Snowmageddon storm clobbers the Mid-Atlantic with 2 - 3 feet of snow

By: Dr. Jeff Masters , 11:08 PM GMT en Febrero 06, 2010

Share this Blog
4
+

It's a very white world in the Mid-Atlantic today, where the historic blizzard of 2010 has buried residents under a record-breaking two to three feet of snow. The storm, which President Obama referred to as "Snowmageddon" in a speech before the Democratic National Committee winter meeting, set the all-time record for heaviest snowfall in Delaware history, thanks to the 26.5" that fell in Wilmington (old state record: 25" in the President's Day storm of 2003). "Snowmageddon" dumped the second heaviest at Philadelphia 28.5"), second heaviest at Atlantic City (18.2"), third heaviest at Baltimore (24.8"), and the 4th heaviest at Washington D.C. (17.8"). Several locations in Maryland have seen over three feet of snow, with the northern Washington D.C. suburb of Colesville receiving 40", and the southern Baltimore suburb of Elkridge receiving 38.3". While the blizzard was not an exceptionally strong storm--the central pressure was a rather unimpressive 986 mb at the height of the blizzard, at 9am EST Saturday--it was an exceptionally wet storm. The melted equivalent precipitation for the blizzard exceeded three inches along its core snow belt. That's an phenomenal amount of moisture for a winter storm. The blizzard formed a very unstable region aloft where thunderstorms were able to build, and there were many reports of thundersnow during the height of the storm. These embedded thunderstorms were able to generate very heavy snow bursts of 2 - 3 inches per hour.

A new storm expected to affect the area Tuesday may add to the immense pile of snow on the ground, though the precipitation may partially fall as rain. With only a slow warm up in store for the mid-Atlantic over the next ten days, the snow will stick around for a while. This is a good thing, since a sudden thaw or heavy rain event could generate considerable flooding, if the three inches of precipitation locked in the snow is suddenly released.

Today's blizzard is the second major snowstorm of 16+ inches to affect the Washington D.C./Baltimore region this winter--the other being the 16.4" storm of December 19 - 20. According to the National Climatic Data Center, the expected return period in the Washington D.C./Baltimore region for snowstorms with more than 16 inches of snow is about once every 25 years. Thus, a one-two punch of two major Mid-Atlantic Nor'easters with 16+ inches of snow in one winter is something that should happen only once every 625 years. Such an event has not happened since the beginning of the historical record in 1870. The numbers are even more impressive for Philadelphia, which has had two snowstorms exceeding 23" this winter. According to the National Climatic Data Center, the return period for a 22+ inch snow storm is once every 100 years--and we've had two 100-year snow storms in Philadelphia this winter. That should happen only once every 10,000 years, in today's climate. Of course, the last ice age was just ending around 12,000 years ago, so this probability number has to be viewed with a some skepticism. Still, the two huge snowstorms this winter in the Mid-Atlantic are definitely a very rare event one should see only once every few hundred years.


Figure 1. "Snowmageddon", the Nor'easter of February 5 - 6, just off the Mid-Atlantic coast, at 12:01 pm EST Saturday 2/6/10. Image credit: NASA GOES project.

The top 10 snowstorms on record for Baltimore:

1. 28.2", Feb 15-18, 2003
2. 26.5", Jan 27-29, 1922
3. 24.8", Feb 5-6, 2010
4. 22.8", Feb 11-12, 1983
5. 22.5", Jan 7-8, 1996
6. 22.0", Mar 29-30, 1942
7. 21.4", Feb 11-14, 1899
8. 21.0", Dec 19-20, 2009
9. 20.0", Feb 18-19, 1979
10. 16.0", Mar 15-18, 1892

The top 10 snowstorms on record for Washington, D.C.:

1. 28.0", Jan 27-28, 1922
2. 20.5", Feb 11-13, 1899
3. 18.7", Feb 18-19, 1979
4. 17.8" Feb 5-6, 2010
5. 17.1", Jan 6-8, 1996
6. 16.7", Feb 15-18, 2003
7. 16.6", Feb 11-12, 1983
8. 16.4", Dec 19-20, 2009 (Snowpocalypse)
9. 14.4", Feb 15-16, 1958
10. 14.4", Feb 7, 1936

