WVclimo Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 Whats the deal with the Kevin Shaw thread? Just his personal weather log. Does anyone else even read it?Kevin has been posting his daily blog on Weatherbug's Backyard Community for the last 10 years. I read it sometimes. Very dedicated weather observer: ACON, and CWOP.Haven't seen that thread's OP around in quite a while though. Hope everything is fine with Terpguy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EastCoast NPZ Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 Pretty much the opposite of the effects during winter. Instead of having cold in the south and warm over Canada you have warm across the south and cold across the north. We're in the zone where we're close to the above normal temps of the south but tend to be near normal but when we get warm can get downright hot. Well, it's settled then. We're sure to have a raging -AO / -NAO combination from May through Sep. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WinterWxLuvr Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 This whole "I'm taking my ball and going home" attitude about posting in the long range thread is just a tad childish. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clueless Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 This whole "I'm taking my ball and going home" attitude about posting in the long range thread is just a tad childish. We need a "Why the GFS sucks" thread to clean up LR. We all know why - because it doesn't give us snow. And if it did give us snow, even if the solution wasn't plausible, everyone would be hugging it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CAPE Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 This whole "I'm taking my ball and going home" attitude about posting in the long range thread is just a tad childish. Who is doing that? I noticed it seemed a bit barren today... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CAPE Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 We need a "Why the GFS sucks" thread to clean up LR. We all know why - because it doesn't give us snow. And if it did give us snow, even if the solution wasn't plausible, everyone would be hugging it. A long range pattern discussion thread does not have to be a model discussion thread. They arent the same thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gymengineer Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 This whole "I'm taking my ball and going home" attitude about posting in the long range thread is just a tad childish. Are you saying Wes and BobChill are being childish? That's a first.... All's that happened with changing where the posts go is that there's now a de facto pattern discussion thread apart from the model discussion thread, just like in the New England subforum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clueless Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 A long range pattern discussion thread does not have to be a model discussion thread. They arent the same thing. I wouldn't know. The rules aren't hard and fast, or so it seems to me. Just sayin'. Although a separate thread for the new GFS may be warranted for obvious reasons. We may even have one buried somewhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CAPE Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 Are you saying Wes and BobChill are being childish? That's a first.... All's that happened with changing where the posts go is that there's now a de facto pattern discussion thread apart from the model discussion thread, just like in the New England subforum. We should have an official model discussion thread here as well. I agree we should have 2 separate threads like the NE subforum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PDIII Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 Did anyone see the digital snow maps I posted this morning... I could have sworn I posted two maps in digital snow and now they are gone.. Maybe they never posted... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aldie 22 Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 Did anyone see the digital snow maps I posted this morning... I could have sworn I posted two maps in digital snow and now they are gone.. Maybe they never posted... It said they were hot linked Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PDIII Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 It said they were hot linked I just defined an IMG and put the URL in the source attribute... Isn't that the way to show an image in an html page? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aldie 22 Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 I just defined an IMG and put the URL in the source attribute... Isn't that the way to show an image in an html page? No clue...I just remember seeing it say that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 A lot of places don't allow image embeds esp if it's locked otherwise. You'll see because it's cached but everyone else just sees a partial link. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T. August Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 18z GFS is ridiculously cold. 18z temps on 2/1/15: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PDIII Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 A lot of places don't allow image embeds esp if it's locked otherwise. You'll see because it's cached but everyone else just sees a partial link.Thanks ian what's the correct way of posting an image? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PDIII Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 The icehouse/greenhouse distinction simply refers to the presence or absence of polar ice caps. It's too early to say if/when AGW will push us into another greenhouse climate regimen, though most of the recent literature puts ECS @ 2.5-3.5C per doubling, which is bad enough. That said, we've seen greenhouse climates w/ CO^2 below 350ppm, and we've seen full blown ice ages w/ CO^2 above 2000ppm. A lot of factors go into the longer term climate changes, and in most cases it's a product of overlapping forcings/harmonics. There's a lot of paleoclimate literature out there suggesting that lower frequency forcings promote the most significant systematic responses. The ice age cycle is a good example of this..there's no change in the amount of solar radiation hitting Earth..it's merely a tiny redistribution, and it's enough to throw the system into and out of ice ages in extremely rapid fashion. These forcings are tiny..decade-to-decade shifts in forcings/circulations are greater than these minute redistributions. Difference is, they're higher frequency phenomenon, and the system is an inertia-laden fluid. /endrant Man can dump c02 in to the atmosphere and the effect is so trivial that not even the top experts can agree that if it has any real effect.. But a tiny redistribution in the solar radiation can spin us in to an ice age... The amount of time and energy spent trying to prove or disprove this is comical. Nature will do whatever the f#@% it wants and there is no way man is gonna stop slow speed up or change that. The global warming ALARMISTS will have more succes swaying public opinion filming polar bear cubs falling off icebergs... And if you get the bear swimming from one iceberg to another.. That's like the golden shot!!!! Especially if the icebergs are small and seem like they might be melting... The best is when the weight of the bear actually makes the ice wobble a little... Oh.. And they gotta get ice wall falling in the water.. Thats important... If they could the polar bear cub with ice falling in the background.. You could show that same video over and over not have spend one more dime research. