dresi
Level 3 Rank
Posts: 120
|
Post by dresi on Nov 30, 2008 9:55:22 GMT
Well, about cold Europe. Right now 14°C above average here in Czech Republic. Warm weather continues. Winter is starting tommorow, snow and cold far away. Extreme hot in Russia. Cold north-west can't bring winter to central Europe. God I hope, we won't have warm winter for third time in row
|
|
|
Post by twawki on Nov 30, 2008 12:22:23 GMT
Well, about cold Europe. Right now 14°C above average here in Czech Republic. Warm weather continues. Winter is starting tommorow, snow and cold far away. Extreme hot in Russia. Cold north-west can't bring winter to central Europe. God I hope, we won't have warm winter for third time in row If it is as you say in the Czech republic then why are the newspapers reporting the snow resorts opening earlier than normal? "The report also says that Eastern European ski areas have begun to open. with seven centres reported open in the Slovak Republic and 18, including major centres like Špindleruv Mlyn, Harrachov and Pec pod Sněžkou in the Czech Republic. " www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/travel/winter_sports/article5238245.eceand the news reports about Russia are as follows; " Nov. 24 (Bloomberg) -- Residents in Sweden, Finland and Russia were left stranded and without power for a second day as the year’s first winter storm pummeled northern Europe. Flights were delayed in Helsinki and Stockholm as northern winds forced airports to shut runways. Snow blanketed the region and the wind blew what had accumulated since the storm hit yesterday. Thousands were without power. The storm buried the region with up to 30 centimeters (11.8 inches) of snow, catching locals unprepared after last winter, the mildest on record. The bare ground then forced Helsinki and Stockholm residents to cancel outdoor activities such as skiing and sledding. " www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601085&sid=asVhNI1mGS.I&refer=europe
|
|
|
Post by alex4ever on Nov 30, 2008 12:41:38 GMT
|
|
|
Post by alex4ever on Nov 30, 2008 12:50:57 GMT
And just for info you are going to have a not-so-strong cold spell by 2 of Dec, but is only gonna last a day or two... Next cold spell to your place is about to take place in 7 of Dec. We will study how strong that will be. It is far til that time to know clearly.
|
|
dresi
Level 3 Rank
Posts: 120
|
Post by dresi on Nov 30, 2008 13:08:57 GMT
alex4ever: Right now, we have strong south wind which drifted temperature up. It's really over 10 degrees above average right now. I don't expect 90 days of cold and snow. I'm just too pessimistic after two years of...well...nothing ;D I know, it's hapenning every year, traditional early December temperature rise, but as I said, I'm just too pessimistic right now, about this year winter twawki: Mountains are ok, in case, that these high temperature won't last too long But last year, ski resorts opened even sooner, then this year, because of low temps, but it wasn't natural snow. Don't get me wrong, last week, we had cold and snow, but these jumps from really cold to really warm aren't too good. I know, I'm panicking ;D
|
|
|
Post by alex4ever on Nov 30, 2008 16:22:45 GMT
See the Winter watch 2008 Section what woodstove said. I wonder how fast it will cold there ;D
|
|
|
Post by alex4ever on Nov 30, 2008 18:17:50 GMT
Hey look at this article, what do you have to say about this? How can people say a different thing about same place at same time? This is rediculous... www.mcclatchydc.com/144/story/54229.html Is this cold there or warm? Ice advancing or not? ;D
|
|
|
Post by kiwistonewall on Nov 30, 2008 19:14:40 GMT
That's trotting out a 2007 report - I've seen that happen a few times. Alaskan waters in the north Pacific (Bering straight is now ice) are in a cold anomaly (Part of the PDO going -ve I think). It is still warm from the gulf stream north of England.