Top 9 snowstorms for Philadelphia:

1. 30.7", Jan 7-8, 1996
2. 28.5", Feb 5-6, 2010
3. 23.2", Dec 19-20, 2009
4. 21.3", Feb 11-12, 1983
5. 21.0", Dec 25-26, 1909
6. 19.4", Apr 3-4, 1915
7. 18.9", Feb 12-14, 1899
8. 16.7", Jan 22-24, 1935
9. 15.1", Feb 28-Mar 1, 1941

I'll have a new blog on Monday, when I'll discuss if record snow storms are inconsistent with a world experiencing warming. Have a great Super Bowl weekend, everyone!

Jeff Masters

cleaning up the cars (chills)
cleaning up the cars
Blizzard 2010 (TonyInDC)
Blizzard  2010
winter scenic (gingyb)
From the looks of the cars we may never dig out.
winter scenic
Hubby Tries to Clear the Snow. (Proserpina)
Hubby tried to use the snow-blower to clear the snow, unfortunately for him the snow is too deep for the snow-blower. The shovel and his arms will have to do the job.
Hubby Tries to Clear the Snow.

Reader Comments

Comments will take a few seconds to appear.

Post Your Comments

Please sign in to post comments.

or Join

Not only will you be able to leave comments on this blog, but you'll also have the ability to upload and share your photos in our Wunder Photos section.

Display: 0, 50, 100, 200 Sort: Newest First - Order Posted

Viewing: 129 - 79

Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15Blog Index

Quoting bassis:
I wish the Kind Dr. would start a Climate change blog and leave this one to non climate change discussion
Maybe just bann the corporate denialist?
Member Since: Septiembre 22, 2005 Posts: 11 Comments: 2032
Quoting drg0dOwnCountry:
About the scientific consensus ... must be a few days back.


Global warming articles on Wikipedia are extensively monitored and under probation. This means that disruptive editors can be temporarily blocked without warning. However I am against that because it would hinder additions that prove that global warming is having a drastic effect on ocean systems NOW.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Ossqss:



Not anytime soon ....

The Indian government has established its own body to monitor the effects of global warming because it “cannot rely” on the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the group headed by its own leading scientist Dr R.K Pachauri.


It could take more than 300 years, but will it? The false IPCC report doesn't neccesarily mean that the glaciers won't disappear in 25 years, but scientists are rightfully cautious with the more conservative figures, because the glaciers the main source of water for over a billion people in India, China, Bhutan, Nepal, Myanmar, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Vietnam, Laos, Thailand, Cambodia, and Turkmenistan.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting AussieStorm:

When will you stop your madness and stop scaremongering. It's all part of a cycle. and have you heard of El Nino???
Can you point out your claim in my comment please? I based my post on facts. If you want i can list it here for you to enjoy.

Further EL NINO can be attributed to GW. Maybe you start to acknowledge the facts. Australia will be one of those areas which suffer hard. How much heat does it need for you to understand??
Member Since: Septiembre 22, 2005 Posts: 11 Comments: 2032
I wish the Kind Dr. would start a Climate change blog and leave this one to non climate change discussion
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting AstroHurricane001:


"But when Willerslev's team dated their recovered DNA, they found that it was at least 450,000 years old. This would mean that the Greenland site must have been completely covered in ice 120,000 years ago."

That's before the Holocene, before at least four ice ages between then and now, and before human civilization was able to flourish.


Exactly, and it was green and warm :)
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Ossqss:


Here ya go. This is not a hard read :)

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn12201-oldest-frozen-dna-reveals-a-greener-greenl and.html

"Willerslev and his colleagues extracted hundreds of DNA samples from the ice 2000 metres down at the very base of the southern Greenland ice sheet, in a location known as Dye 3."


"But when Willerslev's team dated their recovered DNA, they found that it was at least 450,000 years old. This would mean that the Greenland site must have been completely covered in ice 120,000 years ago."

That's before the Holocene, before at least four ice ages between then and now, and before human civilization was able to flourish.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Wow, my Sister in law lives in Elkridge... she said about all you could see of her son was the top of his head when he was walking around in the snow today...

