWesty From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 18898 posts, RR: 64 Reply 5, posted (7 years 4 months 2 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 2193 times:
When I was in NY in November, fruit trees were budding and roses were blooming two weeks prior to Thanksgiving, something long-term residents had never seen. People were afraid that a lot of trees and plants would die this winter because they'd not gone dormant before the heavy snows, but there hasn't been much of it to speak of, from what I've heard.
Here in Oregon, we're going through one storm after another, with another whopper set to come in tomorrow night.
One thing I read recently is that global warming causes a paradox of cooler/wetter days, and warmer nights in winter, since increased evaporation has created more clouds and more intense storms.
It *could* certainly be a cyclical pattern we've just not lived long enough to see from cycle-to-cycle, or we could just be really screwing up the environment. When I think about it all, I remember that the El Nino pattern was only known in folklore before it was scientifically documented only 20 years ago or so. Maybe there are others we've not discovered yet.
Skidmarks From UK - England, joined Dec 2004, 7121 posts, RR: 60 Reply 8, posted (7 years 4 months 2 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 2179 times:
Global Warming is a load of old bollocks! The weather goes in patterns and it's only because of easier communication thanks to the media that we are aware of weather situations around the rest of the world.
Sometimes the weather is bad in winter, sometimes it isnt. Thats the way it goes.
Sunshine79 From UK - England, joined Jan 2006, 1758 posts, RR: 34 Reply 10, posted (7 years 4 months 2 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 2170 times:
My dad says global warning and hurricanes are to do with 'sending those people up there, into space' and interfering with the atmosphere. Dunno if it's true or not, but could have something to do with it.
It's not that simple either. Short-term weather patterns will always vary, but they appear to bump into the extremes with increasing frequency. And the rapid global melting of all (but one) glaciers is a sign that this is not just within the normal variation.
Klaus From Germany, joined Jul 2001, 20861 posts, RR: 55 Reply 14, posted (7 years 4 months 2 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 2159 times:
Quoting Sunshine79 (Reply 10): My dad says global warning and hurricanes are to do with 'sending those people up there, into space' and interfering with the atmosphere. Dunno if it's true or not, but could have something to do with it.
"Disturbance of the atmosphere" as a factor is extremely unlikely. Our current spacecraft are so tiny and so few by comparison that they is practically certain to have no discernable influence, although their engine exhaust certainly contributes a bit to the pollution load. But any smaller city will contribute more pollution through heating and commuter traffic.
Wukka From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 1013 posts, RR: 17 Reply 15, posted (7 years 4 months 2 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 2158 times:
Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 5): When I think about it all, I remember that the El Nino pattern was only known in folklore before it was scientifically documented only 20 years ago or so. Maybe there are others we've not discovered yet.
That was kinda' where I was going with that. I don't know whether or not global warming / cooling is a huge issue or not. I don't think that anyone really does. Folklore and old sailor stories from the annals of history tells us about stuff that we think is insane, but then we experience it and put a scientific explanation on it that we (as humanity) didn't have access to so many years ago.
IMHO, the topic just seems to be jumping the gun. This current pattern is hardly "extreme". I firmly believe that Nature's balance will show us "extreme" when it's had enough of our crap, and give us some time to fix it.
If I'm wrong, I'll see ya' on the flipside after the floods and all.
Current science seems to be outrunning any sense of optimism... or maybe that's just the influx of "trashcience" (I think I just invented that word according to google -- combination of trash and science) we get forcefed as doom and gloom "news" every single freakin' day.
Klaus From Germany, joined Jul 2001, 20861 posts, RR: 55 Reply 19, posted (7 years 4 months 2 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 2151 times:
Quoting Wukka (Reply 15): Current science seems to be outrunning any sense of optimism... or maybe that's just the influx of "trashcience" (I think I just invented that word according to google -- combination of trash and science) we get forcefed as doom and gloom "news" every single freakin' day.
Closing your eyes because reality is scary is not the solution. Science also helps finding ways out of the mess - we just need to take it seriously.
Wukka From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 1013 posts, RR: 17 Reply 21, posted (7 years 4 months 2 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 2139 times:
Quoting Klaus (Reply 19): Closing your eyes because reality is scary is not the solution. Science also helps finding ways out of the mess - we just need to take it seriously.
No dude... Scary sells, and you're the one that's buying.
My eyes are wide open. If you want to look at it from a selfish perspective, I'd rather be alive to see armageddon than die some boring old cancerous death.
I'm saying that I think that we'll get a dose of "REAL REALITY" before we get permanently fucked. Right now, we "scientists" just analyze every little change in every little thing and publish a nonsense paper on it proving anything that's desired to be proven, whether it be the .01 degree year to year climate change or the dB to vibration increase leading to failure on the bearings of the hard drive on your G4.
See... that's the biggest problem. We have what's called "PROOF", given in graphs, stacks of paperwork, and legalese that "PROVE" both sides of a diametrically opposed argument.
I choose to either research more on my own, or wait for a more substantial verdict to come in... if that be the four horsemen of the apocolypse riding over my head to make be believe it, then so be it... but don't you dare accuse me of my eyes being closed.
