Global warming causes ship to be stranded

Marcel,
Don't believe all the hype about hurricanes on the east coast. While Sandy was a big event there are hundreds of thousands of boats on the east coast that did not suffer ANY damage. Hurricanes are much less of a threat to our boats than intended and unintended consequences of government meddling.

Mike
 
Folks,
Let's remember that Sandy was not a Hurricane when it struck New Jersey.
The winds were below Hurricane strength.
Also the reason there was so much flooding is because there was already a long lingering North East Storm piling water into the shore line, especially the funnel at NY Harbor and flooding was already occurring.
Finally the storm hit at an astrological time when extra high tides were occurring on the coast.
New Jersey has experienced similar damage during winter North East storms.
From Wiki
"The Ash Wednesday Storm of 1962 occurred on March 6–8, 1962 along the mid-Atlantic coast of the United States. Also known as the Great March Storm of 1962, it was considered by the U.S. Geological Survey to be one of the most destructive storms ever to affect the mid-Atlantic states. One of the ten worst storms in the United States in the 20th century, it lingered through five high tides over a three-day period, killing 40 people, injuring over 1,000 and causing hundreds of millions in property damage in six states."

"Its impact was so powerful that the U.S. Weather Bureau took the extraordinary step of giving it a name: "The Great Atlantic Storm." It is also known as "Five High Storm" because it lingered off the Atlantic Coast of the northeast United States over a period of five high tides. However, because the heaviest damages occurred in most areas on Wednesday, March 7, which was the Christian holiday of Ash Wednesday, the first day of Lent that year, it has become most popularly well known as the "Ash Wednesday Storm of 1962."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ash_Wednesday_Storm_of_1962

It was not Sandy alone!! But the warming alarmists leave out all the facts
 
NOAA “state of the climate” report: Contiguous US average temperature plummeted 2.9F in 2013

"In 2013, the contiguous United States (CONUS) average temperature of 52.4°F was 0.3°F above the 20th century average, and tied with 1980 as the 37th warmest year in the 119-year period of record. The 2013 annual temperature marked the coolest year for the nation since 2009."
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/01/...mperature-plummeted-2-9f-in-2013/#more-101444

Did anyone hear about this from the MSM?
Are our Politicians talking about this?
 
I would suggest that a lot of you "greenies" don't realize you are being led around by watermelons. (Green on the outside, red in the center). There is a reason why Patrick Moore one of the founders of Greenpeace left, even he doubts man's participation in global warming (if warming exists at all). He knows what these people are up to and I would suggest you read some of his stuff including his report on global warming to the Royal Society. You "greenies" need to get a grip on your data and realize how you are being manipulated by politicians into a very bad place.

By the way, if you do believe in "global warming" ask yourself this question. What is the largest greenhouse gas in the world? Water vapor(remember latent heat of water?). Now tell me which of the so called "global warming affirmation studies" include water vapor in their model?
 
Gee-Bee,
Some excellent points especially how so many are totally unaware that water vapor is the principal green house gas that controls the earth's temperature and climate. Reportedly water vapor is circa 60% of the greenhouse effect without which man could not survive living on earth. CO2 effect is about 1/3rd of H2O.
I was in a meeting in Milan Italy and mentioned this to a PHD scientist, an avid believer in global warming, and he did not believe this fact (from a mere Engineer) . He replied that he would need to check it out.
The propaganda machine is quite effective!
Interesting that the so called "scientists" have claimed for years that the sun does not matter, now the present halt in global warming is now being caused by the quiet solar activity. Note the BBC is hyping the concern about another possible extreme bitter cool period similar to the Maunder minimum ice age between the 16th and 19th centuries where the Thames river was frozen over and there was severe starvation. See BBC:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-25771510
 
Thank you Kevdon22. Most people who do not really understand weather, do not understand the power of latent heat of water in the atmosphere. (Hint, it is why you can freeze to death in the Sahara at night and why there are thunderstorms every afternoon in Panama). There number of global warming models which account accurately for water vapor is exactly ZERO. Because the amount of water has not and likely will never be able to be calculated due to its constant change of state.
 
LOL, you guys can argue all you want about climate change, obviously what will happen will happen.

