Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Rising Risk of Big Tornadoes Suggest A Climate Change Signal

page: 3
9
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 11 2014 @ 08:27 AM
link   
a reply to: rickymouse

You asked a question: Wouldn't fracking changes these currents? My answer is that since water is injected as part of the fracking process, then yes, more than likely they would change. The water would be more conductive than the stone. However, when you look at geomagnetic maps, you do not see regular deviations due to fracking. It is well known where fracking is taking place, so if there were effects, they would be seen and investigated. Such is not the case.

Check out these links. Geomagnetism is an important factor being researched, measured and mapped by the USGS. It's the "space weather" that influences our geomagnetic fields. Feel free to explore as there is much more than the following links available.

Hazard mapping

Geomagnetically induced currents

There is a ton of resources available at the USGS website. If you live near a USGS regional office you may find them to be quite friendly and helpful in answering your questions. You can also buy some rather interesting maps of various types there as well.

I understand what you are saying about experience and focus. I do not know what you do for a living, but consider that if you had been doing it for the last 30 - 40 years (this is just an exercise) and knew your job inside and out, how would you feel about someone with zero practical experience, zero educational experience telling you that, because you told them their idea was not practical, told you that your thinking was one dimensional, insipid, and lacked creativity simply because you did not accept their hypothesis?

There is a guy here on ATS that thought that planet collisions behaved exactly like billiard ball collisions... I am no astrophysicist but even I know better than that. The guy told me I was, in other words, stupid for not accepting his model of the universe regarding collisions..... I see this all the time. There is nothing wrong with stretching the imagination or posing questions or what ifs... However one should maintain an open mind as much as possible.

I will not even say that there is zero chance that fracking does not have some type of effect on localized field anomalies. However I would state that I am 99.9% sure that fracking does not affect the direction or intensity of a tornado by any measurable degree. Is it an opinion? Yep... I have not participated in such a study, nor am I aware of a study involving fracking and it's effect on weather, let alone tornadoes.
edit on 11-8-2014 by bbracken677 because: (no reason given)




posted on Aug, 11 2014 @ 12:16 PM
link   
a reply to: bbracken677

I am a residential builder. I was also a foreman and inspector for government jobs involving insulating houses for a while, so I had a big interest in how energy flows most of the time. I had many people working under me in the past.

I know the feeling of the young trying to make things easier, it usually ends up bad. I was ambitious like that when I was young so I could relate to my workers. Experience is the best teacher and in the case of building, every person on the crew works together, so everyone follows a set pattern. Since I was the boss, I got to choose the way to do things.

I had a worker ask me once if he could put the soffit on a shed after the siding. I told him that I have been doing it this way for a long time. I told him I can't remember why. So I said go ahead. When he went to put the soffit on, the siding made it impossible to nail it. It took him hours of frustration to get the soffit on, vs. about twenty minutes of easy carefree work. He never questioned me again, just did what I said. I memorize patterns or sequences well, that way you can do things automatically without thinking about it. So I didn't remember why I do it that way, until he started having problems.

I'm going to go look at the sites you posted. It is strange that there wouldn't be seeing deviations, but is there a way to compare an old map to a new map? We are dealing with change of deviation caused by a change in the crust. Not with "well, this seems about normal" Like I said, it is well known that tornadoes follow paths in some areas. These paths are caused by something. I am sure mountains and forests can alter wind direction and form the tornado, but something guides them along the normal alley they have followed for a long time. Now disappearance of an underground aquifer would also possibly cause a change in the path, or the disappearance of underground streams feeding springs. We are depleting underground water reservoirs at alarming rates. All these kinds of things effect geomagnetics on a local basis.

Thanks for the info, but it still does not clear up the thoughts in my mind that fracking can be contributing to a change in the path of a tornado or weather event. I have actually not seen any evidence or testing that has open parameters to show that it is not happening. I don't think all of the increase in tornadoes hitting cities is caused by global warming. If the timing didn't align with the big increase in fracking I would say they probably weren't related at all.

There also could have been something built like an electric high speed railroad or some major grid work on the power distribution system that could be causing this. If there was a new oil pipeline with oil rushing through it, it could cause some changes in weather patterns also, but I do not know of any very long ones built recently in the center of the country.



posted on Aug, 11 2014 @ 01:22 PM
link   
a reply to: rickymouse

How much of the perceived increase of tornadoes hitting cities is a result of increased flow of data? I know that Brandon, MS was hit by something like 7 tornadoes back between 92 and 94. I remember seeing the tracks of the tornadoes through the pine forest between the interstate and Brandon. It was as though huge bulldozers had just knocked down paths of trees, all moving in the same general direction. I believe all 7 of them hit Brandon and there were a couple of deaths as well as wide spread destruction of homes and businesses.

