It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

NOAA Makes It Official: 2011 Among Most Extreme Weather Years in History

page: 2
2
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 18 2011 @ 11:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by backinblack


And yet you posted this to me.


is as ignorant as you claim climate scientists are.


I don't see how I'm confused, looks clear to me..


Feel free to post the entire post that carefully clipped sentence comes from. I was not calling you ignorant, although if the shoe fits...




posted on Jun, 18 2011 @ 11:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by incrediblelousminds

Originally posted by backinblack


And yet you posted this to me.


is as ignorant as you claim climate scientists are.


I don't see how I'm confused, looks clear to me..


Feel free to post the entire post that carefully clipped sentence comes from. I was not calling you ignorant, although if the shoe fits...


Fine, doesn't alter the context in the slightest..

But to completely reject, out-of-hand all actual evidence in favor of the pro-industry claim that polluting our environment has no effects on the climate, or ensuing weather patterns is as ignorant as you claim climate scientists are.


BTW, more twisting from you??
Now where did I say you called me ignorant??

You seem to have an issue with what's posted..
You seem to keep changing what you say..



posted on Jun, 19 2011 @ 05:06 AM
link   
reply to post by incrediblelousminds
 


Big difference between global warming and supporting pollution guy. Keep up the rhetoric, it makes you look legitimate, I promise.

Let me put it simply for you. There is no global warming crisis, and there never has been.

Now, you want to discuss pollution? That's a separate topic, and one I would probably agree with you on.
edit on 19-6-2011 by Tephra because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 20 2011 @ 08:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by incrediblelousminds
reply to post by Curious and Concerned
 


Indeed you are correct that the article makes a sensational point instead of a reasoned one. But if you read the article, it isnt merely costs that are being attributed to 'extreme weather'. It also attributes heavier amounts of precipitation to flooding, which has been modeled by climate scientists for many years now.
But yet again, it doesn't provide scientific evidence for their claims of increased precipitation, they just make general claims and attribute it to climate change without backing it up. From what I have seen, preciptation has been fairly consistent, with shifting localised areas breaking records each year, which is to be expected. Weather changes.


Originally posted by incrediblelousminds
The severity of weather patterns contributing to record-sized floods, tornadoes, hurricanes, etc is very likely connected to shifting weather patterns.

There are many factors which contribute to flooding, and not all of them are due to climate. When humans build dams and levees to stop regular, natural flooding, it creates worse floods when they inevitably occur. Land use changes also have a huge impact, when once wooded areas become farms or urban areas with increased run off. You cannot simply blame a record flood on increased precipitation. If you read the article, then you can see that climate scientist Bill Patzert says "it's too simple an answer to say there is more moisture in the atmosphere, so storms are more violent."


Originally posted by incrediblelousminds
The problem with saying 'its climate change', as any climate scientists worth their salt will say is that you cant measure one storm or one year and say its connected to climate patterns. You need at least a decade for that. But when one can see these storms unfolding exactly as has been predicted based on climate modeling, one can begin to see there is likely a pattern emerging and it is worth continuing paying attention to.
Where do you get the information to base your claims that you can "see these storms unfolding exactly as has been predicted based on climate modeling". You earlier mentioned tornadoes. No doubt you are aware that this year has had many tornadoes, and that many people are attributing this to climate change. As you said, one year of severe weather is not climate but weather. Yet if you look at the trends for damaging tornadoes...

There has been no trend for increased tornadoes. Is this what was predicted? And going by the logic of people who claim that this years tornadoes are due to climate change, I could also claim that in 2001 we had decreased tornadoes, due to climate change. If I had flawed models which showed that tornadoes should be decreasing, I could have used those to strengthen my claims. But that would be fitting the evidence to suit an agenda, and not real science.
edit on 20/6/11 by Curious and Concerned because: 'grammar".:

edit on 20/6/11 by Curious and Concerned because: (no reason given)




top topics
 
2
<< 1   >>

log in

join