Global Warming

"Tom Kunich" <cyclintom@yahoo. com> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Everyone remember those moronic leftists screaming that global warming was
going to cause the worst hurricane seasons on record?

I suppose that the last two seasons which have been exceptionally mild
ought to demonstrate the scientific basis for their beliefs. That is -
absolutely nothing at all aside from the blind following of their beloved
leftists.

So the idea is that this frees up huge amounts of working capital that can
now be used to sponsor Pro-Tour teams?

But seriously, forget about "Global Warming" as an issue. If we just act
like decent human beings, which, for sure, can be a bit of a stretch at
times, we'd be doing most of the things your "beloved leftists" would want
anyway. It's funny how we don't think twice about making the smallest impact
possible in wilderness areas, but when it comes to the rest of the planet,
watch out, I don't care where that sewage flows or how much of that
pesticide goes into the food chain or how many areas we might be saving huge
amounts of $$$ if we thought a bit and figured out how to do things with a
bit less packaging. And the amount we drive our cars... once again, forget
about global warming, just look at the smog some days. Doesn't it seem like
something we'd be better off with a bit less of?

We can be better caretakers of this planet without having western
civilization grind to a halt. Right now, I'm going to go turn some lights
off in the house. There's no reason for so many to be on; there's nobody in
the entry hall, or the main hall, or the kitchen right now... all areas I
can see from where I am, all lit up. Even the light in the back yard was on,
and I'll be the dog could care less.

So I've just lengthened the time before I have to replace more lights
(eventually with those fluorescent lights that look sorta like a soft ice
cream cone), I'll save a few pennies on the electric bill, and somehow it
even seems like a house with fewer lights on is a bit less stressful to be
in.

Now, about that computer farm in the living room... kids computer, mom's
computer, file server, and my main computer in the family room... sigh. At
least when I replaced the kids computer last week, I made choices that
resulted in a far-quieter & faster machine that uses less than half as much
power as their older one. Probably spent about $30 more than I might have
otherwise.

Little things that aren't going to make even the tiniest little dent by
themselves, but just make sense in a being-nice-to-the-planet sort of way.

But what does any of this have to do with rbr?

--Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReactionBicycles.com

Tom Kunich said:

Everyone remember those moronic leftists screaming that global warming
was going to cause the worst hurricane seasons on record?

I suppose that the last two seasons which have been exceptionally mild
ought to demonstrate the scientific basis for their beliefs. That is -
absolutely nothing at all aside from the blind following of their
beloved leftists.

Hurricanes will trend up in frequency. That does not predict anything
specific for a particular year.

The issue isn't global climate change. That's a fact. The question is
how much man can affect it. It's a tough call, but cutting back on our
carbon emissions will have benefits even if it doesn't affect climate in
any way.

-paul

In article <[email hidden]>, "Tom Kunich" <cyclintom@yahoo. com>

Quoted message said:

Everyone remember those moronic leftists screaming that global warming was
going to cause the worst hurricane seasons on record?

I suppose that the last two seasons which have been exceptionally mild ought
to demonstrate the scientific basis for their beliefs. That is - absolutely
nothing at all aside from the blind following of their beloved leftists.

The weather is never consistent from year to year. Some years have more
hurricanes, some less. One thing that we can sure will be consistent is that you'll
find a way to say something inane about a topic you don't understand so you can
criticise the demon "Liberals."

--
tanx,
Howard

Faberge eggs are elegant but I prefer Faberge bacon.

remove YOUR SHOES to reply, ok?

Howard Kveck said:

In article <[email hidden]>, "Tom Kunich" <cyclintom@yahoo. com>

Quoted message said:

Everyone remember those moronic leftists screaming that global warming was
going to cause the worst hurricane seasons on record?

Quoted message said:

I suppose that the last two seasons which have been exceptionally mild ought
to demonstrate the scientific basis for their beliefs. That is - absolutely
nothing at all aside from the blind following of their beloved leftists.

The weather is never consistent from year to year. Some years have more
hurricanes, some less. One thing that we can sure will be consistent is that you'll
find a way to say something inane about a topic you don't understand so you can
criticise the demon "Liberals."

If there's one thing more consistent than the sun coming up it's your
moronic replies to things you not only know nothing about but with
which you haven't the intellectual capacity to understand.

Mike Jacoubowsky said:

"Tom Kunich" <cyclintom@yahoo. com> wrote in messagenews:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Everyone remember those moronic leftists screaming that global warming was
going to cause the worst hurricane seasons on record?

