Kiss My Ass Irene

@farmerman,

I guess if 6% of igneous rocks are found in sedimentary rocks then it proves that igneous rocks are formed in sedimentary rocks.

Or perhaps there are other reasons?

If 6% of the bodies in the solar system are warming, it's unlikely that the main cause is an increase in solar activity.

1 Reply

@parados,

Quote:

I guess if 6% of igneous rocks are found in sedimentary rocks then it proves that igneous rocks are formed in sedimentary rocks.

.

Thats why its better to fully understand as[pects of various sciences before you make conclusions like that. There are things called inclusions and breccias of igneous rocks within sediments. Also, anatexis can form igneous cores within sedimentary rocks

When the inner planets of the solar system are reported to be measurably warmer by reflectance thermography, thsy are of a mass significant enough to reflect the main source of energy (we call that the SUN). The bodies that are not warming are either of a lesser mass or are further from the sun . Sometimes science is what it is
Youve seemed to have a vested interest in global warming with no deviation in your opinion despite troubling evidence counter to that conclusion. I suggest that you be more open to all sides of the issue . There is a lot of real science that refutes human caused Global climate change.

Quote:

2 Replies

@JPB,

JPB wrote:

Heavy flooding in Wilmington as well. Bro says he has power but the water is coming up fast. He's on the Huntington River but the house is set back pretty far.

Haven't heard anything from my brother since this update. Have calls into him and his kids, but they're all in Vt as well.

On another note - the town of Newfane, which is the one in the news that is getting airlifted food and relief supplies, is a town that used to be called Fane a few hundred years ago. My mother's ancestors were residents of Fane and ultimately, Newfane.

1 Reply

@farmerman,

Quote:

Thats why its better to fully understand as[pects of various sciences before you make conclusions like that.

Interesting statement there FM.

Quote:

When the inner planets of the solar system are reported to be measurably warmer by reflectance thermography, thsy are of a mass significant enough to reflect the main source of energy (we call that the SUN). The bodies that are not warming are either of a lesser mass or are further from the sun . Sometimes science is what it is

Except that isn't really true FM.I would love to see your "science" supporting that statement.
Mercury, no evidence of warming that I know of
Venus, no evidence of warming that I know of
Mars, the claim for warming is based on 2 photos of ice caps taken 22 years apart. (If that is your version of science FM, then I think we have to assume you also believe igneous rocks are formed within sedimentary rocks all the time.)
Jupiter, equatorial area is warming, poles are cooling. (Jupiter is warmed more by internal forces than by the sun. It radiates more than double the energy it gets from the sun.)
The only planet that clearly seems to be warming is Pluto, which is not large and not close to the sun.

I think the problem here FM is your willingness to try to believe that other planets are warming when there is little evidence to support that claim. I would be more than happy to see your science but don't ridicule my lack of science until you can provide your own.

0 Replies

@farmerman,

Quote:

Youve seemed to have a vested interest in global warming with no deviation in your opinion despite troubling evidence counter to that conclusion. I suggest that you be more open to all sides of the issue . There is a lot of real science that refutes human caused Global climate change.

I don't think there is a lot of science that refutes it FM.

Just because something hasn't happened in the past isn't proof it can't happen in the future.You can argue all you want about historical warming in past eras but the causes of those warming periods don't preclude the possibility of other causes now or in the future. Would you argue that because there is no evidence of man made dams in the geological record it shows that man can't dam rivers? Would you claim that was good science?

2 Replies

@JPB,

I've been there - to Newfane. Such an incredibly pretty town from a photographer's POV. VT is really under the gun and it's by no means out of danger yet..as the many rivers are still swelling beyond flood stage. Brattleboro...Montepelier are in the news hourly. As an example, at least 3 famous covered bridges have been swept away. It's notable that they didn't get damaged (to my knowledge) by the past tropical storms or 'canes of the last 60 yrs. The 'L.I. Express', as the infamous Hurrican of 1938 was probably was the last significantly damaging storm to reach up to VT. Not sure just how much damage was done by Sept 1999 storm called Floyd.

1 Reply

@Ragman,

Just had an email from my brother. All's well there except they have to take the long way around to get into Richmond. I knew if I put it in writing then I'd hear something.

Yeah, it's really a mess; especially in Windham County, which is where I spent my first 12 years before moving to Burlington. My mother's peeps are all along the West River Valley in Newfane, Townsend, and Londonderry.

3 Replies

@parados,

Along those lines that you discuss, there's the issue of what is going under the earth's mantle..with the heat/dynamic activity from the earth's core. I see no mention of that and it's effect on 'global warming'. Whether or not there's proof of it warming or cooling and the effect that it has on our weather and weather extremes. The increase/decrease of volcanic activity is one related issue, but what of the effects on rise/fall of ocean temps and currents. etc...surface winds and jet streams.

I get the distinct impression that in some key areas that our earth science is meager in comparison and not well agreed upon, collectively understood or conclusive.

IMHO, earth science has been growing by leaps and bounds but it seems to me that we've barley crawled out of the dark ages - much less understand the causes of or even proven the existence of global warming.

What further baffles me is that the North Pole ocean is clearing of ice for the first time 'that we have record of '. This all makes me wonder how that can not seen as a significant event. An event worthy of reacting to. The question is how and/or in what way would be the effects that could help to ameliorate remedial actions/reactions.