Klaus From Germany, joined Jul 2001, 20861 posts, RR: 55 Reply 22, posted (7 years 4 months 2 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 2125 times:
Quoting Wukka (Reply 21): I'm saying that I think that we'll get a dose of "REAL REALITY" before we get permanently fucked. Right now, we "scientists" just analyze every little change in every little thing and publish a nonsense paper on it proving anything that's desired to be proven, whether it be the .01 degree year to year climate change or the dB to vibration increase leading to failure on the bearings of the hard drive on your G4.
It's a G5, and my harddrives have fluid bearings. See how unverified conjecture can lead you astray?
The scientific process can look confusing when one doesn't make a little effort to know the context for the various theories, claims and evidence.
Your proposal seems to be to just go with prejudice: Declare science void if it doesn't match what you want to hear.
In reality, science works by setting up theories in view of existing observations and then verifying whether and how far those theories are consistent a) with the entire body of existing evidence and b) with future observations about which the theory is making predictions.
There is no easy way around that, no short cut. But it does indeed make a lot of sense, and it works.
At this point, the existing theories do indeed match existing evidence relatively well (for a difficult field such as climatology) and they do indeed make predictions which are confirmed significantly more often than not by new observations.
Sorry, but simply declaring the complexity "confusing" as an excuse to ignore it all is not good enough.
Md80fanatic From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 2624 posts, RR: 11 Reply 23, posted (7 years 4 months 2 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 2116 times:
I have been seeing wasps and bees all over the place in Austin, and this is supposed to be the coldest part of the year. Trees are budding and allergies are off the scale. Been here 25 years and havent ever seen this kind of warmth in January.
And I will repeat my observation from last year....which began with the "tsunami" event on Dec 26, 2004. I don't at all believe the story that an earthquake triggered it. It was said that the earthquake was so huge that it rang the earth like a "bell".....since when do bells ring themselves? I believe we were impacted from space by something fairly large and very fast moving. What else could cause a wave to kill people 5000 miles from the wave's origin? And since when have tsunami waves been omnidirectional (circular)?
Earthquakes and waves usually do not change atmospheric circulation patterns overnight, but this event did.
DesertJets From United States of America, joined Feb 2000, 7673 posts, RR: 18 Reply 24, posted (7 years 4 months 2 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 2115 times:
contrary to what one sees in the popular media, which continually does a disservice to real science (in part b/c journalists aren't scientists), there does seem to be a reasonable consensus that we are in a period of increasing global temperature. Ice core, tree ring, and other reliable longitudinal data points in that direction. The melting of glaciers in the artic is another fairly obvious sign that something on the marco scale is happening. What they do not really have a good grasp on is WHY it is happening; whether it be some long-term cycle the planet is going through, the result of increased greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, or a little of both.
The funny thing with global warming is that many localized or regionalized weather patterns may be effected in ways that seem counter-intutitive. Many scientists talk about how global warming may lead to lower overall temperatures in Europe over a period of several decades. Primarly due to the increased level of fresh water in the Atlantic, reducing the salienty of the water, and weakening the Gulf Stream; which has a major impact on western and northern Europe's climate despite its high latitude.
But to me, and most of the scientific community, global warming is real and it is happening as I type. The big question is how much influence a marco change is having on localized and regionalized weather patterns.
Stop drop and roll will not save you in hell. --- seen on a church marque in rural Virginia
25 AeroWesty: Omnidirectional would assume there was equal wave force in every direction. That's not how these waves occurred. They were focussed mainly to the Wes
26 Klaus: It's a possibility within the normal variations - relevant is only a statistically significant elevation of such events within a greater observation
27 777236ER: No actually, you don't. You can't prove any scientific theory.
28 Logan22L: As paradoxical as it sounds, global warming is not something that manifests itself in perceptible changes in average temperatures. Global warming is s
29 FlyMIA: Its not global warming. I am sick of this stuff. Everytime there is an non-normal weather period people blame it on global warming. The weather is alw
30 Nordair: As Drew Carey once said, "F**k Global Warming. I want heat NOW."
31 Logan22L: Thank you for your scientific analysis of a scientific question.
32 DLPMMM: Sorry Klaus, but the current "theories' are merely mathmatical curve matching exercises with extrapolations, and have not been at all accurate in pre
33 DLPMMM: This is not to say that the Earth is not getting warmer. The Earth is always getting either warmer or colder. It was obviously much colder during all
34 Klaus: Incorrect. The models have remained valid and consistent with incoming finds, matching the trends actually observed. In a complex system like global
35 Klaus: Only during catastrophic eruptions which would pretty much create the kind of disastrous scenario we're attempting to avoid! We'd be talking about ma
36 Solarix: Remember Y2K and how everyone thought the world would end at 12:00AM in the year 2000. Let's not get started with another paranoia scam called Global
37 KSYR: People, Sometimes places have brutal, cold, snowy winters. Sometimes they have mild winters. That is a fact of life, and has been throughout recorded
38 LTBEWR: My concern is that the exponential growth in 'greenhouse gases' accumulating over time is compounding natural cycles of weather. It may be aggraving t
39 DLPMMM: Klaus, Who said that volcanoes are the cause? Here is a breakdown of natural verses man made greenhouse gasses: http://www.clearlight.com/~mhieb/WVFo
40 Wukka: I hope that you were using this as an opportunity to reiterate my statement; otherwise you completely missed the obvious use of quotations and capita
41 Klaus: When you're claiming "the planet" as the main source, that's the obvious conclusion. It's also a popular misconception. When you're talking about any