happyhoix
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Oct 7, 2011 7:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 20,898
|
Post by happyhoix on Oct 23, 2015 12:57:40 GMT -5
Aren't you the one who continually says a weather event is not climate change. That standard applies to alarmists too. Or does fear mongering get it's own standard. The global Accumulated Cyclone Energy index shows that the last four years are at a 45 year low. The chart is in my second link on the previous post stating my point (#8). If you don't know what the ACE index is, it can be searched on google. Aren't you the one that said this? Looks like this year we ARE getting a super charged storm. So - maybe the fear mongering about climate change causing super charged storms isn't completely bullshit? Or is a class 5 hurricane, larger than any recorded in history, just not that super to you?
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 3, 2024 8:12:39 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 23, 2015 13:12:47 GMT -5
Aren't you the one who continually says a weather event is not climate change. That standard applies to alarmists too. Or does fear mongering get it's own standard. The global Accumulated Cyclone Energy index shows that the last four years are at a 45 year low. The chart is in my second link on the previous post stating my point (#8). If you don't know what the ACE index is, it can be searched on google. Aren't you the one that said this? Looks like this year we ARE getting a super charged storm. So - maybe the fear mongering about climate change causing super charged storms isn't completely bullshit? Or is a class 5 hurricane, larger than any recorded in history, just not that super to you? I'll need a little background on your claim. How long has the hurricane hunter planes been measuring the storms over the ocean. I would need a timespan for your "history" of these weather events. I bet it's only been for a short time span when it comes to climate change timelines. Regardless though, the ACE index still shows the last four years at a 45 year low in accumulated cyclone energy. That was my point by the way. Crying wolf over a single category 5 storm is just weather hyperbole. It's high speed winds only reach about 30 miles from the eye so far, making it small on the energy index. I'm not too scared, nor is any one else with a physics education.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 3, 2024 8:12:39 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 23, 2015 13:54:39 GMT -5
|
|
happyhoix
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Oct 7, 2011 7:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 20,898
|
Post by happyhoix on Oct 23, 2015 15:37:20 GMT -5
Yeah, well then, that makes it a totally lame storm then. Those people in it's path in Mexico are just stupid, non-physics majors for evacuating. Whiners.
|
|
Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger
Senior Associate
Viva La Revolucion!
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:22:04 GMT -5
Posts: 12,758
|
Post by Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger on Oct 23, 2015 15:55:39 GMT -5
How long has the hurricane hunter planes been measuring the storms over the ocean. I would need a timespan for your "history" of these weather events. I bet it's only been for a short time span when it comes to climate change timelines. These aren't the droids you're looking for.
|
|
verrip1
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 13:41:19 GMT -5
Posts: 2,992
|
Post by verrip1 on Oct 23, 2015 18:03:08 GMT -5
Because you'll get just as far (that is, nowhere) arguing with a True Believer as with a True Denier. Both see the issue as fully decided by Higher Authorities. As you say, this is not even a debate. However, you forgot to include the qualifier, "... if you believe". I am uncomfortable discussing with either, as I think you infer here. I do believe rational discussion would begin with a cautious acceptance of what most of the science community regards as settled.
Some of the "deniers", as you call them, are hell bent on preventing that starting point for discussion. I'm sure some of the "believers" would have us shut everything down and live in caves. Neither is conducive to productive conversation.
I don't really have a dog in this fight. I might have 30 years left on this planet, and I am in a relatively good clime to perch from, unlike much of the world. Of course if we all take that attitude rivers will start to catch fire again.
Well, you've expressed a dog in the fight with your last two posts. The believers are not limited to luddites; it includes everyone who has a starting point that the scientists have decided for all of us. Such as what you have expressed above. Why are "most of the science community" infallible? Were the "most of the science community" right when they organized against Pasteur's initial conclusions? Shall the litany of "most of the science community" being wrong historically be ignored as inconvenient? Why is it wrong for someone to argue that "most of the science community" may have been mistaken? Anyone who argues that the science is decided is a True Believer, whether they live in a mansion or a cave. It goes right along with the belief that more government control is the only viable method to deal with any issue. These are underlying precepts that a number of people hold, which make arguing the issue with them a predetermined failure. Their conclusion is also their precept.
|
|
OldCoyote
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 10:34:48 GMT -5
Posts: 13,449
|
Post by OldCoyote on Oct 25, 2015 8:52:17 GMT -5
|
|
Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 63,499
|
Post by Tennesseer on Oct 25, 2015 9:04:47 GMT -5
The strength of the storm is not disputable. It's most severe winds were over rural, mostly unpopulated areas of Mexico. It's breakup so quickly was caused by a huricane's worst enemy: moving over mountainous terrain. The mountains ripped it to shreds.