Amazing... 38"+ there...
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting drg0dOwnCountry:

It will only get worse ... 2 major blizzards, floods in peru, mexico, cali, saudi arabai, israel ... etc etc etc ...

Pentagon said climate change is a threat now ... WHEN THE HELL DO THEY START TO ACT and stop this madness?

When will you stop your madness and stop scaremongering. It's all part of a cycle. and have you heard of El Nino???
Member Since: Septiembre 30, 2007 Posts: 9 Comments: 15961
114. AstroHurricane001

It is the A in front that is the problem. GW has been happening since the 1800's. What proportion of the warming do you attribute to man? 3%,,,, at best? Any scientists here that can tell us ??????
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting drg0dOwnCountry:

It will only get worse ... 2 major blizzards, floods in peru, mexico, cali, saudi arabai, israel ... etc etc etc ...

Pentagon said climate change is a threat now ... WHEN THE HELL DO THEY START TO ACT and stop this madness?


When the world leaders are actually capable of cooperating on a global issue. If not, then the individuals must take charge. Link
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting AstroHurricane001:


Which comment was that? I can edit it back if it hasn't been already.
About the scientific consensus ... must be a few days back.
Member Since: Septiembre 22, 2005 Posts: 11 Comments: 2032
Quoting drg0dOwnCountry:

It will only get worse ... 2 major blizzards, floods in peru, mexico, cali, saudi arabai, israel ... etc etc etc ...

Pentagon said climate change is a threat now ... WHEN THE HELL DO THEY START TO ACT and stop this madness?



Not anytime soon ....

The Indian government has established its own body to monitor the effects of global warming because it “cannot rely” on the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the group headed by its own leading scientist Dr R.K Pachauri.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting breald:


yeap the 6 and 7 of Feb. I remember that storm very well.


I remember the February 2007 storm rather clearly:

Link
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting drg0dOwnCountry:
btw, the wiki link i posted is not correct - actualy it's from 2006. Someone must have sabotaged the wiki ... surprise.


Which comment was that? I can edit it back if it hasn't been already.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Ossqss:
I can attest that I checked all of the info that ATMO has provided, over a long period of time, and it is indeed accurate. He posts science and not propaganda.

Perhaps some of you could tell me what the sea ice in the arctic looked like when the trees were growing on Northern Greenland's coastline, or when the flora and fauna and bugs were in South Central Greenland for starters. Check the bugs, 2007 discoveries in mud from ice cores, verified by DNA folks. Can you find that on the AGW sites? Probably why you are not familiar with it.

Perhaps you can tell me the impact on high and low cloud formation by solar flux ?

To think we know, by virtue of limited models, the overall interaction of that which influences climate on a global level is just not realistic.

We have issues with this planet for sure and many are man made. Step back and look at the big picture.

We would not be having this discussion if science was not influenced by politics and it is far from settled :(

I still look for the truth, and have not found it yet.......


That state of climate was not seen while human civilization was around, and the current CO2 concentrations haven't been this high in 14 million years. Political influence is the exact reason why the debate still continues, while the science is prevented from progressing. Yes there are skeptical scientists, but they are missing the recent evidence that would most likely disprove their points. Focusing on every piece of evidence to try and disprove AGW is missing the bigger picture. Attacking the motivations of climate scientists is denial, and shows that one's arguments are weak. The world's faliure in Copenhagen coincides with the current abrupt changes in ocean circulation patterns that everybody missed while they were too busy arguing and forgot to look out the window. Global warming is happening, it has killed millions of people, and the skeptics are too busy attacking the science while the oil lobbyists give them money in their back pocket.

I say this is Gaia's revenge:

Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting AstroHurricane001:Sacrificing the future of humanity

It will only get worse ... 2 major blizzards, floods in peru, mexico, cali, saudi arabai, israel ... etc etc etc ...

Pentagon said climate change is a threat now ... WHEN THE HELL DO THEY START TO ACT and stop this madness?
Member Since: Septiembre 22, 2005 Posts: 11 Comments: 2032
Quoting drg0dOwnCountry:


Scientific opinion on climate change is given by synthesis reports, scientific bodies of national or international standing, and surveys of opinion among climate scientists. This does not include the views of individual scientists, individual universities, or laboratories, nor self-selected lists of individuals such as petitions.

