Jump to content

Mallow

Meteorologist
  • Posts

    5,457
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Mallow

  1. Indeed, we'll find out pretty soon! For the second-to-last paragraph, that's why I also included the data back to 1979. That trend line is tempered strongly by the 1979-1995 "slower melt" period, and yet it still suggests your bolded comments are too extreme. I think you ascribe too much to the negative feedbacks at the expense of the positive (albedo/oceanic heat content) feedbacks. Both could be important, and I don't think it's reasonable to assume the trend line will change so drastically based on conjecture of which feedbacks are most important.
  2. Including all the data, chubbs is right about 2018: Will's predictions still seem pretty out there to me, even with all the data.
  3. Both of these are pretty extreme, especially the second one. I wouldn't say so (see above) You're welcome to change your vote. I'm simply asking what year (if any) you would think our minimum will be above 2013's minimum. It's not meant to be an actual FORECAST per se, just your best guesstimate.
  4. I voted "Not in our lifetime" for the second question, but if it does happen, it will be sometime between 2016 and 2020.
  5. Honestly, I wouldn't be surprised for anything from 2016 to 2022 or so. Beyond 2023 would shock me.
  6. Psshhh, I called you a grampa in that thread about say something nice to the poster above you.

  7. OHAI doublegunsstk!

  8. That's higher than I expected (I wonder if a decent percentage of those are just tornadoes that were never reported 'cause they happened in sparsely populated areas?)... but not so high that you should say "oh it's just another tornado warning". Even one in four is pretty scary odds for a tornado. Obviously you all know this, but it's a matter of getting this notion to the general public. Just because you've been tornado warned before and didn't personally see anything doesn't mean you shouldn't take the next one seriously.
  9. I wouldn't be surprised if it was a little higher than 50%, but I'd be surprised if it was that high.
  10. Often, "false alarms" aren't false at all. Just because your house (or church) didn't get hit by a tornado when you heard the tornado siren doesn't mean there wasn't a tornado or good reason for the warning. There is a concerted effort to avoid "sounding the alarm on a weak signal". "Weak signal" is a pretty ill-defined term, though. I would venture to guess (out of my a**) that the number of "false positives" is less than 50%, which means if you hear a tornado siren, there's probably an associated tornado. The issue may be that the public doesn't necessarily realize that a confirmed warning doesn't mean that everyone who heard the siren got hit by a tornado. Indeed, only a small part of the warning area usually does withstand a direct hit.
  11. Have no fear--the President of the Portland Bureau of Tourism is here!

  12. Pics of Dan in general are hawt.

    And because it's fun!

  13. I know, I saw. Hawt!

  14. You must've read my mind. I was just in the process of posting "HurricaneJosh - <5% - he always forgets I exist" as a reply. I had to delete the response once I saw my special little wall note.

    Of course, you did only remember me once you saw me in your thread, so I should ding some points for that alone!

  15. I remember that cam! Or at least one of its various incarnations. Excellent!

  16. As much as I'd like to mess with Rich, I cannot do that. I want you to attend!

  17. I already updated the homo list like... two weeks ago.

    And I doubt Tyler (Flexo) or Cory would ever come to a conference, unfortunately. :( :(

  18. Maybe if there was a good met school for grad students in Great Falls. But there's not!

  19. Yeah yeah, I'll get around to it!

  20. Maybe that's where our difference in opinion lies. I have been told all along that jobs are relatively few and far between. Did your school tell you otherwise? Or perhaps someone else?
×
×
  • Create New...