|
|
OldCoyote
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 10:34:48 GMT -5
Posts: 13,449
|
Post by OldCoyote on Oct 25, 2015 9:22:38 GMT -5
|
|
Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 63,499
|
Post by Tennesseer on Oct 25, 2015 10:03:55 GMT -5
I know you have never lived through or experienced a landfall hurricane as you live in Arizona, but here are a few facts. Look them up. The sustained winds to the right of a hurricane's eye are always the strongest as the storm churns counter-clockwise. The further away from the eye, the lower the sustained winds. The eye of the hurricane came through around the town of Cuixmala, which is between thee resort cities of Puerto Vallarta and Manzanillo. The driving distance between Manzanillo and Cuixmala is 106 km or 65.8 miles. The driving distance between Puerto Vallarta and Cuixmala is 178 km or 110.6 miles. The distance as the crow flies, I don't know. But I do know they are not close. A matter of a few miles from the eye of a hurricane can make all the difference between strong and severe. If you have ever experienced a hurricane (as I had a number of times when I lived in the northeast for over 40 years), you would know that. As for your video above, your video states it is showing the storm in Manzanillo and Puerto Vallarta, which again I will point out, is 65.8 miles and 110 miles respectively from the town Cuixmala where the hurricane and the strongest winds were located. Do yourself a favor and read up on hurricanes. Your 'gotcha' posts will be the death of you.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,131
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Oct 25, 2015 10:30:29 GMT -5
nobody disagrees that climate change is taking place, from what i can tell. we only disagree about cause and effect. if agreeing that Climate Change is taking place makes you "pro Climate Change" and you are NOT on that side, you are a very small minority.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,131
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Oct 25, 2015 10:34:20 GMT -5
|
|
Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 63,499
|
Post by Tennesseer on Oct 25, 2015 10:40:07 GMT -5
And for oldcoyote: Hurricane Patricia spares Mexican cities, roars through remote villagesHurricane Patricia caused less damage than feared on Mexico's Pacific coast on Saturday, but hammered an isolated part of the shoreline dotted with luxury villas and fishing villages, where the storm and its 165 mph (266 kph) winds landed. Thousands of residents and tourists fled the advance of the storm, one of the strongest in recorded history, seeking refuge in hastily arranged shelters. There were no early reports of deaths and it appeared major damage was averted as Patricia missed tourist centers like Puerto Vallarta and the major cargo port of Manzanillo. Patricia's ferocious core was relatively small, with hurricane force winds extending 35 miles (55 km) from the center, the U.S National Hurricane Center said. This meant Puerto Vallarta and Manzanillo were spared the worst. (your video, OldCoyote)The hurricane's center hit land on Friday evening near the area of Cuixmala, the NHC said. The area around Cuixmala is sparsely populated, but there are small towns, and it was not clear yet how much damage they had suffered. Hurricane Patricia spares Mexican cities, roars through remote villages
|
|
Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 63,499
|
Post by Tennesseer on Oct 25, 2015 10:49:04 GMT -5
Lies...lies...all lies! Never happened.
|
|
fishy999
Familiar Member
Joined: Aug 9, 2015 20:40:43 GMT -5
Posts: 629
|
Post by fishy999 on Oct 25, 2015 13:17:35 GMT -5
|
|
b2r
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 10:35:25 GMT -5
Posts: 7,257
|
Post by b2r on Oct 25, 2015 15:10:05 GMT -5
In the coming ice age, global warming, climate change we trust!
|
|
OldCoyote
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 10:34:48 GMT -5
Posts: 13,449
|
Post by OldCoyote on Oct 25, 2015 17:05:34 GMT -5
|
|
Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 63,499
|
Post by Tennesseer on Oct 25, 2015 17:51:38 GMT -5
Maybe you should read your own link 3-4 more times. Something just might sink in.
|
|
OldCoyote
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 10:34:48 GMT -5
Posts: 13,449
|
Post by OldCoyote on Oct 25, 2015 19:07:26 GMT -5
the picture and the interview if you want to call it that, show a house ,in the Mexican village of La Fortuna.
The house has a tin roof that most likely would not have stood up to a Cat. 1 hurricane much less a Cat 5 hurricane.
My only argument is that they exaggerated the strength of the hurricane.
|
|
OldCoyote
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 10:34:48 GMT -5
Posts: 13,449
|
Post by OldCoyote on Oct 25, 2015 19:24:28 GMT -5
The only other Cat 5 hurricane to hit the western shore of mexico, followed a similar path, That Time 1900 People died.