National and international science academies and scientific societies have assessed the current scientific opinion, in particular on recent global warming. These assessments have largely followed or endorsed the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) position of January 2001 that states:

An increasing body of observations gives a collective picture of a warming world and other changes in the climate system... There is new and stronger evidence that most of the warming observed over the last 50 years is attributable to human activities.[1]

No scientific body of national or international standing has maintained a dissenting opinion since the American Association of Petroleum Geologists adopted its current position in 2007.[2] Some organisations hold non-committal positions.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_opinion_on_climate_change

Next.


In 1995, the IPCC 2AR was sabotaged by oil lobbyists from Saudi Arabia and Kuwait who insisted on weaker language. The skeptics and anti-AGW science lobbyists and hackers did it again in Copenhagen. Sacrificing the future of humanity, because it's cold outside?!
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting quasigeostropic:
Its amazingly sad that people are so gullible to believe that a trace gas like Co2 can destroy the planet, when the overwhelming constituent of trace gases are water vapor....and even the AGW crowd admits(like Jeff Masters) that computer models have trouble simulating such water vapor processes...Demanding that AGW is settled before settling such huge holes in our knowledge about water vapor(and other extremely complex processes) is really immature and just bad science!

And when you hear people say there is an AGW consensus, they are lying.

List of climate skeptics



Computer models are an oversimplicification that only predicts the averages and not the extremes, and while water vapor is a stronger greenhouse gas than CO2, CO2 is the one we have direct control over and many more tipping points in the climate system will likely be passed as the general trend in global temperatures is still upward.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Chucktown:
Thank goodness for global warming - could you just imagine how bad this storm would have been without it !! LOL


Actually, global warming may have made the winter storms worse since December 1. Look at the link of 2009-10 winter storms I posted again.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting OldLefty19081:


You want to give us a source for any of this, or are we just supposed to take your word for it?


Here ya go. This is not a hard read :)

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn12201-oldest-frozen-dna-reveals-a-greener-greenland.html

"Willerslev and his colleagues extracted hundreds of DNA samples from the ice 2000 metres down at the very base of the southern Greenland ice sheet, in a location known as Dye 3."
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting AstroHurricane001:


Does the animation go from 1 year to 2 years to 3 years...in terms of timespan or is year-by-year?


Cumulative 2000 through whatever year.
Member Since: Septiembre 9, 2008 Posts: 6 Comments: 3414
Quoting OldLefty19081:

I have no clue as to what you do for a living. I do know that manual labor is an honorable way to make a living so if digging ditches is what you do, you should be proud if you dig them well.

What I do is in my profile, and well known to most regs around here.

And I agree completely. Honest manual labor is a perfectly worthy endeavor.

And Oss must be dishonest as he keeps up with the new discoveries. LOL.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Ossqss:
I can attest that I checked all of the info that ATMO has provided, over a long period of time, and it is indeed accurate. He posts science and not propaganda.

Perhaps some of you could tell me what the sea ice in the arctic looked like when the trees were growing on Northern Greenland's coastline, or when the flora and fauna and bugs were in South Central Greenland for starters. Check the bugs, 2007 discoveries in mud from ice cores, verified by DNA folks. Can you find that on the AGW sites? Probably why you are not familiar with it.

Perhaps you can tell me the impact on high and low cloud formation by solar flux ?

To think we know, by virtue of limited models, the overall interaction of that which influences climate on a global level is just not realistic.

We have issues with this planet for sure and many are man made. Step back and look at the big picture.

We would not be having this discussion if science was not influenced by politics and it is far from settled :(

I still look for the truth, and have not found it yet.......


You want to give us a source for any of this, or are we just supposed to take your word for it?
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting atmoaggie:

You do know I don't really dig ditches, right? That was sarcasm...

Everyone one, I, too, am a lefty. (not sarcasm, lest anyone ponder...)

I have no clue as to what you do for a living. I do know that manual labor is an honorable way to make a living so if digging ditches is what you do, you should be proud if you dig them well.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting drg0dOwnCountry:
Spread doubt, uncertainty and let's waste more time.


