EastonSN+ Posted February 25 Share Posted February 25 1 hour ago, LibertyBell said: No it's a pretty cheap thing to do. Experiments have already been conducted via balloons carrying these substances in the SW. I read that even island nations like Indonesia can do it. Their survival is at stake because island nations will be the first to go underwater with sea level rise. There is controversy surrounding it because the only other solution would be to relocate millions of people (and Indonesia is highly populated) to another nation. Australia doesn't want to take them in from what I've read. Any fool who doesn't believe that this has happening only has to look at what's been going on in these Pacific islands in terms of sea level rise and also sunny day flooding in Miami, Charleston and even the south shore of Long Island. Sea level rise is asymmetric and affects some coastal areas more than others. Gulf coast and east coast of the CONUS are affected much more than the west coast (for example.) We've already been relocating people from islands off the Louisiana coast. If it's cheap then hopefully they have a way to move it forward. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cleetussnow Posted February 25 Share Posted February 25 3 hours ago, forkyfork said: funny how the further back you go the colder it gets No shit! Preach on! 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
donsutherland1 Posted February 25 Share Posted February 25 26 minutes ago, EastonSN+ said: If it's cheap then hopefully they have a way to move it forward. The major concern about geoengineering is its unintended effects. For example, India would not be indifferent should the monsoon “fail” and it could attribute the failure to geoengineering. Other major powers would also be sensitive to events they attribute to geoengineering and at least some might retaliate against those whom they blame. 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LibertyBell Posted February 25 Share Posted February 25 59 minutes ago, donsutherland1 said: The major concern about geoengineering is its unintended effects. For example, India would not be indifferent should the monsoon “fail” and it could attribute the failure to geoengineering. Other major powers would also be sensitive to events they attribute to geoengineering and at least some might retaliate against those whom they blame. Yes in the models that were used lower monsoonal rainfalls were one of the predicted side effects of this. However, the big fossil fuel companies want it to happen since they think they will be off the hook and will be able to keep burning fossil fuels at the current rate. Either way, we'll have problems. The fossil fuel companies have their bases covered either way because even if less fossil fuels are used for energy they are themselves transitioning to using them in producing more plastics via petrochemicals. We are just starting to use plant based biodegradable plastics so hopefully we can cut them off at the pass. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MJO812 Posted February 25 Share Posted February 25 Maybe a chance around the 8-9 . We shall see. 1 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthShoreWx Posted February 25 Share Posted February 25 5 hours ago, EastonSN+ said: Sorry I have to disagree with you AND I stand corrected, the following is what frigid looks like, not what either of us posted..... What's 100 years to an AI? 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MANDA Posted February 26 Share Posted February 26 It's time. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EastonSN+ Posted February 26 Share Posted February 26 1 hour ago, NorthShoreWx said: What's 100 years to an AI? Actually the 1800s didn't have the coldest temperature LOL. Forky it didn't get colder the further back you go lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian5671 Posted February 26 Share Posted February 26 3 hours ago, cleetussnow said: No shit! Preach on! interesting some of Alaska was ice free then Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EastonSN+ Posted February 26 Share Posted February 26 1 minute ago, Brian5671 said: interesting some of Alaska was ice free then Negative EPO!!!!! Probably some warm Waters pumping up the ridge LOL. In all seriousness that's some serious lack of moisture. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jm1220 Posted February 26 Share Posted February 26 3 hours ago, cleetussnow said: No shit! Preach on! That’s what I call a rain/snow line. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brasiluvsnow Posted February 26 Share Posted February 26 " Turn Out The Lights The parties over They say that all good things,,,,,,,,,,," 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cleetussnow Posted February 26 Share Posted February 26 2 hours ago, jm1220 said: That’s what I call a rain/snow line. Yeah well the south got revenge on us this year. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cleetussnow Posted February 26 Share Posted February 26 2 hours ago, Brian5671 said: interesting some of Alaska was ice free then Look at that screw zone Iowa, Illinois, Wisconsin. Damn. Winters of yore in these parts though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthShoreWx Posted February 26 Share Posted February 26 4 hours ago, EastonSN+ said: Actually the 1800s didn't have the coldest temperature LOL. Forky it didn't get colder the further back you go lol. Once again the AI is wrong. It contradicts itself right in that screenshot. I assume you don't like to read past the top line. You shouldn't take shortcuts to prove dubious points. That's what politicians are for. I believe there was a -16 in the 1800s 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LibertyBell Posted February 26 Share Posted February 26 6 hours ago, EastonSN+ said: Actually the 1800s didn't have the coldest temperature LOL. Forky it didn't get colder the further back you go lol. It might have been colder in 1857 we don't know because of no official records however there was a day in January 1857 that was reported to be the only day on which the high temperature was below zero. Before that it was colder in the 1780s. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LibertyBell Posted February 26 Share Posted February 26 5 hours ago, jm1220 said: That’s what I call a rain/snow line. and 15,000 years later it's still there!! 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LibertyBell Posted February 26 Share Posted February 26 1 hour ago, NorthShoreWx said: Once again the AI is wrong. It contradicts itself right in that screenshot. I assume you don't like to read past the top line. You shouldn't take shortcuts to prove dubious points. That's what politicians are for. I believe there was a -16 in the 1800s 1857 and before then in the 1780s We don't really need AI for this stuff...