patrick.net

CaptainShuddup says

Climate mystery NO Hurricanes

So let me get this straight. You are saying that there were no major hurricanes where you live, therefore climate change is a hoax and we should continue polluting our atmosphere with no regard.

Well, that's dumb and wrong. Let's just take a look at rising sea-levels, one of the most visible and undeniable effects of climate change.

http://www.youtube.com/embed/c9fDzyGFk5c
http://www.youtube.com/embed/AQ7EVZDSXKA
http://www.youtube.com/embed/7yPQzLyXmp4
http://www.youtube.com/embed/wRaVE9dO1Mw

And here's your bonus video…
http://www.youtube.com/embed/OJ6Z04VJDco

This is about Hurricanes.
Stay on topic please.

Dan8267 says

Let's just take a look at rising sea-levels, one of the most visible and undeniable effects of climate change.

SoftShell says

This is about Hurricanes.

Stay on topic please.

This is not about Hurricanes. Infer the intentions of the author. He's not bitching and moaning about not being hit by a hurricane. He's trying to denounce Climate Change as a hoax.

But by your response, I take it that you are conceding defeat.

The captain has the political perspective of a 70 year old, constant Fox "news" watching, crotchety old man.

Wow. I see two multi-sentence paragraphs describing the effects of moisture in the atmosphere affecting hurricane patterns. Not to mention a bolded blaring thread headline screaming 'hurricanes'.

Yes, there might be a little politics at the end.....
Yes, the captain has something of what you describe...
Yes, he's getting in his jibes on global warming and homedepot sales volumes.

But, make no mistake....with over 90% of the thread header describing cause and effect regarding hurricanes, this thread IS about hurricanes.

You may 'infer' at your own risk.

Why do you folks hate facts, and promote propaganda?
You're fucking adults start acting like one goddamn it.
You sniveling little tit mice can believe that Global warming bullshit if you want to, I'm staying firmly planted in reality.

CaptainShuddup says

Why do you folks hate facts, and promote propaganda?

Oh honey, I'm the only one in this thread who has inserted facts. Just watch the videos I've linked. Those are all the facts any sane, rational person needs to know beyond any doubt, reasonable or otherwise, that sea levels are rising due to carbon dioxide pollution from man.

http://www.foxnews.com/science/2013/09/09/arctic-sea-ice-up-60-percent-in-2013/

CaptainShuddup says

foxnews.com/science

That's an oxymoron.

I'm still waiting for the hole in the Ozone that is going to expel all of our precious global warming carbon, and then the planet is going to freeze over in a gigantic ice age.

Please one fake crisis at a time, get one right first, then I'll entertain then next Bubbe Meises.

Dan8267 says

CaptainShuddup says

foxnews.com/science

That's an oxymoron.

humanity says

The captain has the political perspective of a 70 year old, constant Fox "news" watching, crotchety old man.

You know guys, it would be real easy to feel ashamed of my self, if 99% of the media in US wasn't a schill for this administration and annexed into the ministry of propaganda and misinformation.

Fucking Dennis Rodman is a better leader than the Asshole you people elected, the Goddamn Kaiser of Russia outclasses the son of a Bitch as well.

If it weren't for FOX, we'd all be in the Dark, and I guess that's what scares you people about FOX. It's a kink in the chain, that prohibits total brainwashing and domination.

Sorry Charlie!

CaptainShuddup says

I'm still waiting for the hole in the Ozone that is going to expel all of our precious global warming carbon, and then the planet is going to freeze over in a gigantic ice age.

Please one fake crisis at a time, get one right first, then I'll entertain then next Bubbe Meises.

From National Geographic,

The ozone layer lies between about 9.3 and 18.6 miles (15 and 30 kilometers) above Earth's surface. This blanket of ozone, or O3, blocks most of the sun's high-frequency ultraviolet rays.

These UV rays can cause skin cancer and cataracts in humans, as well as reproductive problems in fish, crabs, frogs, and even in the single-celled phytoplankton at the bottom of the ocean food chain.