|
|
|
Post by jorgekafkazar on Nov 30, 2008 19:26:33 GMT
Hey look at this article, what do you have to say about this? How can people say a different thing about same place at same time? This is rediculous... www.mcclatchydc.com/144/story/54229.html Is this cold there or warm? Ice advancing or not? ;D Well, it's propaganda. Notice how they put in the notion of a "tipping point" without saying "tipping point?" Remember, the article was mostly about autumn of 2007. Also, there is evidence of volcanism in the arctic, something the article conveniently didn't mention. The article has some fallacious thinking, too. The fallacy here is called "argumentem ad numerum." There's possibly a bit of "unrepresentative sample," too, and some "appeal to authority." "...the ocean is warming and causing global sea levels to rise even faster than predicted, according to the Arctic Report Card, the product of 46 scientists from 10 countries." What kind of scientists? Which scientists? How were they chosen? Deponent saith not. Why is the fact they came from 10 countries somehow important? Is there some critical number of countries that will guarantee a non-random sample is free of prejudiced members?
|
|
|
Post by twawki on Nov 30, 2008 23:57:47 GMT
Hey look at this article, what do you have to say about this? How can people say a different thing about same place at same time? This is rediculous... www.mcclatchydc.com/144/story/54229.html Is this cold there or warm? Ice advancing or not? ;D Well, it's propaganda. Notice how they put in the notion of a "tipping point" without saying "tipping point?" Remember, the article was mostly about autumn of 2007. Also, there is evidence of volcanism in the arctic, something the article conveniently didn't mention. The article has some fallacious thinking, too. The fallacy here is called "argumentem ad numerum." There's possibly a bit of "unrepresentative sample," too, and some "appeal to authority." "...the ocean is warming and causing global sea levels to rise even faster than predicted, according to the Arctic Report Card, the product of 46 scientists from 10 countries." What kind of scientists? Which scientists? How were they chosen? Deponent saith not. Why is the fact they came from 10 countries somehow important? Is there some critical number of countries that will guarantee a non-random sample is free of prejudiced members? A recent report out on sea levels says about 1.4-1.6mm rise per year with a +/- tolerance of about 0.4mm au.youtube.com/watch?v=cJ1vBca0Dic&eurl=http://www.co2science.org/education/truthalerts/v11/sealevelrise.phpguess the media didnt see that one!
|
|
|
Post by twawki on Dec 1, 2008 0:00:20 GMT
alex4ever: Right now, we have strong south wind which drifted temperature up. It's really over 10 degrees above average right now. I don't expect 90 days of cold and snow. I'm just too pessimistic after two years of...well...nothing ;D I know, it's hapenning every year, traditional early December temperature rise, but as I said, I'm just too pessimistic right now, about this year winter twawki: Mountains are ok, in case, that these high temperature won't last too long But last year, ski resorts opened even sooner, then this year, because of low temps, but it wasn't natural snow. Don't get me wrong, last week, we had cold and snow, but these jumps from really cold to really warm aren't too good. I know, I'm panicking ;D hot/cold oscillations are typical or spring and autumns why wasnt the snow natural?
|
|
|
Post by twawki on Dec 1, 2008 0:02:20 GMT
excerpt from recent article; blogs.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/piersakerman/index.php/dailytelegraph/comments/questions_a_plenty_on_global_warming/"Further, the complete span of scientific evidence supports those on the side of those sceptics and deniers and not Rudd or his claque, his beloved United Nations and its political tool, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. With the study of science in Australian schools at a critically low ebb, and Green fundamentalism on the rise, particularly within your ABC and the Fairfax media, the global warming mantra has become dogma to many. The science has been ignored in the Green religious fervour. Professor Ian Plimer, a professor of geology at the University of Adelaide and former head of the school of earth sciences at the University of Melbourne, is an Einsteinian scientist. Unlike the narrow-minded, he relishes the big questions. In a new book to be titled Heaven and Earth, which will be available early next year, he points out that the IPCC modelling upon which the global warming apocalyptists base their catastrophic scenarios overlook some basic facts, including the actual history of the planet. Earth’s climate, he notes, has always been cyclical. It has warmer periods and cooler periods. Since the