Once slow-moving threat, global warming speeds up, leaving litt...

Full story: Newsday

When Bill Clinton took office in 1993, global warming was a slow-moving environmental problem that was easy to ignore.
Comments
36,761 - 36,780 of 46,385 Comments Last updated 13 min ago
litesong

Lynnwood, WA

#39156 Sep 14, 2013
gcaveman1 wrote:
So far today, I have heard the rains described as "a year's rain in one day", "a 100-year event", " a 1000-year event".
////////
LessHypeMoreFact wrote:
The news I had was of 'six months worth of rain in one week'. But stay tuned. It's still raining..
//////////
litesong wrote:
A couple of years ago, the pineapple express from Hawaii to the Pacific Northwest went stable, directly against a mountain slope of the Cascade Mountains. Among the wild wide ranging pourings that often hit the Northwest, this incessant pounding kept dumping inches of rain per hour on that slope of one to three square miles........ for about 4 days! The radar kept track of the quantity...... 133 inches during the 4 day period.
gcaveman1

Bay Springs, MS

#39157 Sep 14, 2013
ritedownthemiddle wrote:
<quoted text>Emails from Cook Survey participants explaining that their responses were misinterpreted.
Apparently, child, you don't understand.
Link?

So I can read them myself, since I sure as hell don't trust you to comprehend English, nor tell the truth.
gcaveman1

Bay Springs, MS

#39158 Sep 14, 2013
Meanwhile, in the real world, the Army is getting off its fossil fuel addiction.

<><><>< ><><><> <><><>

(Reuters)- Italy's biggest renewable energy group Enel Green Power said on Friday it was one of 22 companies that had won the right to take part in tenders to supply the U.S. army with wind and solar power.

Enel Green Power, controlled by Italy's biggest utility Enel, said the 22 companies were eligible to bid for future U.S. army projects which envisage investments of $7 billion in renewable energy.

The U.S. defense department is aiming to generate 25 percent of its energy from renewable sources by 2025.

Last May Enel Green Power's U.S. unit was one of five companies to win the right to participate in supplying the U.S. army with power from geothermal sources.

“EnvironMENTAList ”

Since: Feb 07

Near Detroit

#39159 Sep 14, 2013
SpaceBlues wrote:
<quoted text>Silly goose, science is not your bag; give it up.
How do YOU as a believer get away with saying a CO2 crisis WILL happen when science has NEVER said or agreed it WILL happen, only "could" and "possibly" and "likely" and..........never "will be"?
We have no problem with you believers saying the truth; that a CO2 crisis only "could" happen. Fair enough?
Mothra

Phoenix, AZ

#39160 Sep 14, 2013
Dialing Back the Alarm on Climate Change: A forthcoming report points lowers estimates on global warming

Later this month, a long-awaited event that last happened in 2007 will recur. Like a returning comet, it will be taken to portend ominous happenings. I refer to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's (IPCC) "fifth assessment report," part of which will be published on Sept. 27.

There have already been leaks from this 31-page document, which summarizes 1,914 pages of scientific discussion, but thanks to a senior climate scientist, I have had a glimpse of the key prediction at the heart of the document. The big news is that, for the first time since these reports started coming out in 1990, the new one dials back the alarm. It states that the temperature rise we can expect as a result of man-made emissions of carbon dioxide is lower than the IPPC thought in 2007.

Admittedly, the change is small, and because of changing definitions, it is not easy to compare the two reports, but retreat it is. It is significant because it points to the very real possibility that, over the next several generations, the overall effect of climate change will be positive for humankind and the planet.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142412788...
Mothra

Phoenix, AZ

#39161 Sep 14, 2013
Earth Gains A Record Amount Of Sea Ice In 2013

Earth has gained 19,000 Manhattans of sea ice since this date last year, the largest increase on record. There is more sea ice now than there was on this date in 2002.

http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2013/09/14...
NobodyorLess

Hondón De Las Nieves, Spain

#39162 Sep 14, 2013
cavemonkey wrote:
So far today, I have heard the rains described as "a year's rain in one day", "a 100-year event", " a 1000-year event".
So basically you're saying that no one knows.

Colo. floods worst since 1894
http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/...

If it happened in 1894, it's not caused by Glowbull warming.
If it happened in 1013, that could have been Glowbull warming.
gcaveman1

Bay Springs, MS

#39163 Sep 14, 2013
NobodyorLess wrote:
<quoted text>So basically you're saying that no one knows.
Colo. floods worst since 1894
http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/...
If it happened in 1894, it's not caused by Glowbull warming.
If it happened in 1013, that could have been Glowbull warming.
Yes, dirt, these newscasters and meteorologists who made the statements might not know, or might utilize a certain degree of hyperbole. The point being that it was a remarkable event.

The generally agreed-upon start of the Industrial Revolution is 1750. That's 144 years before 1894, time enough for you Brits, the original industrial-strength polluters, to crank up that ole global warming machine.

If it happened in 1013, that could have been the Normans taking turns screwing your Celtic milkmaid ggggggggggggggggggggggg-granny , which undoubtedly generated a lot of heat.