Quoted message said:

I suppose that the last two seasons which have been exceptionally mild
ought to demonstrate the scientific basis for their beliefs. That is -
absolutely nothing at all aside from the blind following of their beloved
leftists.

But seriously, forget about "Global Warming" as an issue. If we just act
like decent human beings, which, for sure, can be a bit of a stretch at
times, we'd be doing most of the things your "beloved leftists" would want
anyway.

Mike, I've always put a smaller footprint on the earth. Of course we
called it "conservationism" and not "environmentalism".

But if you think that doing everything the leftists asked would
satisfy them you're sadly mistaken. Like all psychologically damamged
people (did you know that the vast majority of "environmentalists"
couldn't tell you the basis of their beliefs?) they want you to dance
to their tune because they crave a feeling of power.

You being a reasonable person can't understand that and probably won't
believe it because of your very reasonableness but that is the case.

Howard Kveck said:

In article <[email hidden]>, "Tom Kunich" <cyclintom@yahoo. com>

Quoted message said:

Everyone remember those moronic leftists screaming that global warming was
going to cause the worst hurricane seasons on record?

I suppose that the last two seasons which have been exceptionally mild ought
to demonstrate the scientific basis for their beliefs. That is - absolutely
nothing at all aside from the blind following of their beloved leftists.

The weather is never consistent from year to year. Some years have more
hurricanes, some less. One thing that we can sure will be consistent is that you'll
find a way to say something inane about a topic you don't understand so you can
criticise the demon "Liberals."

Howard, you're a good egg

Steve (inveterate lefty)

--
Mark & Steven Bornfeld DDS
http://www.dentaltwins.com
Brooklyn, NY
718-258-5001

Quoted message said:

Did you notice that those locks that they built on the Thames to keep
out the 20 foot change in ocean level were quietly turned off a couple
of years ago having never been needed and having cost the Brits more
than a small fortune.

They are being used more and more often and are no longer expected to be
able to cope with rising tides!

Howard Kveck said:

Quoted message said:

The weather is never consistent from year to year. Some years have more
hurricanes, some less. One thing that we can sure will be consistent is that you'll
find a way to say something inane about a topic you don't understand so you can
criticise the demon "Liberals."

Mark & Steven Bornfeld said:

Howard, you're a good egg

I bet Kunich would like to make an omelet out of him.

Tom Kunich said:

Everyone remember those moronic leftists screaming that global warming
was going to cause the worst hurricane seasons on record?

I suppose that the last two seasons which have been exceptionally mild
ought to demonstrate the scientific basis for their beliefs. That is -
absolutely nothing at all aside from the blind following of their
beloved leftists.

Doubting Thomas:

Here is a link to Emmanuel's Nature paper on the relationship between
hurricane *intensity* and a warming planet. Note that the link is not in
storm frequency, but on storm intensity. In other words, what the model
says is that of the storms that do occur, more will be bigger.

ftp://texmex.mit.edu/pub/emanuel/PAPERS/NATURE03906.pdf

Now, cut to the 2007 hurricane season. There were two cat 5 hurricanes out
of a total of 4 storms, which is a fraction of 0.5 (not to mention that
both cat 5's followed essentially the same track, which is unprecedented in
the history of observations (plus you had Humberto, which intensified
faster than any storm even so close to landfall (go to the NHC website
archives and find the forecasters comments on Humberto if you don't believe
me, which you don't, but you won't check, but you should, because I am
right and it will save you from looking foolish when you call me names and
I then provide the link from the NHC website))). If you go back through
the archives and calculate the fraction of major hurricanes to total
hurricanes each season back to 1980 or so, you will find a fairly steady
increase in this fraction. This is Emmanuel's point, in a warming climate,
the total number of cyclones that form is still a function of vertical
shear and tropospheric forcing, but *if* you form a cyclone, it has a
better chance of turning into a major storm.

Interestingly, if you do the same exercise for typhoons, you find the same
thing. Total typhoon number from 1980 through 2006 is highly variable,
with frequency not really correlating from year to year. However, the
fraction of all typhoons that become super typhoons (equivalent to a cat 3
or bigger hurricane) increases steadily from about 0.2 in 1980 to double
that 0.4 in 2006. Again, maybe not more storms, but of the storms that do
form, more are bigger.

I am not surprised you think this season was exceptionally mild. The two
cat 5's, which made landfall as cat 5's (also unusual), killed brown people
so they didn't get much coverage here. However, I had the distinct
pleasure of flying into the outer fringes of Dean and it was intensely
cool. There was this huge container ship, at least 250 m long, sitting
there in the Gulf of Mexico. At that location, it was maybe 200 miles from
the storm's eye after it crossed the Yucatan and was in the Bay of
Campeche. We looked down and thought it odd that the ship had no wake. We
realized it was hove to, making no headway and treading water, just trying
to survive in the wave field kicked off by Dean.