I also remember Tornado(s) hitting Wichita Falls, TX back in the mid to late 60s (had a high school friend that was there during it)

I lived in MS for 30 years. Not exactly a dense population state, but cities/towns were often hit, sometimes not. You didn't live in MS without knowing someone who had experienced a tornado first hand, if not yourself. One hit in the area my friend lived. It seemed, from the destruction, that the tornado had moved from one side of the road back to the other in serpentine fashion taking out every other house on the street, both sides of the street. His house was missed, and oddly enough he still had potted plants on his deck after the destruction. They had not been touched by the winds and yet both homes on either side of him were destroyed. These were 3 acre lots. I think that happened back in the mid to late 80s. Numerous other tornadoes hit the area, but no specific memories stick since they didn't directly affect me or friends.

There was a thunderstorm back in the late 80s that moved right up the Pearl river valley adjacent to Jackson, MS. It was uncanny how it followed the river up, generally north/east direction. Dumped a massive amount of rain as it moved, all of which made it back to the river causing massive flooding. Worst flood in over 100 years for the area. Pearl river is normally, during the spring just a few feet deep. It rose to 42 feet, I believe. I remember fishing in the river in a flat bottom boat (not then) and having to drag the boat across shallow areas. Was it mere coincidence that it followed the river up in such a fashion? I believe so...since nothing like it had happened in the years before while I was there, nor in the years after. The fact that it did, and dumped as much rain as it did was the perfect storm for massive flooding. I think that was in '88. Had that happened today there would be all kinds of posts on ATS about govt tinkering with the weather, or perhaps blaming it on climate change or global warming. I just do not automatically attach a significance to every disaster... shist happens.

Here is a link showing the distribution of tornadoes in the US over recent history. Tell me how you think the distribution works or applies with recent years of fracking.

Tornadoes



posted on Aug, 11 2014 @ 02:43 PM
link   
a reply to: bbracken677

The link does show that there has been an increase in tornadoes over the years covered in the article. It says that it does not seem at first to show any increase unless you consider the F0s which are small tornadoes. This only goes till 2010 in most cases, the increases since there are more dramatic. I read an article addressing the last five years somewhere.

Now Fracking has excalated over the last ten years, which would be right on par with the graph. To see the increase on that link, go to the conclusion on the bottom. About two thirds the way down, it tells of increasing frequency of all tornadoes.

This article blames it all on global warming though, I am trying to say there may be more causes than just global warming contributing to this increase in some of these events.

Tornadoes do not always follow the exact path. The farmer I talked to in Wisconsin said they did near his and other farmers houses though. He had witnessed many going down that ditch in the fifty years he had lived there. All the houses there were a hundred years old. These twisters were small, they were probably F0s. But they happened quite often in Sheboygan falls. I would hate to say that their beliefs or guardian angels kept the tornadoes in line where they did not hurt anything other than sucking the water out of the ditch. I believe this farmer, he was about sixty years old at the time and he told me that those tornadoes won't hurt you unless you are are in that area. The Farmhouse I was renting was close to that but they never hit that house either. They never hurt the trailer park across from the farmhouse either. I saw two of them one day. This made me start asking questions. Now, I would guess that a big tornado would not be confined to a path like this. The ones I saw were very long and thin, they just tossed some bushes around and cleaned the ditch. I assume the others were about the same size because the farmer said that noone has even lost crops to them if they do not go into the ditch. This ditch was about fifty to seventy five feet wide.



posted on Aug, 11 2014 @ 03:43 PM
link   
a reply to: rickymouse

The last 2 years are down though. If you look at the history, the increase started more than 10 years ago...before fracking started up.

Also, you would think that areas that have experienced heavy fracking would be experiencing an up tic in tornadoes. Living in Dallas, I am not aware of any particular odd patterns of tornadoes. South west of Dallas and south of Dallas there are significant levels of fracking going on...yet tornadoes? Nary a one that I recall. On the other hand, there is a significant increase in small earthquakes in those areas that seldom saw earthquakes. That is the kind of activity I would expect to see. I would also expect to see similar "swarms" of tornadoes in areas heavily involved in fracking, and yet that is not the case.
edit on 11-8-2014 by bbracken677 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 11 2014 @ 04:02 PM
link   
a reply to: bbracken677

I think that fracking initiates change. It could be for the worse or for the better possibly. It wouldn't cause more tornadoes to form, only alter their path possibly. It usually takes wind from three directions to form a tornado. I have seen this many times yet the clouds just swirl around here and a funnel rarely forms. Now this area is actually full of energy seeping through the earth, a big area of rock with some topsoil on top. It used to be a mountain at one time geology says. But not many tornadoes. I am glad they aren't allowed to frack here, we are stuck in the middle of two of the great lakes. Jeopardizing one of the biggest water reserves in the country, Lake Superior, would be foolish. I hope Canada isn't allowing fracking near lake Superior. There are two crystal aquifers running under Superior.