Since: Jul 11

Location hidden

#39165 Sep 14, 2013
From the weather channel:
It will take climate scientists many months to complete studies into whether man-made global warming made the Boulder flood more likely to occur, but the amount by which this event has exceeded past events suggests that man-made warming may have played some role by making the event worse than it otherwise would have been.

Considering that this flood event occurred in the backyard of some of the top climate researchers in the world, it is likely that this event will be closely researched. Boulder is home to several major weather and climate research institutions, including the National Center for Atmospheric Research and the Earth System Research Laboratory, both of which were forced to close due to flooding.

http://www.weather.com/news/science/environme...
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#39166 Sep 14, 2013
LessHypeMoreFact wrote:
<quoted text>
Which is why I termed it 'a tad unusual'. In fact, pretty far out on the probability chart. Doesn't mean that it needed AGW or climate change, but it IS more likely if you assume the old standard climate is no longer valid. More moisture from the Gulf getting wrung out as it climbs over Denver or maybe just an unusual weather pattern.
Makes you wonder though. For good reason..
CORRECTION: not Gulf but the Pacific Ocean..

See the sat loop;

http://www.weather.com/news/science/environme...

Signs point to the tropical Pacific being the source of the abundant moisture, according to the University of Wisconsin’s Cooperative Institute for Meteorological Satellite Studies. From there, the moisture plume was transported northeastward, over Mexico and into Texas, and then northward by upper level winds.
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#39167 Sep 14, 2013
OzRitz wrote:
From the weather channel:
It will take climate scientists many months to complete studies into whether man-made global warming made the Boulder flood more likely to occur, but the amount by which this event has exceeded past events suggests that man-made warming may have played some role by making the event worse than it otherwise would have been.
Considering that this flood event occurred in the backyard of some of the top climate researchers in the world, it is likely that this event will be closely researched. Boulder is home to several major weather and climate research institutions, including the National Center for Atmospheric Research and the Earth System Research Laboratory, both of which were forced to close due to flooding.
http://www.weather.com/news/science/environme...
True. Thanks for the link.

You saved me a search ;-)
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#39168 Sep 14, 2013
mememine69 wrote:
<quoted text>
How do YOU as a believer get away with saying a CO2 crisis WILL happen when science has NEVER said or agreed it WILL happen, only "could" and "possibly" and "likely" and..........never "will be"?
We have no problem with you believers saying the truth; that a CO2 crisis only "could" happen. Fair enough?
I wrote a detailed reply to you last. Where's your response to it? You are denying my reply! How do you expect to get away with being such a nonresponsive poster?

Good grief!
gcaveman1

Bay Springs, MS

#39169 Sep 14, 2013
SpaceBlues wrote:
<quoted text>
I wrote a detailed reply to you last. Where's your response to it? You are denying my reply! How do you expect to get away with being such a nonresponsive poster?
Good grief!
Don't expect a reply from a robot.

Or maybe he's a "climate zombie". Like his avatar.
gcaveman1

Bay Springs, MS

#39170 Sep 14, 2013
NobodyorLess wrote:
<quoted text>So basically you're saying that no one knows.
Colo. floods worst since 1894
http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/...
If it happened in 1894, it's not caused by Glowbull warming.
If it happened in 1013, that could have been Glowbull warming.
While any network news usually gets things right, they like to sensationalize/sell and do a really good job of covering bears falling from trees and royal babies falling from the womb.

"Further afield, folks at the Cooperative Institute for Meteorological Satellite Studies at the University of Wisconsin-Madison have been poring over satellite images and other data to try to make sense of the waterlogged chaos. Their startling conclusion:“This event could be classified as a 500- to 1000-year event.”"

Or you could try NOAA: http://hdsc.nws.noaa.gov/hdsc/pfds/pfds_map_c...

Haven't seen any other reference to 1894; maybe they meant 1976? Transposed/wrong numbers. Like Himalayan glacier melt typos?

But, there's these:
The Big Thompson flood of 1976 was considered between a 500-year and 1,000-year event. The disaster between Estes Park and Loveland killed 145 people and caused $41 million in damage after dumping 12 inches of rain in three hours.

Boulder has set a record for its wettest 24-hour period. Ever.

Prior to Wednesday, the single wettest day on record was July 31, 1919, when 4.80 inches of rain were recorded, according to Bob Henson, a science writer at the National Center for Atmospheric Research.

Additionally, the last three days of rain are more than Boulder has experienced in any month on record.

Since the rain kicked in late Monday afternoon, Boulder has officially recorded at least 9.61 inches of rain, topping the 9.59 inches recorded in the entire month of May 1995.

This is also by far the rainiest September ever for the city.

"Keeping in mind that Boulder records are a little bit spotty in places, but this is an extreme event for any month. But for the month of September, the heaviest rainfall (previously) was 3.05 inches, and that was Sept. 4, 1901," Henson said.

"So we may have doubled that record, and no other September day has received more than three inches. This is a one-day record (for any month)."