This season wasn't mild, there just weren't a lot of storms and the ones
there were didn't kill white people.

--
Bill Asher

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

"Tom Kunich" <cyclintom@yahoo. com> wrote in
messagenews:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Everyone remember those moronic leftists screaming that global warming
was
going to cause the worst hurricane seasons on record?

Quoted message said:

I suppose that the last two seasons which have been exceptionally mild
ought to demonstrate the scientific basis for their beliefs. That is -
absolutely nothing at all aside from the blind following of their
beloved
leftists.

But seriously, forget about "Global Warming" as an issue. If we just act
like decent human beings, which, for sure, can be a bit of a stretch at
times, we'd be doing most of the things your "beloved leftists" would
want
anyway.

Mike, I've always put a smaller footprint on the earth. Of course we
called it "conservationism" and not "environmentalism".

Tom: If we want to solve problems, letting words get in the way isn't going
to help. At some point it makes sense to accept that there are reasonable
connections between "conservationism" and "environmentalism." If the left &
right weren't so anxious to battle each other, we'd be a lot better off. But
danged few politicians are doing much to seek a middle ground these days.
And the advent of the 'net hasn't helped either, because no matter what you
believe, you'll find large amounts of support for it. And little on the 'net
ever suggests compromise as a strategy.

Quoted message said:

But if you think that doing everything the leftists asked would
satisfy them you're sadly mistaken. Like all psychologically damamged
people (did you know that the vast majority of "environmentalists"
couldn't tell you the basis of their beliefs?) they want you to dance
to their tune because they crave a feeling of power.

My mother is a conservative and couldn't tell you the basis of her beliefs
either. In fact, I'd guess conservatives have an easier time not knowing
what they believe, because in general they prefer things not to change or
progress. Thus "conservative."

Quoted message said:

You being a reasonable person can't understand that and probably won't
believe it because of your very reasonableness but that is the case.

Don't insult me by suggesting I'm reasonable! My son very definitely didn't
think I was reasonable taking him up Redwood Gulch for the first time on
Sunday.

But don't get too wound up by any of this. You win in the end, almost
guaranteed. Try to show me an scenarion in which a democrat becomes
President next November. Unless another candidate comes from nowhere, things
don't look good. Obama could be a great President in the future, but not
yet. Not enough experience. And Hillary is going to lose a ton of votes when
she beats up on him, reinforcing the worst stereotypes of her image. I have
no idea who's going to emerge from the Republican camp; I don't think
Giuliani is electable (it's a bit late for the 2001 coattails to remain
effective), and people are scared of Romney in a way that reminds one of the
fears of electing a Catholic back in 1960 (of course, Kennedy *did* win...).
McCain is frankly too old; 8 years ago, I think he would have been a great
choice. What does that leave us with... Fred Thompson?

--Mike Jacoubowsky
Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReaction.com
Redwood City & Los Altos, CA USA

<[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Mike Jacoubowsky said:

"Tom Kunich" <cyclintom@yahoo. com> wrote in
messagenews:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Everyone remember those moronic leftists screaming that global warming
was
going to cause the worst hurricane seasons on record?

Quoted message said:

I suppose that the last two seasons which have been exceptionally mild
ought to demonstrate the scientific basis for their beliefs. That is -
absolutely nothing at all aside from the blind following of their
beloved
leftists.

But seriously, forget about "Global Warming" as an issue. If we just act
like decent human beings, which, for sure, can be a bit of a stretch at
times, we'd be doing most of the things your "beloved leftists" would
want
anyway.

Mike, I've always put a smaller footprint on the earth. Of course we
called it "conservationism" and not "environmentalism".

But if you think that doing everything the leftists asked would
satisfy them you're sadly mistaken. Like all psychologically damamged
people (did you know that the vast majority of "environmentalists"
couldn't tell you the basis of their beliefs?) they want you to dance
to their tune because they crave a feeling of power.

You being a reasonable person can't understand that and probably won't
believe it because of your very reasonableness but that is the case.

William Asher said:

Tom Kunich said:

Everyone remember those moronic leftists screaming that global warming
was going to cause the worst hurricane seasons on record?

Quoted message said:

I suppose that the last two seasons which have been exceptionally mild
ought to demonstrate the scientific basis for their beliefs. That is -
absolutely nothing at all aside from the blind following of their
beloved leftists.