You want doubts? Tell me what part of this article is incorrect as it relates to the UN activities. Forget the science controversy, focus on the UN activities and tell me where it is wrong ....... then check their website....

http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/02/ipcc_international_pack_of_cli.html
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
You are all cordially invited to attend the Christopher and Dana Reeve Foundations conference in New Orleans March 10.

The Foundation assisted with portlight.org with a 10,000 out of cycle grant to be used for Haiti Relief

The reeve foundation has worked with portlight since Post Katrina in New Orleans on other Disabled needs,ramps,..and mobility items as well.

Join us for this FREE presentation about the Reeve Foundations Paralysis Resource Center
Meet Reeve Foundation senior staff and ambassadors living with paralysis.

Learn about the Resource Centers free comprehensive information resources and referral services and its Quality of Life Grants
program.

Network with members of diverse communities, including: non- profit organizations, health care professionals and leaders in the dis-
ability community based in the New Orleans area.

Wednesday, March 10, 2010
9:00 a.m. - 1:00 p.m.
Registration and breakfast begins at 9:00 a.m.
Lunch will be served at noon
Location
American Legion Post #175 The Ridgeway 2431 Metairie Road

Metairie, Louisiana 70001-5211
Please RSVP by March 1, 2010 to:
pmehta@ChristopherReeve.org


Since 2002, more than 1.2 million people have used the Paralysis Resource Center services. This includes the Paralysis Resource Guide, resource-rich websites, trained Information Specialists, the largest library on paralysis in the nation and programs for diverse populations and injured veterans.
The Reeve Foundation has awarded more than 13 million dollars to more than 1,600 non-profit organizations.
The Paralysis Resource Center serves diverse communities across the United States through in-language websites, resources and translation services in more than 150 languages.

For more information and to RSVP: Priti Mehta, (505) 272-6751 pmehta@ChristopherReeve.org

The Christopher and Dana Reeve Foundation Paralysis Resource Center is funded through a cooperative agreement with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (Award No. 1U59DD000338).
Member Since: Julio 3, 2005 Posts: 426 Comments: 129089
Quoting Ossqss:
Spread doubt, uncertainty and let's waste more time.
Member Since: Septiembre 22, 2005 Posts: 11 Comments: 2032
Quoting weathergeek5:


Today is the anniversary of the blizzard of 1978 right?


yeap the 6 and 7 of Feb. I remember that storm very well.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
btw, the wiki link i posted is not correct - actualy it's from 2006. Someone must have sabotaged the wiki ... surprise.
Member Since: Septiembre 22, 2005 Posts: 11 Comments: 2032
I can attest that I checked all of the info that ATMO has provided, over a long period of time, and it is indeed accurate. He posts science and not propaganda.

Perhaps some of you could tell me what the sea ice in the arctic looked like when the trees were growing on Northern Greenland's coastline, or when the flora and fauna and bugs were in South Central Greenland for starters. Check the bugs, 2007 discoveries in mud from ice cores, verified by DNA folks. Can you find that on the AGW sites? Probably why you are not familiar with it.

Perhaps you can tell me the impact on high and low cloud formation by solar flux ?

To think we know, by virtue of limited models, the overall interaction of that which influences climate on a global level is just not realistic.

We have issues with this planet for sure and many are man made. Step back and look at the big picture.

We would not be having this discussion if science was not influenced by politics and it is far from settled :(

I still look for the truth, and have not found it yet.......
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting RabidWolf:
The odd thing is that my friend, with whom I went through the Boston area 'Blizzard of '78'", has just moved to Virginia, and now has a new 'Blizzard' to deal with.
Of course it will melt a lot faster there.

Ciao,
RW


Today is the anniversary of the blizzard of 1978 right?
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Member Since: Septiembre 22, 2005 Posts: 11 Comments: 2032
The odd thing is that my friend, with whom I went through the Boston area 'Blizzard of '78'", has just moved to Virginia, and now has a new 'Blizzard' to deal with.
Of course it will melt a lot faster there.

