Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,588
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    LopezElliana
    Newest Member
    LopezElliana
    Joined

October Banter and discussion


CoastalWx

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 1.7k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

somewhat random banter: been reading a lot about this new IPCC report. does anyone actually care? does it change how anyone lives? i know it's meant for policymakers but still...aside from the crazy MET who cried and is now getting a vasectomy because of the IPCC report ( :lol: )....does anyone see a report on the news about IPCC projections and change their behavior / lifestyle?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I want that image

 

Here's one from up high on the mountain... looking due east with town down in the fog (I live down there somewhere) and then the 3,500ft ridgeline of the Worcester Range on the east side of Stowe.

 

The fog is like a topo map... here it's filling in all elevations of 1,000ft or lower.  Every piece of land you see is above 1,000ft.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

somewhat random banter: been reading a lot about this new IPCC report. does anyone actually care? does it change how anyone lives? i know it's meant for policymakers but still...aside from the crazy MET who cried and is now getting a vasectomy because of the IPCC report ( :lol: )....does anyone see a report on the news about IPCC projections and change their behavior / lifestyle?

 

Nope and if they did..what are they going to do to save the world?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Back to having big differences in the GEFS vs EC ensembles again. Look at the differences in AK.  Quick glance at the MJO and you can see why the GEFS is doing what it's doing.

 

 

Definitely some colder analogs now on the GEFS....2002 on their multiple times and even 2006. I'd still hedge strongly against a 2002 October though (and 2006). Maybe we get there late in the month, but I doubt 10/10-10/15 like they show.

 

Maybe the GEFS will be right...we can recall back in February when they insisted on the more favorable pattern through late Feb and early March when the Euro ensembles wanted more of a torch. Turned out the GEFS had a rare victory. But I wouldn't bet them this time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Definitely some colder analogs now on the GEFS....2002 on their multiple times and even 2006. I'd still hedge strongly against a 2002 October though (and 2006). Maybe we get there late in the month, but I doubt 10/10-10/15 like they show.

 

Maybe the GEFS will be right...we can recall back in February when they insisted on the more favorable pattern through late Feb and early March when the Euro ensembles wanted more of a torch. Turned out the GEFS had a rare victory. But I wouldn't bet them this time.

 

 I recall them having suppport from the GGEM ensembles and they do actually side closer to the GEFS this time around, but I'm hesitant to hop on that train right now. The UKMO also tries to move along the MJO so I suppose it's not out of the question.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

somewhat random banter: been reading a lot about this new IPCC report. does anyone actually care? does it change how anyone lives? i know it's meant for policymakers but still...aside from the crazy MET who cried and is now getting a vasectomy because of the IPCC report ( :lol: )....does anyone see a report on the news about IPCC projections and change their behavior / lifestyle?

 

it's meant for policy makers

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know some people are pretty scared of the future but seems to me the majority view global warming in tempered terms. Education and awareness is important and all of us doing small parts to reduce pollution of air and water is vital but the vitriol in that report is not taken as seriously by most. Older people I think have trouble believing alarmists simply because of what we were told as youth what the Earth would be like in

2013. Out of oil, seas way inland, massive Cat 5 hurricanes regularly, Gulf Stream stopping, ice caps melted, massive heat related deaths and on and on. Now they moved the goalposts because somehow the oceans absorbed all the heat. Climate changes we know that. With the approaching solar minimum perhaps in a way few expect.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't the euro ensembles want to build back the heat after July? While the gefs did not show that.

 

No they were actually pretty cool IIRC...they did briefly try and spike the heat way out in lala land on some runs in late July, but for the most part they showed us staying out of the heat.

 

 

Many of us did bite on the long range warmth coming back around Aug 10th...but once we got to within 10-11 days, they backed off on that idea. They showed cool for the 2nd half of August.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ocean acidification. co2 is a pollutant

 

Nothing we can really do except educate. You think any of these third world countries trying to get their economy going and spewing CO2 out really care about what we think in the US or any other modern superpower? They are the first ones to tell us to go sh*t in a hat.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Due to the Federal government shutdown,

NOAA.gov and most associated web sites

are unavailable.

Only web sites necessary to protect lives

and property will be maintained.

See Weather.gov for critical weather

information or contact USA.gov for more

information about the shutdown.

 

This is total BS and shame on the leaders/Webmasters for playing politics with Websites.  As an IT person, I know there is no technological reason why Websites can't stay up.  You should put a notice saying that the content is not being updated, but the fact that you're able to display a "Website not available" page means that the server is indeed up and that a calculated decision has been made to block users from accessing it.  They've done this to other .gov sites and it's just a means to play politics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is total BS and shame on the leaders/Webmasters for playing politics with Websites.  As an IT person, I know there is no technological reason why Websites can't stay up.  You should put a notice saying that the content is not being updated, but the fact that you're able to display a "Website not available" page means that the server is indeed up and that a calculated decision has been made to block users from accessing it.  They've done this to other .gov sites and it's just a means to play politics.

 

Bingo. Just let the site run.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...