We get lots of snow up here. I think there is some sort of geomagnetic reason for the multitudes of snow we get. More than just the lake. But then again, the body of water is a big geomagnetic phenomenon, maybe they already take that in consideration. Top that off with the magnetite ores and the copper all over the place and you get cold and snow. Santa wouldn't even want to live here because of the snow.



posted on Aug, 12 2014 @ 08:04 AM
link   
a reply to: rickymouse

I hope this works. This is a link to a magnetic field map (pdf) of the USA. One thing that caught my eye was the dissimilarity between Kansas and Mississippi. Both are known hotbeds of tornado activity and yet the magnetic fingerprint for both states seems very different.

Mag Field Map


Here is a map of tornado distribution 1950 to 1995:

Tornado distribution USA

I will see if I can find a more recent tornado activity map for comparison. One thing that is apparent is the general trend of tornado movement from SW to NE.. In MS I learned that if you are keeping an eye out for one, look SW, cause that is usually where they will be coming from.

Addendum: Here is a more recent map

More recent





edit on 12-8-2014 by bbracken677 because: (no reason given)
edit on 12-8-2014 by bbracken677 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 12 2014 @ 08:25 AM
link   
a reply to: bbracken677

Perhaps not hugely related, but it is to some degree, to this thread:

P erception of recent weather being worse

A rather interesting read. Note the graph of Tornado activity towards the bottom. It seems to follow an 11/22 year cycle that coincides with the solar mins/max activity levels to some degree.



edit on 12-8-2014 by bbracken677 because: (no reason given)
edit on 12-8-2014 by bbracken677 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 12 2014 @ 10:06 AM
link   
a reply to: bbracken677

There seems to be some similarities of the magnetic map to the other two maps, I wish I had software to overlay them.

It's well known that hills are both magnetic hotspots and do deflect wind. Wind is deflected by energy, not really the hill itself. If I touch something, my flesh does not really touch it, the energy field surrounding the flesh touches it. otherwise the cells would weld together.

This repulsion of energy is evident in everything, varying on the type of material we are dealing with There has to be a magnetic quality to this energy. Matter repels matter because of this energy. These repulsions also cause things to assemble into bigger things at a defined distance and most often a defined pattern based on the composition of the material. Some may be conglomerate and some may be structured crystal in the composition of rock. I don't know the geology terms for this, I study energy flows and patterns most.

Now, so it is this energy barrier (probably magnetic) that actually deflects the wind, not really the hill itself. So why can't we replicate this energy to stop a tornado while it is forming. Take the wrong energy out of the wind.



posted on Aug, 12 2014 @ 01:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: rickymouse
a reply to: bbracken677

There seems to be some similarities of the magnetic map to the other two maps, I wish I had software to overlay them.

Me too...you have me interested in this now lol ... I realized that a post or 2 ago.


Now, so it is this energy barrier (probably magnetic) that actually deflects the wind, not really the hill itself. So why can't we replicate this energy to stop a tornado while it is forming. Take the wrong energy out of the wind.


I dunno, that is totally beyond me. I do know that shear plays a big part in the formation of tornadoes... Somehow, from what I read somewhere, that can be influenced by solar wind indirectly. The weaker our magnetosphere is the less likely we will see tornadoes and hurricanes. Or was it more likely...my short term memory sucks... lol. That is a theory, I believe, not proven. Not my memory sucking, that has been proven LOL



posted on Aug, 12 2014 @ 07:14 PM
link   
a reply to: bbracken677

I was checking my stove heat with the hand held remote thermometer and I decided to checi the temperature of the metal behind the stove. The temperature was 220 degrees. I thought that was kinda hot so I felt it and it was only maybe a hundred degrees to the touch. I was confused how my thermometer could be registering this so wrong so started researching things. A lot of products employ this knowledge but the information that causes this effect doesn't seem to be stated anywhere, so I had to figure it out with what I could find.

I started looking at the surface tension information and applying it to other things. The reason we see sparkly waves is because the surface tension of the water builds up from various sources and the tension actually reflects the light, not the water itself. Same with a mirror, the energy built up on the outside of the glass reflects the energy and we see ourselves in the mirror. Heat ducts are metal and they do not get hot, the surface charge builds up on them and reflects the heat energy. This is used so much in our society and is taken for granted, everything has a surface charge to it, the strength dependent on the color and composition of the material. Black absorbs more of this tension and converts it to heat. Copper turns electricity to heat or heat to electricity.