Ciao,
RW
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting quasigeostropic:
Its amazingly sad that people are so gullible to believe that a trace gas like Co2 can destroy the planet, when the overwhelming constituent of trace gases are water vapor....and even the AGW crowd admits(like Jeff Masters) that computer models have trouble simulating such water vapor processes...Demanding that AGW is settled before settling such huge holes in our knowledge about water vapor(and other extremely complex processes) is really immature and just bad science!

And when you hear people say there is an AGW consensus, they are lying.

List of climate skeptics




Scientific opinion on climate change is given by synthesis reports, scientific bodies of national or international standing, and surveys of opinion among climate scientists. This does not include the views of individual scientists, individual universities, or laboratories, nor self-selected lists of individuals such as petitions.

National and international science academies and scientific societies have assessed the current scientific opinion, in particular on recent global warming. These assessments have largely followed or endorsed the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) position of January 2001 that states:

An increasing body of observations gives a collective picture of a warming world and other changes in the climate system... There is new and stronger evidence that most of the warming observed over the last 50 years is attributable to human activities.[1]

No scientific body of national or international standing has maintained a dissenting opinion since the American Association of Petroleum Geologists adopted its current position in 2007.[2] Some organisations hold non-committal positions.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_opinion_on_climate_change

Next.
Member Since: Septiembre 22, 2005 Posts: 11 Comments: 2032
"I tried to build a dishwasher that unloaded itself, but the last test run went bad..."
Sure ...
Member Since: Septiembre 22, 2005 Posts: 11 Comments: 2032
Its amazingly sad that people are so gullible to believe that a trace gas like Co2 can destroy the planet, when the overwhelming constituent of trace gases are water vapor....and even the AGW crowd admits(like Jeff Masters) that computer models have trouble simulating such water vapor processes...Demanding that AGW is settled before settling such huge holes in our knowledge about water vapor(and other extremely complex processes) is really immature and just bad science!

And when you hear people say there is an AGW consensus, they are lying.

List of climate skeptics


Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting weathergeek5:


I would say young professional still like I am.

That works.

L8R, all. I tried to build a dishwasher that unloaded itself, but the last test run went bad...
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting atmoaggie:

LOL.
I guess that makes me what?
Not-yet-middle-aged lefty?

Is mid-30s too old to call young? (relative to a teen or 20-something)


I would say young professional still like I am.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Seastep:


Fair. I do agree that going from 2000 only is not a fair assessment. I'm doing the same gif from 1979. I only put that 2000 forward, reluctantly, to hopefully get some to realize what the obs are vs. the projections. Because I do think that is misleading, albeit accurate in validating the IPCC so far. But 10 years isn't enough.

BBL. Fam stuff.


Does the animation go from 1 year to 2 years to 3 years...in terms of timespan or is year-by-year?
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting OldLefty19081:


I'm thinking that 40-50% of the economy in Louisiana tis tied to the petrochemical business. Am I wrong?

I dunno. But most of our collaborators and clients are in Alabama, Florida, Indiana, NC, DC, etc. as well as a number of federal agencies.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting atmoaggie:

You think that is all we do down here?


I'm thinking that 40-50% of the economy in Louisiana tis tied to the petrochemical business. Am I wrong?
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting AwakeInMaryland:


What AtmoAggie says is true, OldLefty.

-- Middle-AgedLefty

LOL.
I guess that makes me what?
Not-yet-middle-aged lefty?

Is mid-30s too old to call young? (relative to a teen or 20-something)
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting OldLefty19081:


Wow, you really live in Louisiana? If you do, I gotta say that I have a hard time believing you. I'm guessing that's not the first time you've heard that.


What AtmoAggie says is true, OldLefty.

-- Middle-AgedLefty

ADD: I mean about that particular post. We disagree about CC somewhat, but his integrity and honesty are known to many of us who aspire to those same traits.

Greetings to SNOOOOOOW neighbors!
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting OldLefty19081:


Wow, you really live in Louisiana?

You think that is all we do down here?
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Thank goodness for global warming - could you just imagine how bad this storm would have been without it !! LOL
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting OldLefty19081:


Wow, you really live in Louisiana? If you do, I gotta say that I have a hard time believing you. I'm guessing that's not the first time you've heard that.

