I study what the actual scientists publish.
Not what some rando physicist who quotes nonsense.
You can choose where you get your news information AND your science information from.
Non-stop hurricane warnings!
- Thread starter The Tradition
- Start date
I study what the actual scientists publish.
Not what some rando physicist who quotes nonsense.
You can choose where you get your news information AND your science information from.
Being a scientist himself, Lowry wanted to dig into the historical data for a number of the buoy stations that were recording the high temperatures. What he found was that the stations that record the numbers are in “very shallow water” surrounded by properties that could skew the readings very high.
Lowry explains that mud flats, mangroves, and other submerged aquatic vegetation more readily absorb the sunlight, which could account for the very high readings.
So, there WERE 100 degree temps
Just not out in the open Atlantic, where they were "only" 92-94 degrees (which is still abnormally high and hurricane jet-fuel).
Andrew was a monster. I was in the Coast Guard at the time and got sent down there to help clean up the Coast Guard Housing Complex after it was over. What a mess. Roofs blown off, windows shattered, A/C units ripped from the sides of the buildings, cars tossed around like toys. Our day was spent clearing tree limbs from the roadways so that bigger equipment and trucks could get in.
So Joe are you near those fires near I-10 there in AZ? Get out there with your garden hose old man!
Someone who lives in the desert doesn’t understand that.
Meanwhile the Thwaites glacier could collapse any day (or year). That alone could raise sea levels by 2 feet. Disaster for many coastal cities, but that's only, um, the tip of the iceberg. Thwaites is currently the dam holding back Antarctic ice that could raise sea levels by 65 feet. [doing those numbers from memory, so feel free to correct them; close enough for HROT work]
I already get my info from reliable sources.
Your sources are what appear to be your problem here.
Someone who understands you still have temperature records understands that doesn't really make any difference, aside from the headlines.
I'm not getting the same information experience in the Panhandle that OP is getting in his part of Florida.
It must be something about the demographics in his area.
It must be something about the demographics in his area.
I think your memory has been influenced by the fact that hurricane activity was usually low during 70s and 80s in Florida.
We both understand that. As I’ve said many times I do believe the Earth’s climate is changing. As it has done over MILLIONS of years. But I’m not so arrogant that I believe we as a collection of complex cells are in charge. We can all jump off a cliff and unplug everything on the way out and good old Earth won’t even notice.
I've heard none of that in my part of Florida. I had to search for a seasonal prediction for the thread I started.
I don't and neither do the majority of Floridians. Maybe you shouldn't have started the OP with "The news media down here in Florida can't stop talking about hurricanes!"
Indeed it was. Cycles, my friend. Cycles.
Since you live in the woods you probably don’t get news about anything (😉) but my gosh it’s been insane here.
And by the way I would never waste money on the Orlando Slantinel either. 😵💫
What does "the majority of Floridians" have to do with anything?
I will admit that I click on hurricane news stories so maybe my usual newsfeeds are filled with hysterical hurricane stories.
However, THE ECONOMIST even did it today.
I think a large number of us who grew up here don’t want to know ANYTHING about Orlando.
🤔
This is from your OP. "The news media down here in Florida can't stop talking about hurricanes!". It might be true about your local news sources but not for the rest of us.
We as a complex collection of societies are clearly driving it.
By pushing >130x more CO2 into the atmosphere than all terrestrial and submarine volcanoes do, annually.
Scientists predicted this prior to 1910. Exxon scientists confirmed it in the 1980s.
And you are like hyperbolic speech. Stop blaming others and just accept the error in the OP.
And yet, at any moment some sort of variable could happen to upend this.
A massive volcano eruption, a sudden dimming of the sun, a large asteroid impact....
In any case, we have the technology to remove CO2 from the atmosphere. Why not do more of that?
No error.
A different story on this every day last week in the Orlando Sentinel. I'm sure it was the same with the South Florida Sun-Sentinel, the Palm Beach Post, the Miami Herald, the Florida Times-Union, the Tampa Bay Times, the Tallahassee Democrat, and on and on and on...
No; we do not.
Not anywhere close to the rate we are adding it in. It is difficult and expensive
This is gigatons of carbon we're pulling out; it doesn't just magically disappear.
Every 8-pound gallon of gas you burn produces around 20 pounds of CO2.
Perfect.
And it's a chocolate cake watch, because there's no cocoa or chocolate in the ingredients photo...
So, could end up being blueberry muffins or something.... 🤣
They already did that. It's going broke too.