Invented in the 1920s, CFCs proved to be an exceptional problem for ozone, because many of these synthetic chemicals can persist for decades, allowing them to make their way into the upper atmosphere.

Scientists had theorized since the 1970s about the chemistry that could lead to ozone depletion. But in May 1985 scientists with the British Antarctic Survey shocked the world when they announced the discovery of a huge hole in the ozone layer over Antarctica.

Technically a substantial thinning of the ozone layer, the ozone "hole" has been opening every spring since the 1970s, the scientists reported.

Their data, collected at the Halley Research Station in Antarctica, suggested that CFCs were to blame. That's because atmospheric conditions during the cold, dark, Antarctic winters were building stockpiles of CFCs over the South Pole.

The disturbing discovery set the stage for an environmental triumph: the Montreal Protocol of 1987.

This pact to phase out the use of CFCs and restore the ozone layer was eventually signed by every country in the United Nations—the first UN treaty to achieve universal ratification.

The unparalleled cooperation has had a major impact.

"If we had just kept letting CFCs increase at a pretty nominal rate, characteristic of the 1970s, the decreased ozone levels of the hole would have eventually covered the entire planet," said atmospheric physicist Paul Newman of NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center.

"Global ozone dropped a little bit [after CFCs were banned], but the good news is that if we had done nothing, it would have gotten really, really bad."

Now a complete rebound seems imminent. Some scientists project that by 2080 global ozone will return to 1950s levels.

So, now your definition of fake crisis includes real crises that were adverted by human beings coming together and fixing the problem by listening to the science and acting.

As for the Snowball Earth, see the last of the videos in the series I've linked. It already addresses that.

So, here's your record…

Claim 1: Climate change isn't happening because there hasn't been a major hurricane in Florida in the past few years.

Result: False. Rising sea levels that are drowning islands is indisputable proof that climate change is happening. The CO2 / Solar Activity graph shows a clear correlation between CO2 pollution and rising temperatures and sea-levels. CO2 measurements confirm that the vast majority of CO2 released is man made and due to the burning of fossil fuels.

Claim 2: The Ozone Hole was lie.

Result: False. The Ozone Hole was precisely measured and tracked. The Ozone layer is essential to preventing cancer-causing UV radiation from penetrating the atmosphere. The health effects of losing the Ozone layer would be catastrophic, and the Earth was on course to rapidly lose the Ozone layer throughout the entire world. Yet, through International cooperation, mankind adverted that tragedy and the massive deaths that would have resulted by banning the chemicals that caused Ozone destruction.

What's really twisted about your logic is that you have attempted to take an environmental success story and turn it into misinformation that would cause environmental destruction. Damn, you should be hosting Fox News. The irony is that, even ignoring all the moral and ethical issues of destroying the environment, it is not in your financial interest to do so. The loss of productivity and the health care costs incurred by the destruction of the Ozone layer alone would far outweigh any financial benefit you gain by polluting. Pollution is simply bad economics. It is bad resource management. It is bad business.

Claim 3: The Snowball Earth theory was the accepted theory back in the 1960s and it was false, therefore global warming must also be false.

Result: False and false. The Snowball Earth theory was not the accepted theory back in the 1960s. Even then far more climatologist supported the theory that mankind was causing net global warming despite the release of visible pollution, which is a global coolant since it blocks sunlight.

Furthermore, even if the Snowball Earth theory had been the accepted theory back in the 1960s, it would not in any way discredit Climate Change today. Environmental science began in the 1960s and has progressed considerably over the past 50 years. A half century is a damn long time in the scientific community today. The amount of advancement in 50 years in any science today is staggering.

So you are batting 0 for 3. The real question is why do you want people to disbelieve in climate change and take no action? I can only surmise the misinformation that Fox News has poisoned your mind. Of course, Fox News is paid off by the very polluters who make money at your expense by polluting.

Pollution is a form of theft called cost shifting. It involves shifting the cost of production and the risks from the producer to society -- hey, shit, that's socialism! -- while keeping the profits private. It is essentially no different than your next door neighbor breaking into your house and stealing all your wife's jewelry so he can resell it. From his perspective, he's just keeping production cost down like a good business man. That's what polluters do. They steal the quality of our environment and the very real and measurable economic productivity it offers, do not compensate us for that theft, and then keep the profits all to themselves.