Doubting Thomas:

Here is a link to Emmanuel's Nature paper on the relationship between
hurricane *intensity* and a warming planet. Note that the link is not in
storm frequency, but on storm intensity. In other words, what the model
says is that of the storms that do occur, more will be bigger.

ftp://texmex.mit.edu/pub/emanuel/PAPERS/NATURE03906.pdf

Now, cut to the 2007 hurricane season. There were two cat 5 hurricanes out
of a total of 4 storms, which is a fraction of 0.5 (not to mention that
both cat 5's followed essentially the same track, which is unprecedented in
the history of observations (plus you had Humberto, which intensified
faster than any storm even so close to landfall (go to the NHC website
archives and find the forecasters comments on Humberto if you don't believe
me, which you don't, but you won't check, but you should, because I am
right and it will save you from looking foolish when you call me names and
I then provide the link from the NHC website))). If you go back through
the archives and calculate the fraction of major hurricanes to total
hurricanes each season back to 1980 or so, you will find a fairly steady
increase in this fraction. This is Emmanuel's point, in a warming climate,
the total number of cyclones that form is still a function of vertical
shear and tropospheric forcing, but *if* you form a cyclone, it has a
better chance of turning into a major storm.

Interestingly, if you do the same exercise for typhoons, you find the same
thing. Total typhoon number from 1980 through 2006 is highly variable,
with frequency not really correlating from year to year. However, the
fraction of all typhoons that become super typhoons (equivalent to a cat 3
or bigger hurricane) increases steadily from about 0.2 in 1980 to double
that 0.4 in 2006. Again, maybe not more storms, but of the storms that do
form, more are bigger.

I am not surprised you think this season was exceptionally mild. The two
cat 5's, which made landfall as cat 5's (also unusual), killed brown people
so they didn't get much coverage here. However, I had the distinct
pleasure of flying into the outer fringes of Dean and it was intensely
cool. There was this huge container ship, at least 250 m long, sitting
there in the Gulf of Mexico. At that location, it was maybe 200 miles from
the storm's eye after it crossed the Yucatan and was in the Bay of
Campeche. We looked down and thought it odd that the ship had no wake. We
realized it was hove to, making no headway and treading water, just trying
to survive in the wave field kicked off by Dean.

This season wasn't mild, there just weren't a lot of storms and the ones
there were didn't kill white people.

What I find interesting is that dumbass Asher doesn't think that
anyone will call him on his [censored].

So far this season there's been four hurricanes. This hurricane season
is essentially over as well though there are occasionally November
hurricanes they're rare.

And of course he demonstrates a level of ignorance about hurricanes
that's almost funny.

In 1995 when his hero Bill Clinton was thumping young girls (Asher far
prefers young boys) we had 11 hurricanes and 8 tropical storms which
are almost-hurricanes.
In 1996 when his hero Bill Clinton was thumping young girls (Asher far
prefers young boys) we had 9 hurricanes and 4 tropical storms.
In 1998 when his hero Bill Clinton was thumping young girls (Asher far
prefers young boys) we had 10 hurricanes and 4 tropical storms.
In 1999 when his hero Bill Clinton was trying to lie about thumping
young girls there were 8 hurricanes and 4 tropical storms.

By all means Asher, tell us all about how those hurricanes weren't any
big deal but like two Cat 5 hurricanes today are.

How about you actually learn something before you shoot your stoopid
face off about it?

Donald Munro said:

Howard Kveck said:

Quoted message said:

The weather is never consistent from year to year. Some years have more
hurricanes, some less. One thing that we can sure will be consistent is that you'll
find a way to say something inane about a topic you don't understand so you can
criticise the demon "Liberals."

Mark & Steven Bornfeld said:

Howard, you're a good egg

I bet Kunich would like to make an omelet out of him.

I don't see Tom as violent. Neither are us lefties. But we ain't
going away.
Frankly, I don't know which leftists made absurd claims about global
warming. While scientists can be political, science ain't. It is what
it is. I don't argue with the flat earth society.

Steve

On Oct 30, 1:43 pm, Steven Bornfeld <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

I don't see Tom as violent.

I punched a guy about 20 years ago and he fell over and hit his head
against the edge of a car door. Luckily he had a head like a stone and
wasn't really hurt but I haven't hit anyone since. Wouldn't have hit
him then if he wasn't about to throw up on me.

Quoted message said:

Neither are us lefties. But we ain't going away.