I thought about this knowledge I gained and apply it to much of what I see. When the wind blows mildly, the furnace runs less, how can this be. The wind has energy on it and it charges the siding with this energy when the house slows it. This energy charge reflects the effects of heat transfer by slowing the current carrying the heat with it. A pane of glass has little to stop heat, but the charge on it reflects the heat.Raise the charge up and the rate of heat loss is reduced. So when you insulate, you build a capacitor which allows a higher current to be stored if there is no external source of energy to charge the wall. surfaces. Water shorts this out, the charge cannot be built if there is water in the air or humidity in the wall.

Now the last paragraph could relate to how fracking could disturb the energy field by altering the rock...actually it could possibly be the fracking water that is causing the change. It shorts out the capacitor qualities of the rock.

There could be a lot of different things that can cause changing weather with fracking, some I have not even thought of. Concentrating on the pollution we understand keeps us from seeing what possible other side effects could be happening. The present regulations do not hold a company liable for problems with their products or services if there is no proof that their actions or products are causing anyone harm. Only side effects that are already known and established in the field are monitored. This means that if the companies and sciences do not research anything other than what is already known, then they cannot be sued or held liable for any problems that occur. It means they need to know exactly what is required though, they can be held liable if they cause problems that are listed in the regulations and known problems in the field they are in.

So this means if you keep the blinders on so you can only see what is said to be relevent, you can go ahead and start a business and make money. Not a problem on a small scale, but fracking is not being done on a small scale. It is not a coincidence that they are letting way too much fracking, I feel that in ten years it will be illegal to put in new wells. They fracked so much that they had a glutton of gas and not enough storage, dropping the price of natural gas. Why would they cut their own throats, maybe because they know people will sooner or later discover all the bad from this practice. They won't be able to make new wells, but will probably be able to use ones that are already made. This rush without broadform research could cause a lot of problems someday. You cannot see something if you are looking at something else in a different direction.

A deer can walk right behind you when you are watching a path while deer hunting if you have earmuffs on your ears. You may never know it happened. We are not that observant, we can't see the air in front of our faces yet we need it to survive.



posted on Aug, 12 2014 @ 07:45 PM
link   
a reply to: rickymouse



So this means if you keep the blinders on so you can only see what is said to be relevent, you can go ahead and start a business and make money. Not a problem on a small scale, but fracking is not being done on a small scale. It is not a coincidence that they are letting way too much fracking, I feel that in ten years it will be illegal to put in new wells. They fracked so much that they had a glutton of gas and not enough storage, dropping the price of natural gas. Why would they cut their own throats, maybe because they know people will sooner or later discover all the bad from this practice. They won't be able to make new wells, but will probably be able to use ones that are already made. This rush without broadform research could cause a lot of problems someday. You cannot see something if you are looking at something else in a different direction.


Well...I do have some knowledge regarding what has been going on as well as the why's here. I had a professional association with a retail energy company. During that period I learned that in Texas the price of electricity and natural gas are totally interrelated.
It is not just one company producing the gas...there are a multitude of small, medium and large companies. As fracking became more prevalent and efficient more was produced. There is supposed to be pipelines to be able to mass transit the gas to ports to export, but they got held up due to every tom, dick and harry's concerns over everything you can imagine so the pipelines are still not built.

It didn't take long for the LP gas producers to get the message and reduce production since there was not enough storage. They were barely running a profit for a short period of time. Of course, as things go, since it was not a single entity controlling things production was cut back too much and then prices skyrocketed. Of course this resulted in increased production...well, you get the picture. It took them a few years to get smoothed out and away from the wild swings of production (supply vs demand). It was all about the bucks...

There are still plans to export the LP and there are big bucks there, so they are still expanding production capacity but trying to manage production to supply demands at the same time. That way when there is the ability to export they can ramp up really fast to meet that demand as well.

I learned some of this during my association with the retail electric company and the rest from research. I am strongly considering investing in LP futures, but I also want to make damned sure I do it right and limit my risk. The exporting of LP could seriously help our balance of trade to a degree that people just do not realize. Our economy is sick. We produce very little and export even less... in the 60s we produced 25% of the world's manufactured products. Today we are around 5% and the lion's share of that remains here in the US. An economy that imports much more than it exports is doomed to shrink and the wealth of that country is dwindling. Our trade balance has been negative over the last 20-25 years to the tune of 15 trillion dollars. People are fighting over fast food jobs, for crying out loud.

That (investing) is also why I am concerned about the mini-quake swarms in areas that are fracking. That is the major concern of these companies right now. The aspects you are talking about are way off the chart...Not on their radar. I still believe that the other aspects that affect tornadoes are magnitudes greater in terms of influence than the magnetosphere anomalies.

Your assertion that if a company does not research potential side effects they will not be liable is... not correct. Of course if no one knows there are negative side effects no one will sue, true enough. But if you can prove that a product produced the negative effects in court, regardless of whether the company knew about them ahead of time or not, the company will be liable. Of course, if they knew of them ahead of time then that is a double whack against them, so to speak.





new topics

top topics



 
9
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join