You do know I don't really dig ditches, right? That was sarcasm...

Everyone one, I, too, am a lefty. (not sarcasm, lest anyone ponder...)
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
THE GREATEST CRIME

Publication of deliberately false climate change data literally ought — i.e., MUST — be treated, not as a peccadillo, but as a Crime Against Humanity.

My remark here is not an expression of an emotion, but of an intellectual and humanitarian reaction of a scientist to falsification of data that could be as bad in its effect as long-term global warming itself, by permitting the latter to thrive, and acquire an egregious and panhumanly disastrous momentum.

If this were World War III such people would be shot, and with far, far greater warrant than even those human catastrophes.

A scientist is a kind of Protective Angel for Humanity. Why? Simply because he lives and breathes for Truth.

——— * ———

As for the falsifiers of data, or criminal social parasites, let me switch from the second to the first of my scientific careers, long ago at M.I.T., where I was — a then VERY rare! — theorist in neuroscience, trying to make sense of the human brain as a whole and all the astonishing behavior and abilities it gives rise to.

A SIDE interest of mine, then and later, was the queer and baffling, and decidedly chilling, phenomenon of the psychopath, a.k.a. sociopath. The essential trait of such people is that have little or no conscience, and yet they can be at the same time profoundly convincing to the layman — i.e., virtually all of us.

The incidence of these curious and horrific people in the body of the whole of humanity is estimated to be of the order of 1/200. This is misleading, however, because the pathology is a matter of degree, or properly illustrated by an intensity-frequency curve.

To put it simply, a psychopath can and does lie without a blink, either external or internal. And often does so for profit or simply out of total indifference to the harm he works upon the innocent and the virtuous.

I have little doubt that the purveyors of purposefully, and dangerously, falsified Global Warming data ARE in many instances psychopaths, whose falsifications tend to put ALL of us at risk.

Even heads of great corporations can be, in various ways and degrees, psychopathic. (Psychopathy probably had some partly useful — personal OR social — function in the long-ago past of Homo sapiens. It is certainly common enough in our politicians nowadays!)

— Patrick Michael Gunkel (Princeton, NJ)

POSTSCRIPT: Two decades ago I was neutral, but skeptical, about global warming. Later I realized that we simply could not tolerate the risks it potentially posed. One does not play games, or take chances, when essentially the whole of civilization and humanity MAY be in peril.

None of us can escape from the need for such caution, and where even the very survival of our species over Eternity may just be confronted with the possibility of extinction through carelessness or ignorance, or a shallow and selfish morality, or ideology or skepticism, or a universal involvement in petty and personal disputes between men fighting in diapers. (Phenomena we have seen often enough in World Wars and in Wars Ancient, but no less pathetic and mindless.)

In short, All of the Future hangs by a single tenuous thread from each and ever Present.
Member Since: Septiembre 22, 2005 Posts: 11 Comments: 2032
Quoting atmoaggie:

? I never been anything but honest here...and I think most regulars can believe that. And I think most are really tired of this discussion, as am I.


Who knows, maybe you really believe that. I think that most of the regulars would disagree,

It seems that you have your mission and believe that the ends justify the means. Sorry, but I just can't respect that.

We'll just leave it there.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting AstroHurricane001:


You shouldn't just compare the trend for one decade from year to year. The past decade had fairly stable global temperatures due to a combination of reduced solar activity and the water vapor negative feedback. Most of the factors preventing an acceleration of warming for the last decade look set to be removed this decade while more positive feedbacks take over.


Fair. I do agree that going from 2000 only is not a fair assessment. I'm doing the same gif from 1979. I only put that 2000 forward, reluctantly, to hopefully get some to realize what the obs are vs. the projections. Because I do think that is misleading, albeit accurate in validating the IPCC so far. But 10 years isn't enough.

BBL. Fam stuff.
Member Since: Septiembre 9, 2008 Posts: 6 Comments: 3414

Viewing: 129 - 79

Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15Blog Index

Top of Page

About

Jeff co-founded the Weather Underground in 1995 while working on his Ph.D. He flew with the NOAA Hurricane Hunters from 1986-1990.

Local Weather

Light Rain
52 ° F
Lluvia débil