elfie's look at me climate thread

[Elfiero]

First of all let me say that my thoughts and hopes are with the people of the Texas coastal bend, especially for Coolie who I have verbally sparred with many times on this board.

That all is just political B.S. and has no bearing on my hopes that he and his family are safe.

Now on to what CONservatives have turned into a political issue when it's NOT.

This is a one in 1000 year event(get used to that changing). As the National Weather Service stated in a tweet " we have never seen anything like this, unprecedented."

A few years ago edreed4preez and I had this discussion on this forum and I brought up how the extra 5% moisture we've added to the atmosphere because of the increased warming would cause extreme rainfall events like we've never seen......well, here we are.

Some areas around Houston will recieve close to 50 inches probably when this thing is done.

That area has had 5 one hundred year rain events in the last 16 years.....let that sink in before you post the usual idiotic " Hurricanes happen all the time" or " flooding is normal for that area."

For you Trumptards that means flooding events that should happen once every 100 years have now happened 5 times in the last 16 years.

Record breaking events....one after the other:

Katrina

Sandy

Haiphan (spelling?)

And now Harvey

AGW doesn't care about your politics....the best is yet to come, stay tuned.

 

[BAS]

There is no such thing as AGW : Houston Chapter

What you fail to comprehend is that the argument is NOT whether we're experiencing global warming - the argument is whether or not its man-made.

Worse, there's a movement by some in the scientific and political communities that are trying to monetize some solution to the problem.

Those people are trying to get rich off of their end-of-days predictions.




Sent from my iPhone using Steeler Nation mobile app

 

[Elfiero]

What you fail to comprehend is that the argument is NOT whether we're experiencing global warming - the argument is whether or not its man-made.

Worse, there's a movement by some in the scientific and political communities that are trying to monetize some solution to the problem.

Those people are trying to get rich off of their end-of-days predictions.




Sent from my iPhone using Steeler Nation mobile app

What you fail to understand is there is no debate about whether it's man made or not.

There is the illusion of a debate that comes from well funded groups representing the fossil fuel industry.

And again , whether Al Gore makes a penny off AGW has no bearing on the science. The science is indisputable at this point.

 

[oneforthebus]

If AGW really is causing these high rainfall totals, one would expect to see a steady pattern of increasing rainfall over the years, right? Yet the second highest rainfall total in the US (if this once actually does reach 50 inches) was produced by tropical storm Amelia- 48 inches of rain--in 1978.

Hurricane Patricia in 2015 produced 23 inches of rain in Texas.

Oh, the wettest tropical storm ever was Hurricane Hiki in Hawaii. Produced 52 inches of rain. In 1950.

How can you extrapolate some kind of cause and effect relationship? We've had high rainfall totals since rainfall totals have been recorded. Less high rainfall totals too. We've had storms that produced more rain and storms that produced less. Can you produce any actual scientific study linking the ones that produce more with AGW? Showing an overall trend of higher rainfall totals?

 

[Supersteeler]

How can you extrapolate some kind of cause and effect relationship?

Because Al Gore tells him to. "End of the world" climate alarmists are no different than "end of the world" religious maniacs. They both predict the apocalypse during every natural disaster. And what a coincidence....they both want your money to make it stop......a lot of it. One may be cashew and one may be pistachio, but make no mistake they are similar types of nuts.....and they both have an identical goal.

 

[Ironcitysteelers]

Rain and hurricanes didn't happen before man. We are fleas on this planet, when it wants it will shake us off regardless of what we have done or will do.

 

[CharlesDavenport]

I guess AGW also caused the record hurricane drought in the Gulf before Harvey. It causes everything you can think of.

 

[DBS1970]

Right.

There were hurricanes in the time of Columbus. The word for the storm comes from the Caribe Indians suggesting they had experienced them enough to have a name for this type of weather event. The global warming chicken littles have said we would have more bid storms but there haven't been.

 

[Booted]

I think it's time we stopped giving elfie arguments and start listening to what elfie has to say. And , if we listen instead of fighting, maybe elfie can shed some light on some actions we all could take to stop GW in it's tracks. I think we all can all agree ....We need to put an end to hurricanes. And with elfie's guidance, I believe we can end hurricanes in our life time. See the Antarctic once again frozen over to it's former glory, Tornadoes reduced to a mere breeze. Blizzards? No more. Floods? Only a flood of good feelings and happiness, my friends! But, it won't be easy. We have to all be on the same team..."elfie's" team. So who is with me? Who is willing to stop arguing and START returning Earth to what it once was before it got all screwed up. A ball of lava? I have the utmost confidence elfie can guide us to create the perfect planet. And after we straighten all this **** out, I say we move on to Mars. Now THAT hellhole could use some greenery.

 

[Ron Burgundy]

What you fail to understand is there is no debate about whether it's man made or not.

Not on your side, no.

 

[Roy92040]

Yeah we can trace this AGW stuff all the way back to Noah. LOL

 

[madinsomniac]

Ummmm most of the coastal areas we populated were underwater... some in the not too distant past.... we expect natiure to cater to us for instance, the pacific is drastically past due for a large underseas earthquake off the coast if California... its happened roughly on the same schedule and we lnow this from the tidal waves from around the pacific... now we know when it happens we are going to lose millions of people, but when it happens are we going to blame it on politicians or scapegoat it on global warming kind of like we do for everything else...

 

[Roy92040]

Ummmm most of the coastal areas we populated were underwater... some in the not too distant past.... we expect natiure to cater to us for instance, the pacific is drastically past due for a large underseas earthquake off the coast if California... its happened roughly on the same schedule and we lnow this from the tidal waves from around the pacific... now we know when it happens we are going to lose millions of people, but when it happens are we going to blame it on politicians or scapegoat it on global warming kind of like we do for everything else...