Wanna bet? The younger generation has gone through the schools with
all of the super leftists teaching in them. My guess is that sooner or
later they'll come into power and there'll be a pogrom. Let's remember
that Jack Kennedy would be declared an extreme right wing nut these
days.

Quoted message said:

Frankly, I don't know which leftists made absurd claims about global
warming. While scientists can be political, science ain't. It is what
it is. I don't argue with the flat earth society.

Maybe you don't know your hero and leader Al Gore?

Quoted message said:

By all means Asher, tell us all about how those hurricanes weren't any
big deal but like two Cat 5 hurricanes today are.

How about you actually learn something before you shoot your stoopid
face off about it?

Tom:

Here's what I am talking about in the case of typhoons:

Year Typhoon Super Fraction 3-yr backwards
Typhoon moving average
1980 15 2 0.13
1981 16 2 0.13
1982 16 2 0.13 0.13
1983 12 2 0.17 0.14
1985 16 2 0.13 0.14
1985 17 1 0.08 0.12
1986 19 3 0.16 0.11
1987 18 6 0.33 0.18
1988 13 1 0.08 0.19
1989 21 6 0.29 0.23
1990 21 4 0.19 0.18
1991 20 5 0.25 0.24
1992 21 5 0.24 0.23
1993 19 3 0.16 0.22
1994 21 6 0.29 0.23
1995 15 5 0.33 0.26
1996 21 6 0.29 0.30
1997 24 11(!) 0.46 0.36
1998 9 3 0.33 0.36
1999 11 1 0.09 0.29
2000 15 5 0.33 0.25
2001 16 3 0.19 0.20
2002 15 8 0.53 0.35
2003 17 5 0.29 0.34
2004 19 7 0.37 0.40
2005 16 7 0.44 0.37
2006 15 7 0.47 0.42
2007 10 4 0.40 0.43

The first column is the year starting with 1986. The second column is
total number of typhoons in that year. The third column is the number of
super typhoons, the fourth column is the fraction of the all typhoons that
became super typhoons, the fifth column is a 3-yr running average of the
fraction. Note how the values in the 5th column, which is the
average super-typhoon count divided by the typhoon count, increases from
1986 to 2007? This is what Emmanuel says will happen, that of the typhoons
that do develop, more will grow to super-typhoon category. The frequency
of storm occurrence is not the key parameter, it is storm intensity.

As always, I remain in awe of your ability to evade all form of rational
debate.

--
Bill Asher

Quoted message said:

On Oct 30, 1:43 pm, Steven Bornfeld <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

I don't see Tom as violent.

I punched a guy about 20 years ago and he fell over and hit his head
against the edge of a car door. Luckily he had a head like a stone and
wasn't really hurt but I haven't hit anyone since. Wouldn't have hit
him then if he wasn't about to throw up on me.

Quoted message said:

Neither are us lefties. But we ain't going away.

Wanna bet? The younger generation has gone through the schools with
all of the super leftists teaching in them. My guess is that sooner or
later they'll come into power and there'll be a pogrom. Let's remember
that Jack Kennedy would be declared an extreme right wing nut these
days.

That's pretty funny.

Steve

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Frankly, I don't know which leftists made absurd claims about global
warming. While scientists can be political, science ain't. It is what
it is. I don't argue with the flat earth society.

Maybe you don't know your hero and leader Al Gore?

Bill:

Where can I find a time series of Emanuel's PDI?

On Oct 29, 10:44 pm, Paul Cassel <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

Tom Kunich said:

Everyone remember those moronic leftists screaming that global warming
was going to cause the worst hurricane seasons on record?

Quoted message said:

I suppose that the last two seasons which have been exceptionally mild
ought to demonstrate the scientific basis for their beliefs. That is -
absolutely nothing at all aside from the blind following of their
beloved leftists.

Hurricanes will trend up in frequency. That does not predict anything
specific for a particular year.

The issue isn't global climate change. That's a fact. The question is
how much man can affect it. It's a tough call, but cutting back on our
carbon emissions will have benefits even if it doesn't affect climate in
any way.

-paul

Could you please elaborate on the benefits we'd receive from cutting
back on carbon emissions even if it doesn't affect climate in any way?

Quoted message said:

Bill:

Where can I find a time series of Emanuel's PDI?

I think this is what you are looking for:

http://wind.mit.edu/~emanuel/Papers_data_graphics.htm

But if a woman answers, hang up.

--
Bill Asher

Scott said:

Could you please elaborate on the benefits we'd receive from cutting
back on carbon emissions even if it doesn't affect climate in any way?

For one:

http://tinyurl.com/33fjej

Steve