Pleistocene Ice Age (110,000-14,700 years ago) was followed by the Bolling (14,700-13,900 years ago), the cycles have seen the Older Dryas followed by the Allerod, the Younger Dryas by the Holocene warming, the Egyptian cooling by the Holocene warming, the Akkadian cooling by the Minoan warming, the Bronze Age cooling by the Roman warming, the Dark Ages by the Mediaeval warming, and the Little Ice Age (1300 AD-1850) by the present. Further, atmospheric levels of carbon dioxide, currently demonised, have in the past been many time higher while Earth was actually cooler than it is now. Professor Plimer asks why this science is ignored. He would also like to know why the IPCC’s models, used by Rudd and Garnaut to justify policies, do not include the heat and C02 emissions from 85 per cent of the world’s volcanoes, those under the oceans lying along 64,000km of mid-ocean ridges? "
|
|
|
Post by kelken on Dec 3, 2008 15:58:45 GMT
Are they Crazy..........If we are entering into a maunder or Dalton type cooling period......what will this do? Just a questionScientists Discuss Replicating Volcano’s Effect to Cool Climate December 1, 2008 By Sara Burrows CNS News Scientists discussed the merits and demerits of pumping sulfur into the Earth’s atmosphere as a temporary “fix” to global warming at a forum hosted in Washington, D.C., on Nov. 21 by the American Meteorological Society (AMS). Photo: This NOAA satellite image taken Wednesday, Nov. 19, 2008 at 2:15 PM EST shows cloud coverage across the Great Lakes and Northeast as storm systems generate lake-effect snow shower activity. (AP / Weather Underground) The idea is to artificially re-create the effects of volcanic eruptions to temporarily cool the planet. In 2006, Nobel Prize-winning chemist Paul Crutzen and National Center for Atmospheric Research Senior Scientist Tom Wigley suggested that “geo-engineering” might be used as a quick, but temporary, remedy for global warming. This idea was one of the issues discussed at the AMS forum. “In particular, Crutzen and Wigley focused on blocking incoming solar radiation, an idea that has generated much interest in the press and the scientific community,” the AMS explained in a posting on the forum on its Web site. “Nature offers an example of how to do this. Volcanic eruptions cool the climate for up to a couple of years by injecting precursors to sulfate aerosol particles into the stratosphere, which has the effect of temporarily blocking incoming sunlight.” The AMS, however, indicated that it is worried that geo-engineering of this type has the potential to create more problems than it solves. On its Web site (ametsoc.org), it lists depletion of the ozone layer, a reduction in rainfall, and an unknown impact on plant life as some of the undesirable potential side effects of geo-engineering. Injecting sulfur into the atmosphere would also cost taxpayers. “Nobody knows what a system would cost,” Alan Robock, a professor of atmospheric science at Rutgers, said at the forum. “There have been estimates it would cost from $10 to $100 billion dollars a year to counteract the warming that’s going on.” Even though Robock said he is concerned about the long list of potential problems associated with geo-engineering, he said society may get to the point where it has no choice but to use an emergency measure like sulfur injections to cool global temperatures. Anthony Socci, a senior science fellow at AMS, agreed. “This problem is coming at us faster and larger than we thought. We may find ourselves backed against a wall and be forced to look at these temporary solutions in a more serious way,” he said. Fred Singer, professor emeritus of environmental science at the University of Virginia, does not see the human race getting backed against a wall by global warming. “My feeling is global warming is not a problem. It’s not a threat. Therefore all of these fancy schemes are not only useless but a waste of resources,” he told CNSNews.com. In Unstoppable Global Warming, a book he co-wrote with Dennis T. Avery, Singer argues that the Earth goes through natural warming and cooling cycles every 1,500 years. He agrees that we are presently experiencing a warming trend, but does not think it is dangerous. Singer says geo-engineering schemes like sulfur injections are expensive, useless and dangerous. “It’s like trying to turn the sun off … it makes no sense,” he said. www.cnsnews.com/public/content/article.aspx?RsrcID=40003
|
|
|
Post by kelken on Dec 3, 2008 16:04:18 GMT
|
|
|
Post by dopeydog on Dec 3, 2008 16:14:32 GMT
quote from above:
"Scientists discussed the merits and demerits of pumping sulfur into the Earth’s atmosphere as a temporary “fix” to global warming at a forum hosted in Washington, D.C., on Nov. 21 by the American Meteorological Society (AMS)."
These people are scary beyond belief!!!
|
|