And the answer to that question is.....it depends on who is president?


Sent from my iPad using Steeler Nation mobile app

 

[Elfiero]

If AGW really is causing these high rainfall totals, one would expect to see a steady pattern of increasing rainfall over the years, right? Yet the second highest rainfall total in the US (if this once actually does reach 50 inches) was produced by tropical storm Amelia- 48 inches of rain--in 1978.

Hurricane Patricia in 2015 produced 23 inches of rain in Texas.

Oh, the wettest tropical storm ever was Hurricane Hiki in Hawaii. Produced 52 inches of rain. In 1950.

How can you extrapolate some kind of cause and effect relationship? We've had high rainfall totals since rainfall totals have been recorded. Less high rainfall totals too. We've had storms that produced more rain and storms that produced less. Can you produce any actual scientific study linking the ones that produce more with AGW? Showing an overall trend of higher rainfall totals?

 

[Supersteeler]

Wonder how much his kickbacks are for his "findings"?

I can tell you what they would be if they found no connection to man made climate change. Nada. Zilch. Zero.

 

[Elfiero]

Wonder how much his kickbacks are for his "findings"?

I can tell you what they would be if they found no connection to man made climate change. Nada. Zilch. Zero.

He doesn't get kickbacks he does important work.

If you want an example of what you're talking about look no further than Willie Soon. An actual scientist(not climate) who has received more than 1 million dollars from Exxon for the obfuscation game he's played for them. All to convince people like you that the jury is still out on AGW and we should do nothing.

 

[oneforthebus]

So if climate change exacerbated Harvey and caused the rainfall, why did Amelia have almost the same rainfall in 1978? Why did Hiki have more in 1950? Why have we had less severe hurricanes and even hurricane droughts in between?

You can post all the gobbledy gook you want. but basically what a lot of these climate scientists do is equate correlation with causation.

If as you insist there is a warming trend and if warming trends exacerbate the severity of hurricanes. there ought to be a concurrent trend in the severity of hurricanes, right? Yet they are all over the place, from just as severe decades ago to almost non existent a few years ago.

Nothing you posted explains that.

Gee it's almost like the severity and frequency of hurricanes depends on the confluence of a number of circumstances that vary from year to year.

Nah, that makes too much sense.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/25/us/hurricane-harvey-climate-change-texas.html

How much does Hurricane Harvey, or any particular storm, have to do with climate change?

The relationship between hurricanes and climate change is not simple. Some things are known with growing certainty. Others, not so much.

The most recent draft of a sweeping climate science report pulled together by 13 federal agencies as part of the National Climate Assessment suggested that the science linking hurricanes to climate change was still emerging. Looking back through the history of storms, “the trend signal has not yet had time to rise above the background variability of natural processes,” the report states.

 

[Elfiero]

So if climate change exacerbated Harvey and caused the rainfall, why did Amelia have almost the same rainfall in 1978? Why did Hiki have more in 1950? Why have we had less severe hurricanes and even hurricane droughts in between?

You can post all the gobbledy gook you want. but basically what a lot of these climate scientists do is equate correlation with causation.

If as you insist there is a warming trend and if warming trends exacerbate the severity of hurricanes. there ought to be a concurrent trend in the severity of hurricanes, right? Yet they are all over the place, from just as severe decades ago to almost non existent a few years ago.

Nothing you posted explains that.

Gee it's almost like the severity and frequency of hurricanes depends on the confluence of a number of circumstances that vary from year to year.

Nah, that makes too much sense.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/25/us/hurricane-harvey-climate-change-texas.html

You don't think climate change was happening in 1978? And no there wouldn't be a concurrent trend because of natural variability. There is a trend but it would show clearer in a much wider window than the one used now with satellite data as the main reference.

Your question is much like this guys answer...

 

[oneforthebus]

You don't think climate change was happening in 1978? And no there wouldn't be a concurrent trend because of natural variability. There is a trend but it would show clearer in a much wider window than the one used now with satellite data as the main reference.

LOL...you're telling us that GW is causing these intense hurricanes, but then you turn around and say there's no a trend because of natural variability? How do you know natural variability isn't causing the intense ones? You have no idea and scientists don't either. Warming seas is also "natural variability". Sea temperatures fluctuate all the time, for a variety of reasons.

You're using typical scare tactics, and for what? What's your goal? You think some carbon taxes are going to reverse something that's capable of causing this massive natural disaster? You actually believe that? Give me a break.

 

[Spike]

how predictable

even 2 days out their prediction models were garbage

 

[Supersteeler]

Gotta keep that money rolling in somehow.

 

[IndySteel]

It's simply the weather. Don't let the climatards fool you.

 

[21STEELERS21]

Yeah how could 1.2 billion cars spewing poison daily be causing any harm to the atmosphere? Complete nonsense.

 

[oneforthebus]

Yeah how could 1.2 billion cars spewing poison daily be causing any harm to the atmosphere? Complete nonsense.

Who said they weren't? And what are you planning to do about it? Since this is such an urgent , imminent threat, would you ban all cars? Are you going to stop driving your car?

Let me guess, your solution involves letting people continue to drive cars but making them hand over some more money to the government. Ya know, for the planet and all.

 

[Superman]

Who said they weren't? And what are you planning to do about it? Since this is such an urgent , imminent threat, would you ban all cars? Are you going to stop driving your car?

Let me guess, your solution involves letting people continue to drive cars but making them hand over some more money to the government. Ya know, for the planet and all.

well, gubmint never ***** anything up.
and elfie is now on record as saying we should give our gubmint more leeway in making things work for us.
in a sense, you can say elfie is now a ... "Trumptard"