But I do find it interesting that a lot of people that are climate change deniers also do not believe in evolution, and think the earth is 6,000 years old. Does anyone know the correlation in there?

http://www.pewforum.org/2013/12/30/publics-views-on-human-evolution/

http://www.people-press.org/2013/11/01/gop-deeply-divided-over-climate-change/

I rest my case. Hope that is not too subtle.
 
MarcelR, the only people I see who believe the earth is and should be static is people like you screaming about climate change. If one believes in evolution of species, then one equally has to believe in evolution of the planet on which said species live in its atmosphere. Indeed, a changing atmosphere is one of the reasons animals do adapt and evolve. Evolution is change, and you seem to be the one most afraid of it.
 
Some can't see the forrest for the trees.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/01/17/beijing-fake-sunrise_n_4618536.html
While the Chinese didn't broadcast this rising sun to illustrate their smog problems, a picture is worth a thousand words.
Believe what you will but I believe that if not for our environmenalist, our smog would have gotten as bad as it is in China now.
I also believe that global warming is real and that dirtying our nest(polution) has played some role in that.
 
No rational person denies that our climate is changing and has changed in the past. And even conservatives acknowledge that human activity "has played some role" in the changes. However, the media hype that claims humans are the major cause is not supported by science. Even the U.N. committee on climate change claims only a small portion of the change is caused by human activity.

meide
 
Tribble and the rest. CO2 is not even a significant portion of our atmosphere at less than 1/2 of 1%. Since man made global warming accounts for 7-45% of the CO2 by ppm in the atmosphere there is less than a 50% chance that man has any effect on it. And while the current ppm is nearly double of that of close to 15 million years ago (according to ice samples) there has been only a 37% change in the last 120 years (most of the industrial revolution). You can manipulate the numbers only so much. But the bottom line is, if we don't do something to stop the earth from putting CO2 into the air we will have climate change.

That last line was sarcasm BTW. People like Tribble know only one thing about Global Climate change and that is what they get from the people who's business it is to air dirty laundry.

Composition of dry atmosphere, by volume[5]
ppmv: parts per million by volume (note: volume fraction is equal to mole fraction for ideal gas only, see volume (thermodynamics))
Gas Volume
Nitrogen (N2) 780,840 ppmv (78.084%)
Oxygen (O2) 209,460 ppmv (20.946%)
Argon (Ar) 9,340 ppmv (0.9340%)
Carbon dioxide (CO2) 397 ppmv (0.0397%)
Neon (Ne) 18.18 ppmv (0.001818%)
Helium (He) 5.24 ppmv (0.000524%)
Methane (CH4) 1.79 ppmv (0.000179%)
Krypton (Kr) 1.14 ppmv (0.000114%)
Hydrogen (H2) 0.55 ppmv (0.000055%)
Nitrous oxide (N2O) 0.325 ppmv (0.0000325%)
Carbon monoxide (CO) 0.1 ppmv (0.00001%)
Xenon (Xe) 0.09 ppmv (9×10#8722;6%) (0.000009%)
Ozone (O3) 0.0 to 0.07 ppmv (0 to 7×10#8722;6%)
Nitrogen dioxide (NO2) 0.02 ppmv (2×10#8722;6%) (0.000002%)
Iodine (I2) 0.01 ppmv (1×10#8722;6%) (0.000001%)
Ammonia (NH3) trace

Not included in above dry atmosphere: (and left out of every climate study)
Water vapor (H2O) ~0.25% by mass over full atmosphere, locally 0.001%–5%
 
quote:
Originally posted by meide

No rational person denies that our climate is changing and has changed in the past. And even conservatives acknowledge that human activity "has played some role" in the changes. However, the media hype that claims humans are the major cause is not supported by science. Even the U.N. committee on climate change claims only a small portion of the change is caused by human activity.

meide

Click to expand...


United Nations report on climate change.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/weath...governmental-panel-on-climate-change/2878853/
 
I find it interesting that the major proponents of human cause of climate change get paid for producing that work.
 
Relating evolution and climate change beliefs indicates Marcel thinks that people can only be 100% correct or 100% wrong, so unless he has never been wrong all his opinions on climate change are wrong.
 
Tribble,

The USA article appears to be based solely on the executive summary of the IPCC report, which many of the report's authors say does not represent the report's true content. Unfortunately the howling media only reads the politically biased summary rather than doing their homework (kind of like they Obamacare).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top