0 Replies

@JPB,

Glad you had some relatively good news from the family.

1 Reply

@Butrflynet,

The power came back on at my cousin's house in Middleboro, MA yesterday. She's been trying to get through to the electrical company for the last 48 hours to have them help get the downed trees off the wires.

Everyone else seems to have faired well except for the massive amount of yard clean up work to be done.

0 Replies

@JPB,

I've close friends in Rutland and Wallingford. Luckily, there's someone taking care of their pets at their home while they find a way to get back to their home. This married couple got trapped (safely) separately and are both in different locations for the last 2 days. One was coming home from an out-of-state motorcycle vacation and the other was trying to get back home from working a 24-hr-shift at a hospital.

1 Reply

@Ragman,

Glad everyone is safe, Ragman.

Thanks, bfn.

0 Replies

@JPB,

Thanks. Also glad to read that your family is safe and sound.

0 Replies

Quote:

They know they missed it. Forecasters at the National Hurricane Center in Miami say when it comes to the strength of Hurricane Irene as it approached North Carolina, they know they were off. Way off.

“At least in the guidance we were looking at there was no indication of anything that would cause the storm to weaken. So, we thought we would have a Category 3 at landfall,” said Bill Read, the director of the Hurricane Center. Irene came in at a Category 1, the weakest. Read said there’s good reason they were so far off.

The science of forecasting how strong or weak a storm will become is simply not very good. With Irene, forecasters say they weren’t even as good as their five-year average.

“Every storm comes up with a surprise,” Read said. “In this case it was one where it went downhill. Charlie a few years ago is one that went uphill. Neither case did we see that coming, and that’s my measure of the fact that we have a long way to go.”

Which is a valid point for South Carolina, given that they did not know till the last 12 hours before landfall that this storm was not going to get stronger, thus the warnings and evacuations for SC were justified. (from 11 am 26th to 12 am 27th the storm stayed at 100MPH, then it dropped making landfall at 5 am 27th). It did not hit NYC till about 8 am 28th, long after ( a day and a half) after it was clear that the predicted cat 3 was not going to happen.

Quote:

Forecasters say that three out of four times you will likely be asked to evacuate and you’ll coming back saying "Why did I leave?"

But that fourth time, if you don’t, Read says, you’ll wish you had.

Crying wolf too often is what caused the Katrina problem, as citizens had long ago learned that government claims of impending disaster are unreliable, so as Katrina approached they blew off calls to take action. Government has not changed, they still will trump up the danger as they dont want to take any chance of underestimating, they would rather be wrong 10 times out of ten by overestimating. It is only a matter of time before the citizens go back to blowing off the government, so long as government refuses to reform, refuses to work to make the estimates more correct.

http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2011/08/30/how-irenes-forecast-missed-the-mark-and-why-it-could-happen-again/

0 Replies

@parados,

Quote:

I don't think there is a lot of science that refutes it FM.

There is quite a bit that refutes it. Much of it is IN the geologic literature .Imbrie stated before he died that we were 4500 years INTO the next interglacial epoch. Fred Singer published some good research on DAnagaard Oeschger cycles and AAPG/SEPM has published tens of articles on glacial chronostratigraphy that supports a "Ice First-CO2 following" theory.

The "Signature project" in which scientists were asked to sign a petition regardin their non-support of an anthropogenic Global Warming hypothesis.

The signature list just topped 40000 scientists of all relevant stripes.

2 Replies

@farmerman,

..I am not going neither way concerning global warming but just want to ask you what entity proposed the signature project and if the sample of scientists reflected in it are completely independent and reliable sources for the purpose ? who acknowledges that ?

1 Reply

@Fil Albuquerque,

The ptition was started by the Oregon Institute of SCience and Medicine. The director, a well known eccentric scientist did it as a bet and its grown in size and is getting in the way of the "Innumerable clkimate scientists " who, as Al Gore says, "belive in man induced global climate change". The fact is that there is no such program called "climate science" that Im aware of. The closest Im aware of is Meteorology.
Many of the scientists who signed the petition are earth scientists and geophysicists .

Ive not signed yet but am leaning towards signing. Ive been very cautious and have been quite open to discussions about GW and Im amazed at how , while the science proceeds and throws several bricks in the road about man induced GW, these findings keep being ignored.

EG CO2 is rising in the atosphere yet weve seen a significant cool down in the last 10 years globally.

CO2 as a leading indicator is under terrific scrutiny by lab analyses from ice cores and glacial varves and perma frost regions that are now melting.

GET ME RIGHT HERE. I dont think anypne doubts that climate is changing and the atmosphere is getting warmer. What I need to see is where is the definitive connection ?

2 Replies

I think you need to make it clear is that the connection you are looking for is climate change and human activity.

1 Reply

@farmerman,

Quote:

and Im amazed at how , while the science proceeds and throws several bricks in the road about man induced GW, these findings keep being ignored.

When you can ignore huge boulders, Farmer, bricks ain't nothin'.

0 Replies

@Setanta,

Quote:

I think you need to make it clear is that the connection you are looking for is climate change and human activity

What was I not making clear?

1 Reply

Kiss My Ass Irene

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know