Environmentalism is the wise management of the single most important economic resource mankind has, one that we literally cannot live without. All environmental problems are really problems of theft, which should not be tolerated in any economy. Such theft decreases the world's production, wealth, and future production capabilities. It is such overwhelmingly bad business to degrade the environment that environmental issues should not be political. The only reason they are is that "conservatives" are so unbelievably fucking stupid that they cannot comprehend what is obvious to everyone else. The environment has monetary value and the profits gained by degrading it are far outweighed by the loss of productivity and by the costs of repairing the environment.

John Bailo says

Are you now claiming that between the time the home was built and now the sea level has risen 2 feet?!

And what about NYC. If the sea level had indeed risen by that much, then it would have stayed flooded, not simply been flooded and then dried out.

Elevation for New York, NY is 186 feet

Elevation for Boca Raton, FL is 36 feet

And that's why I'm concerned about buying real estate and rising sea-levels. Will the federal government bail out my ass if people like the Captain are wrong? Fuck no.

John Bailo says

So, yes, hurricane refers to specific geographical area and yes, they have all but disappeared. The last Cat 5 was Andrew from 1992.

Fail.

Katrina (2005) was 920 mbar at landfall. Andrew was 922 mbar at landfall.

Dean (2007) was stronger than both, 915 mbar.

John Bailo says

a storm with a violent wind, in particular a tropical cyclone in the Caribbean.

So, yes, hurricane refers to specific geographical area and yes, they have all but disappeared.

First, the phrase "in particular" is not synonymous with the word "exclusively". Hurricanes do not have to originate in the Caribbean.

Second, a better definition comes from The National Hurricane Center, which is part of The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration or NOAA. Here's how the experts define the term.

Hurricane / Typhoon:
A tropical cyclone in which the maximum sustained surface wind (using the U.S. 1-minute average) is 64 kt (74 mph or 119 km/hr) or more. The term hurricane is used for Northern Hemisphere tropical cyclones east of the International Dateline to the Greenwich Meridian. The term typhoon is used for Pacific tropical cyclones north of the Equator west of the International Dateline.

I.e., hurricane, cyclone, and typhoon all mean the exact same thing and only arbitrary cultural preferences influence which synonymous term is used.

Booyah

Dan8267 says

And that's why I'm concerned about buying real estate and rising sea-levels. Will the federal government bail out my ass if people like the Captain are wrong? Fuck no.

They don't have too, God knows Citizen gets as much in Insurance thanks to YOUR scientists marketers, in just two years to totally replace my whole roof.

Second of all, try not to be so damn silly. The swath of damage from any given storm, is quite small when compared to a whole fucking state that is paying 500 times the true amount they should be paying. A bomb could level any City in South Florida and Citizens would still be in the black. The problem is the Insurance investors wouldn't make the quarterly profit, so it is those assholes that need FEMA to pay money that they should be paying. They are the ones that invested in Homeowner insurance.

FTR we haven't seen a major storm since 2005, and you're still hiding under a rock.

Dan8267 says

I.e., hurricane, cyclone, and typhoon all mean the exact same thing and only arbitrary cultural preferences influence which synonymous term is used.

Booyah

Hurricanes = Northern Hemisphere and rotate counter clockwise.
Typhoon = Southern Hemisphere and rotate clockwise.

I call you your Booyah and raise you Hell Yeah!

Unlike most that are gripped in total fear staring intently at their smart phone watching the Cone on the phone, to get their next crissis.

I have been following hurricanes for 30 years of my life, and have talked with a lot of Old Floridians about hurricanes when I first moved down in the early 80's.

CaptainShuddup says

Second of all, try not to be so damn silly. The swath of damage from any given storm,

It's not the storms I'm worried about. It's Florida being underwater. That's a very real possibility. Last time the Earth was just a bit warmer, Florida was underwater.