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian Posted January 18, 2015 Share Posted January 18, 2015 Thanks ian what's the correct way of posting an image?Probably save them to your computer the upload them here (or imgur then link like you were). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stormtracker Posted January 18, 2015 Share Posted January 18, 2015 imma 'bout to **** that refreshing banner up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stormtracker Posted January 18, 2015 Share Posted January 18, 2015 lol'd. Good gif Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kay Posted January 18, 2015 Share Posted January 18, 2015 I won't deny it anymore... I'm sick, and all bets are off for tomorrow. Bleh! I hope you guys will be extra entertaining. Thank you in advance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WxUSAF Posted January 18, 2015 Share Posted January 18, 2015 Man can dump c02 in to the atmosphere and the effect is so trivial that not even the top experts can agree that if it has any real effect.. But a tiny redistribution in the solar radiation can spin us in to an ice age... The amount of time and energy spent trying to prove or disprove this is comical. Nature will do whatever the f#@% it wants and there is no way man is gonna stop slow speed up or change that. The global warming ALARMISTS will have more succes swaying public opinion filming polar bear cubs falling off icebergs... And if you get the bear swimming from one iceberg to another.. That's like the golden shot!!!! Especially if the icebergs are small and seem like they might be melting... The best is when the weight of the bear actually makes the ice wobble a little... Oh.. And they gotta get ice wall falling in the water.. Thats important... If they could the polar bear cub with ice falling in the background.. You could show that same video over and over not have spend one more dime research. lolz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MN Transplant Posted January 18, 2015 Share Posted January 18, 2015 Man can dump c02 in to the atmosphere and the effect is so trivial that not even the top experts can agree that if it has any real effect.. But a tiny redistribution in the solar radiation can spin us in to an ice age... The amount of time and energy spent trying to prove or disprove this is comical. Nature will do whatever the f#@% it wants and there is no way man is gonna stop slow speed up or change that. The global warming ALARMISTS will have more succes swaying public opinion filming polar bear cubs falling off icebergs... And if you get the bear swimming from one iceberg to another.. That's like the golden shot!!!! Especially if the icebergs are small and seem like they might be melting... The best is when the weight of the bear actually makes the ice wobble a little... Oh.. And they gotta get ice wall falling in the water.. Thats important... If they could the polar bear cub with ice falling in the background.. You could show that same video over and over not have spend one more dime research. No, literally every expert says that it has a real effect. Even the "respected" climate skeptics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PDIII Posted January 18, 2015 Share Posted January 18, 2015 Hey this is a little off topic but I really want to share something that I discovered today. If you place a sliver of butter (the real stick kind... Salted) between two pieces of cinnamon toast crunch....and then eat it... Like its a little sandwich... It so good you could probably eat a stick of butter without even batting an eyebrow Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PDIII Posted January 18, 2015 Share Posted January 18, 2015 No, literally every expert says that it has a real effect. Even the "respected" climate skeptics.You see I am admittedly bias on this one.. My junior year I took earth and planetary sciences at Hopkins and the prof would go off on his global warming tangent pretty much every class. You see he went to antarctica.. A couple of times and drilled a bunch of ice cores... And looked at the C02 content.. He had slides upon slides.. Statistical analysis.. Spreadsheets charts etc... And his conclusion was that basically the spike in C02 levels is not anomalous. So with no abnormal CO2 levels... What part is man playing in it?So I am gonna go with PhD who actually drilled the cores and did the analysis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mappy Posted January 18, 2015 Share Posted January 18, 2015 Anyone else see the bright orange fireball about 10 min ago? Was looking NNE Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WinterWxLuvr Posted January 18, 2015 Share Posted January 18, 2015 Anyone else see the bright orange fireball about 10 min ago? Was looking NNE Ground level or elevated? Could it have been a meteor? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mappy Posted January 18, 2015 Share Posted January 18, 2015 Ground level or elevated? Could it have been a meteor? My husband thinks it was about 30-40 degrees up, pretty sure it was a meteor. Thought it was a plane at first until it grew bright orange as it streaked across the sky, then faded and was gone. Pretty cool to see. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WinterWxLuvr Posted January 18, 2015 Share Posted January 18, 2015 My husband thinks it was about 30-40 degrees up, pretty sure it was a meteor. Thought it was a plane at first until it grew bright orange as it streaked across the sky, then faded and was gone. Pretty cool to see. Wow....I'd like to see something like that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T. August Posted January 18, 2015 Share Posted January 18, 2015 My husband thinks it was about 30-40 degrees up, pretty sure it was a meteor. Thought it was a plane at first until it grew bright orange as it streaked across the sky, then faded and was gone. Pretty cool to see. Was it a constant light for awhile? It sounds similar to what I saw on NYE. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.