In fact, Boulder's one-day record has not just been broken; it has been shattered. After the 4.80 inch reading in 1919, all runners-up rounding out the Top 10 for a 24-hour-period are readings of 3.6 inches or less. Also, all of those feel between April and early August.

So both in totals and timing, Henson said, "This is an event that really stands apart."

Again, bottom line, a RECORD event.
LessHypeMoreFact

Toronto, Canada

#39171 Sep 14, 2013
SpaceBlues wrote:
<quoted text>CORRECTION: not Gulf but the Pacific Ocean..
See the sat loop;
http://www.weather.com/news/science/environme...
Signs point to the tropical Pacific being the source of the abundant moisture, according to the University of Wisconsin’s Cooperative Institute for Meteorological Satellite Studies. From there, the moisture plume was transported northeastward, over Mexico and into Texas, and then northward by upper level winds.
Thanks. That is interesting. Not even an 'atmospheric river' but maybe a stationary low?
B as in B S as in S

Minneapolis, MN

#39172 Sep 15, 2013
OzRitz wrote:
From the weather channel:
It will take climate scientists many months to complete studies into whether man-made global warming made the Boulder flood more likely to occur, but the amount by which this event has exceeded past events suggests that man-made warming may have played some role by making the event worse than it otherwise would have been.
Considering that this flood event occurred in the backyard of some of the top climate researchers in the world, it is likely that this event will be closely researched. Boulder is home to several major weather and climate research institutions, including the National Center for Atmospheric Research and the Earth System Research Laboratory, both of which were forced to close due to flooding.
http://www.weather.com/news/science/environme...
CMs forecasted drought yet it is likely that researchers will connect Anthropogenic CO2 as contributory to this weather (event)?
Do 97% of Climate Scientisst agree with that logic?

“EnvironMENTAList ”

Since: Feb 07

Near Detroit

#39173 Sep 15, 2013
SpaceBlues wrote:
<quoted text>
I wrote a detailed reply to you last. Where's your response to it? You are denying my reply! How do you expect to get away with being such a nonresponsive poster?
Good grief!
I read it and it didn't answer the question of how is it that your opinion that it WILL happen is more credible than that of the scientist's who have never said what YOU said; that a crisis WILL happen.
Scientists would have doomed children as well and this is about the life or death of the planet and if this really were a crisis the lab coats would have given us a real warning for a real crisis.
As long as you accept "maybe" as "will be" it shows who the educated planet lovers really are.
All denial will end when science agrees it will actually happen, not just possibly happen.
gcaveman1

Bay Springs, MS

#39174 Sep 15, 2013
B as in B S as in S wrote:
<quoted text>
CMs forecasted drought yet it is likely that researchers will connect Anthropogenic CO2 as contributory to this weather (event)?
Do 97% of Climate Scientisst agree with that logic?
Colorado has been in a drought. I guess the models were right.

Why don't you develop a model that can predict the weather on September 15th, 2020?

"Do 97% of Climate Scientisst agree with that logic?" Look it up, dear.
Mothra

Phoenix, AZ

#39175 Sep 15, 2013
OzRitz wrote:
From the weather channel:
It will take climate scientists many months to complete studies into whether man-made global warming made the Boulder flood more likely to occur, but the amount by which this event has exceeded past events suggests that man-made warming may have played some role by making the event worse than it otherwise would have been.
Considering that this flood event occurred in the backyard of some of the top climate researchers in the world, it is likely that this event will be closely researched. Boulder is home to several major weather and climate research institutions, including the National Center for Atmospheric Research and the Earth System Research Laboratory, both of which were forced to close due to flooding.
http://www.weather.com/news/science/environme...
This would be news if the didn't attribute the flooding to global warming.
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#39176 Sep 15, 2013
mememine69 wrote:
<quoted text> I read it and it didn't answer the question of how is it that your opinion that it WILL happen is more credible than that of the scientist's who have never said what YOU said; that a crisis WILL happen.
Scientists would have doomed children as well and this is about the life or death of the planet and if this really were a crisis the lab coats would have given us a real warning for a real crisis.
As long as you accept "maybe" as "will be" it shows who the educated planet lovers really are.
All denial will end when science agrees it will actually happen, not just possibly happen.
Read it again. Your mind is not trained on science. It is obvious.

Good luck.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Chicago Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 5 min sonicfilter 1,101,847
Messianic Jews say they are persecuted in Israel (Jun '08) 12 min Rick Moss 69,094
Who is MICHAEL LA VAUGHN ROBINSON 53 min Check Facts 1
BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting... (Jan '09) 1 hr LRS 177,535
ISIS Plans to Blow Up an Entire American City a... 2 hr Slewer 57
Topix Chitown Regulars (Aug '09) 2 hr RACE 97,985
Ill. House Approves Legalizing Same-Sex Civil U... (Dec '10) 2 hr JonahI 49,515
•••
•••

Chicago Jobs

•••
Enter and win $5000
•••
•••

Chicago People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••

Chicago News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Chicago
•••

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]
•••