NorthShoreWx Posted January 18, 2011 Share Posted January 18, 2011 I'm not touching this, just passing it on. Geologists now replacing NSSL and op forecasters in California, it would seem: http://news.yahoo.co...nter-superstorm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snow Wizard Posted January 18, 2011 Share Posted January 18, 2011 I'm not touching this, just passing it on. Geologists now replacing NSSL and op forecasters in California, it would seem: http://news.yahoo.co...nter-superstorm There is some merit to this. In the winter of 1861-62 California had flooding that would cause tens of billions of dollars in damage if it ocurred today. Interestingly this corresponded with a historic cold in the Pacific NW that brought Chicago like temperatures to Seattle for weeks on end. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Qaanaaq Posted January 18, 2011 Share Posted January 18, 2011 There is some merit to this. In the winter of 1861-62 California had flooding that would cause tens of billions of dollars in damage if it ocurred today. Interestingly this corresponded with a historic cold in the Pacific NW that brought Chicago like temperatures to Seattle for weeks on end. There's a long rock record that substantiates such catalysmic events- the Appalachians have recorded many, many such events. I have a piece of red spruce carbon dated 36,000 years old that deposited under 40 feet of debris in Madison County, Virginia and unearthed by the 30 inches of rain in 1995 http://landslides.usgs.gov/recent/archives/1997kinsey.php Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goldstar Posted January 18, 2011 Share Posted January 18, 2011 http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2010/1312/of2010-1312_text.pdf Here is the gov released study in PDF. Enjoy! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthShoreWx Posted January 18, 2011 Author Share Posted January 18, 2011 http://pubs.usgs.gov...0-1312_text.pdf Here is the gov released study in PDF. Enjoy! Good stuff. Thanks. This is better reading wthout the Yahoo sensationalism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aslkahuna Posted January 18, 2011 Share Posted January 18, 2011 Weatherwise had an article about the 1861-62 floods in CA some time back and it's that flood that forms the basis for the USGS study. A similar pattern but of shorter duration in December 1955 caused massive flooding in CA which killed 78 people and did 350 million 1955 dollars worth of damage in a state with less than half its current population. Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ApacheTrout Posted January 18, 2011 Share Posted January 18, 2011 I'm not touching this, just passing it on. Geologists now replacing NSSL and op forecasters in California, it would seem: http://news.yahoo.co...nter-superstorm Why won't' you touch this? Is it because you don't understand the science of geology? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BTRWx Posted January 18, 2011 Share Posted January 18, 2011 Should this have been on the Yahoo homepage? The article topic is interesting, but Yahoo makes it look like breaking news. Thanks for the link to the published report! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed Lizard Posted January 18, 2011 Share Posted January 18, 2011 Lucille Jones is an attention junkie, IMHO. She was on TV a lot when I lived in Cali always hyping earthquakes. Cali is obviously a good place to hype earthquakes, and maybe the geologic record suggests the occasional heavy rain event in California, but as a seismologist she has little or no training in atmospheric sciences. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthShoreWx Posted January 18, 2011 Author Share Posted January 18, 2011 Why won't' you touch this? Is it because you don't understand the science of geology? It is because I did not wish to be associated with the sensational way that story was presented on Yahoo. I am not sure that I understand your second question but I assume that it is just trolling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed Lizard Posted January 18, 2011 Share Posted January 18, 2011 The risk is gathering momentum now, scientists say, due to rising temperatures in the atmosphere, which has generally made weather patterns more volatile. I like that there is some evidence of a significant flood event in the geological record every few hundred years, but if it ever happens again, it will be global warming, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthShoreWx Posted January 18, 2011 Author Share Posted January 18, 2011 I think your reference of "wacky" is a bit unfair and somewhat offensive given the list of some very distinguished scientists and organizations. Agreed. I updated the thread subtitle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ApacheTrout Posted January 18, 2011 Share Posted January 18, 2011 It is because I did not wish to be associated with the sensational way that story was presented on Yahoo. I am not sure that I understand your second question but I assume that it is just trolling. .I see you changed the sub-title of the thread, which much better reflects what I now understand to be your intent. You can call my second question "trolling" if you like, but I was more interested in learning if you were dismissing the report because it was done by geologists, much in the way that creationists scoff at geologists with their "evidence" of dinosaur fossils when everyone knows that the Big Chief created the world some 6,000 years ago, and that the bones were put there by said Big Chief in order to test our faith. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wi_fl_wx Posted January 18, 2011 Share Posted January 18, 2011 It just seems like common sense. The earth now is clearly warmer than 1850. A warm earth has more moisture in the atmosphere. If a similar setup occurs today, there will be more rain and it will have an exponentially greater impact due to increased land use and sensitivity to flooding. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Qaanaaq Posted January 18, 2011 Share Posted January 18, 2011 It just seems like common sense. The earth now is clearly warmer than 1850. A warm earth has more moisture in the atmosphere. If a similar setup occurs today, there will be more rain and it will have an exponentially greater impact due to increased land use and sensitivity to flooding. I have not read the entire 200 page report, but I don't think this report was motivated by global temperatures or the suspician that there would be more water available. The fact is, these events occur every so often (perhaps every several hundred years or so) and catastrophic rainfall will happen again- count on it. Since 1971 I have witnessed three such events on the eastern slopes of the Blue Ridge in Virginia- feet of rain, landslides, debris flows and deaths. Mostly in very unpopulated, rural areas. The consequence of these occurring in a populated regions is frightening. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stellarfun Posted January 18, 2011 Share Posted January 18, 2011 Already a thread on this. With more links to the underlying science. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aslkahuna Posted January 18, 2011 Share Posted January 18, 2011 Agreed. I updated the thread subtitle. Just a question-how can saying the an event that has happened before and therefore could happen again with much more severe impact than the last time it occurred could possibly be construed as sensationalism? The type of pattern referred to is merely an unusually robust Pineapple Express and given the other circumstances that go along with it outside of CA is more likely to occur during a La Niña winter with a -PDO. It also has nothing to do with Climate Change but is one of those anomalies that comes together in Spades. I liken it to Nature playing a slot machine and hitting the rain jackpot with four 7's. The thing is, it's happened before and will happen again very likely in the manner described. Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ApacheTrout Posted January 18, 2011 Share Posted January 18, 2011 Just a question-how can saying the an event that has happened before and therefore could happen again with much more severe impact than the last time it occurred could possibly be construed as sensationalism? The type of pattern referred to is merely an unusually robust Pineapple Express and given the other circumstances that go along with it outside of CA is more likely to occur during a La Niña winter with a -PDO. It also has nothing to do with Climate Change but is one of those anomalies that comes together in Spades. I liken it to Nature playing a slot machine and hitting the rain jackpot with four 7's. The thing is, it's happened before and will happen again very likely in the manner described. Steve I think this provides a good example of how we underestimate the magnitude and frequency of extreme storm events, especially in areas where precipitation and flood records extend less than 100 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aslkahuna Posted January 19, 2011 Share Posted January 19, 2011 I think this provides a good example of how we underestimate the magnitude and frequency of extreme storm events, especially in areas where precipitation and flood records extend less than 100 years. Depending upon locale, rainfall records in CA can date back to about 1850 with anecdotal records from the Missions going back to the 18th Century. Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.