CaptainShuddup says

Hurricanes = Northern Hemisphere and rotate counter clockwise.

Typhoon = Southern Hemisphere and rotate clockwise.

I call you your Booyah and raise you Hell Yeah!

Which hemisphere the storm is in and which way it turns does not change the nature of the beast in any material way. Arguing nomenclature is pointless. Whatever people decide to call the storms, hurricanes, typhoons, or cyclones, they are all basically the same damn thing.

Differentiating them based on where they are located is like giving cars a different word based on where they are located. Differentiating them based on which way they turn is like calling a car by another name because of its color. It's a non-material difference and hence it's pointless to use different terms for them.

I wholly agree that pollution is bad for not only the earth but also mankind. That said, I don't agree that carbon dioxide counts as pollution.
The CFC/ozone depletion thing is an entirely separate case from purported global warming, but environmentalists used to talk about the two in the same breath so it's not surprising that people like the Captain get confused. Dan did lay that out nicely. One additional cause of ozone layer depletion is jet plane emissions, which are hot enough to form nitrogen monoxide which is a free radical much like CFCs can create when they break down, and can break apart the fragile ozone molecule which is unstable anyway.

Carbon dioxide is plant food, and a fairly weak greenhouse gas. It has increased in atmospheric concentration by a small amount over the last century, but other gases like methane and water vapor are far more effective at creating greenhouse conditions. This is why the chicken littles of the atmospheric science community keep missing with their predictions. Their models aren't correct. Their vaunted computer simulations don't model reality, garbage in garbage out (GIGO).
Rising sea levels are a fact, but the amounts are very small, less than a foot in the last two decades. Small pacific islands are ALWAYS sinking into the sea. This has more to do with the level of their surface dropping than the sea rising. Islands are born and die with regularity in that highly volcanic and tectonically active region. If the inhabitants wanted to keep their islands from sinking they could emulate Holland and build some dikes. Big sturdy dikes wearing flannel and Birkenstocks who would keep that water away just with the force of naked feminism!

Dan8267 says

Well, that's dumb and wrong. Let's just take a look at rising sea-levels, one of the most visible and undeniable effects of climate change.

quess that would explain the whale bones found in the sierra mountains...

http://www.science20.com/news_articles/ancient_climate_change_and_californias_coast_sierra_nevada_mountains

New research by a team of paleontologists from the University of California, Berkeley, the University of British Columbia in Vancouver, Canada, and the University of Utah paints a less catastrophic picture. Instead of a sudden die-off, the researchers say that the bone bed is a 700,000-year record of normal life and death, kept free of sediment by unusual climatic conditions between 15 million and 16 million years ago.

weather does not equal climate.

John Bailo says

Sea level...level...if water is rising many feet at one point to inundate islands than the coasts of all the continents would be flooding as well by that same amount.

Actually, that's not the way it works. But don't take my word for it. Take the word of the experts who's community and economy depends on stopping rising sea-levels. I'm talking about the good folks at the Oceanography Department at the University of Hawii. Read what they have to say about rising sea levels and its devastating economic and geological impact on Hawaii.

If that's not enough to convince you that rising sea levels are a threat to coastal communities including those in the United States, then no evidence will convince you because the truth doesn't matter to you.

To me the truth matters because any land I buy in Florida might go underwater before I die. That's a real economic concern. Especially when looking at this map of rising sea-level and coastal flooding zones. Hell, my entire city and every city in a 100 mile radius of me is in the danger zone!

Unless conservatives are willing to put their money where their mouth is and provide full coverage for our economic loss if sea levels continue to rise, I say they don't even get a say at the table where pollution control legislation is being made.

John Bailo says

Dan8267 says

Rising sea levels that are drowning islands

Sea level...level...if water is rising many feet at one point to inundate islands than the coasts of all the continents would be flooding as well by that same amount.

Rising sea levels erode susceptible regions more than others. A 3 foot elevation sandy island will drown much more quickly than a 3 foot rock...especially if there is no reef break for protection. However since hurricanes have been halted by the GOP, all islands are now safe.

...until further notice of course!