That would have been before Global Warming.
|
|
Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 63,499
|
Post by Tennesseer on Oct 25, 2015 20:04:01 GMT -5
The only other Cat 5 hurricane to hit the western shore of mexico, followed a similar path, That Time 1900 People died. That would have been before Global Warming. Here is your 1900 killed western Mexico. "In 1959, an unnamed storm struck near Manzanillo, killing about 1,800 people." 1959 is not 2015. Technology and building safer housing and buildings have advanced since then. The world's first weather satelite was launched in 1959 but was not a success. The first successful weather satelite was launched in 1960 and orbited for 78 days. The death toll in Manzanillo and the surrounding area was high because no one was prepared. No advanced warning as the storm was not predicted to hit the area. There was plenty of warning for the hurricane this past week. People evacuated. Your own link states where the hurricane landed the other day was sparsley populated. I do hope you know what sparsley populated means. Damage will be to the scattered, 'sparsley populated' villages in the area of landfall. Most damage will be to the vegetation and wildlife of the area. A look at deadly Category 5 hurricanes that made landfall History Weather satellite . 1959 Mexico hurricane
|
|
Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 63,499
|
Post by Tennesseer on Oct 25, 2015 20:09:40 GMT -5
The only other Cat 5 hurricane to hit the western shore of mexico, followed a similar path, That Time 1900 People died. That would have been before Global Warming. There was though an El Nino in 1959 just like there is an El Nino this year.
|
|
OldCoyote
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 10:34:48 GMT -5
Posts: 13,449
|
Post by OldCoyote on Oct 25, 2015 23:25:40 GMT -5
1900, boy did I type that wrong, I knew it was 1959,
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,131
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Oct 26, 2015 9:36:40 GMT -5
fewer people were killed, therefore it was a less severe hurricane. got it.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,131
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Oct 26, 2015 10:38:04 GMT -5
that this is the worst Pacific hurricane in recorded history to make landfall in the Americas is not conjecture. it is fact.
the accepted method of measuring hurricanes is barometric pressure, and this one was a record low.
argue against facts all you like. they will remain facts.
|
|
Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 63,499
|
Post by Tennesseer on Oct 26, 2015 11:25:14 GMT -5
It puzzles me why anyone would think meteorologists, scientists, and the like, would have any reason to lie regarding record setting sustained winds and central barometric pressure for a hurricane near and landing in North America.
What save the coast of Mexico from catastrophic damage was that the hurricane landed in a sparsely populated area, the population in the area was well informed and prepared, the storm had a very small eye (only 5 miles across) and its most damaging winds were no further than fifteen miles from the hurricane's eye. Add to that the storm was travelling extremely fast for a hurricane and immediately crashed into the mountains located right behind the coast line. And because it was travelling so fast, not enough rain fell in the mountains to cause killer mudslides.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,131
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Oct 26, 2015 12:32:34 GMT -5
the idea that this is some kind of conspiracy to sell global warming is utterly nuts.
|
|
mmhmm
Administrator
It's a great pity the right of free speech isn't based on the obligation to say something sensible.
Joined: Dec 25, 2010 18:13:34 GMT -5
Posts: 31,770
Today's Mood: Saddened by Events
Location: Memory Lane
Favorite Drink: Water
|
Post by mmhmm on Oct 26, 2015 12:36:28 GMT -5
I'm befuddled, as well. It honestly seems to me there are people out there who actually devote a good deal of time to looking for things to be worried about. There are enough events in most people's normal, daily lives to give them some cause for concern, at times. I can see absolutely no value in looking for more. If I run out of even slightly worrying events for a short time, I bask in the damned glow!
|
|
fairlycrazy23
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 27, 2010 23:55:19 GMT -5
Posts: 3,306
|
Post by fairlycrazy23 on Oct 26, 2015 13:10:29 GMT -5
Patricia was extremely strong, certainly one of the strongest every recorded, luckily it fizzled out very quickly when it hit land. Saying that it was one of , if not the strongest hurricane ever is not a conspiracy by the pro global warming alarmists. Saying it was directly caused by man made warming and we can expect this to become the norm, would be.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,131
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Oct 26, 2015 13:13:32 GMT -5
Patricia was extremely strong, certainly one of the strongest every recorded, luckily it fizzled out very quickly when it hit land. Saying that it was one of , if not the strongest hurricane ever is not a conspiracy by the pro global warming alarmists. Saying it was directly caused by man made warming and we can expect this to become the norm, would be. bingo. now, if we can find ANYONE who is saying that, that would be a discussion worth having!
|
|