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IrishRob17 Posted February 26 Share Posted February 26 4 hours ago, NorthShoreWx said: Once again the AI is wrong. It contradicts itself right in that screenshot. I assume you don't like to read past the top line. You shouldn't take shortcuts to prove dubious points. That's what politicians are for. I believe there was a -16 in the 1800s I was just looking at that screenshot and thinking it must a damn joke because of the contradiction but hey it's AI! 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MJO812 Posted February 26 Share Posted February 26 9 hours ago, Brasiluvsnow said: " Turn Out The Lights The parties over They say that all good things,,,,,,,,,,," Not yet. 1 more posible shot . 2 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heisy Posted February 26 Share Posted February 26 6z Ai, touch too tucked but on board for a major event for that 9th window. . 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heisy Posted February 26 Share Posted February 26 Here is the H5 leading in. Pretty sexy, wish we could have gotten this a few weeks ago though. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LibertyBell Posted February 26 Share Posted February 26 1 minute ago, Heisy said: Here is the H5 leading in. Pretty sexy, wish we could have gotten this a few weeks ago though . I think we did have this a few weeks ago lol-- it looks VERY familiar.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MJO812 Posted February 26 Share Posted February 26 42 minutes ago, Heisy said: 6z Ai, touch too tucked but on board for a major event for that 9th window. . Let the south trend begin a day before the storm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LibertyBell Posted February 26 Share Posted February 26 For the cyclic snowfall people, this site details them well. https://thestarryeye.typepad.com/weather/2015/03/an-extraordinarily-snowy-21st-century.html 40 inches of snow is considered a hefty amount for a New York winter, a total that's about 50% above average. Over the years, winters with this much snow have occurred once every four years. This average, however, masks extended periods with and without snowy winters. For example, winters between 1873 and 1923 averaged snowfall of 40 inches or more once every three years, but then the 24-year period that followed (between 1924 and 1947) had just one snowy winter. More recently there was a 26-year period between 1968 and 1993 that also had just one. Most recently, New York found itself in the midst of an abundance of snowy winters, the most recent being the winter of 2017-18. Specifically, nine of the sixteen winters between 2003-2018 had 40 inches or more of snow, an unprecedented concentration (including four winters in a row). Of the five winters that didn't see this much, three were well below average (under 13") and the other two picked up an average amount of snow. (The three winters after 2018 have each had less than 40", but winter 2020-21 came close, with 38.6" measured.) PEAKS & VALLEYS OF WINTERS WITH 40 INCHES+ SNOWFALL # of # of Winters % with Time Period Winters 40"+ Snow 40"+ Snow All Winters 152 36 24% 1870-1872 3 0 0% 1873-1923 51 17 33% 1924-1947 24 1 4% 1948-1967 20 6 30% 1968-1993 26 1 4% 1994-2002 9 2 22% 2003-2018 16 9 56% Source: NWS New York Office 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian5671 Posted February 26 Share Posted February 26 The problem with all this is that it's too amped in the mid and long range....been the same thing all season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LibertyBell Posted February 26 Share Posted February 26 11 minutes ago, LibertyBell said: For the cyclic snowfall people, this site details them well. https://thestarryeye.typepad.com/weather/2015/03/an-extraordinarily-snowy-21st-century.html 40 inches of snow is considered a hefty amount for a New York winter, a total that's about 50% above average. Over the years, winters with this much snow have occurred once every four years. This average, however, masks extended periods with and without snowy winters. For example, winters between 1873 and 1923 averaged snowfall of 40 inches or more once every three years, but then the 24-year period that followed (between 1924 and 1947) had just one snowy winter. More recently there was a 26-year period between 1968 and 1993 that also had just one. Most recently, New York found itself in the midst of an abundance of snowy winters, the most recent being the winter of 2017-18. Specifically, nine of the sixteen winters between 2003-2018 had 40 inches or more of snow, an unprecedented concentration (including four winters in a row). Of the five winters that didn't see this much, three were well below average (under 13") and the other two picked up an average amount of snow. (The three winters after 2018 have each had less than 40", but winter 2020-21 came close, with 38.6" measured.) PEAKS & VALLEYS OF WINTERS WITH 40 INCHES+ SNOWFALL # of # of Winters % with Time Period Winters 40"+ Snow 40"+ Snow All Winters 152 36 24% 1870-1872 3 0 0% 1873-1923 51 17 33% 1924-1947 24 1 4% 1948-1967 20 6 30% 1968-1993 26 1 4% 1994-2002 9 2 22% 2003-2018 16 9 56% Source: NWS New York Office https://thestarryeye.typepad.com/weather/2013/01/new-york-city-snowstorms-1979-2011-.html March 1, 1914- Rain in the morning changed to snow around lunchtime and by midnight 13.5" had accumulated (an additional inch fell after midnight on 3/2). It was a very heavy, wet snow with a high water content (2.65") until around 9 PM when Arctic air moved in. This was the century's first snowstorm of a foot or more, and the first since February 1899, when 16 inches piled up. This remains the longest period between snowstorms of 12 inches or more. So interesting the first footer of the 1900s didn't happen until 1914. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MJO812 Posted February 26 Share Posted February 26 Euro MJO gets stuck in 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EastonSN+ Posted February 26 Share Posted February 26 8 hours ago, NorthShoreWx said: Once again the AI is wrong. It contradicts itself right in that screenshot. I assume you don't like to read past the top line. You shouldn't take shortcuts to prove dubious points. That's what politicians are for. I believe there was a -16 in the 1800s Nah I am just missing around with Forky. He usually trolls the New England forum so just wanted to mess with him since he gets angy at someone thinking it's cold outside. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LibertyBell Posted February 26 Share Posted February 26 1 minute ago, EastonSN+ said: Nah I am just missing around with Forky. He usually trolls the New England forum so just wanted to mess with him since he gets angy at someone thinking it's cold outside. the new england forum is a little anal retentive, although I find it interesting how they don't have as much conflict in north vs south, inland vs coast, even though they cover a much larger area. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now