HAPPY ST. PATRICK'S DAY
Written by: Brian O'Neudorff
Happy Saint Patrick's Day everyone, but that's not really the topic of today's post. I actually had so many things on my mind to blog about today that I may actually talk about most of them in this post.
Since it is St. Patrick's Day, from a local weather perspective we can see all kinds of weather. We've been very fortunate the last 2 years. We should be very close to 60 today with sunshine and we had 59 last year and no rain. 2008 wasn't that bad either but it wasn't very warm with a high of only 35. Those have been the only St. Patrick's days I've been in Rochester for but going back to 2007, we received over 8 inches of snow. Given the alternative I know I'm feeling the luck of the Irish.
Although our weather has been nice to start the month, and as Bob mentioned yesterday that we are fairly dry and been snow free it looks like that is going to change. The above image is from the 00Z run of the GFS 144 hours out or for Monday Night/Tuesday morning. This shows the 850 mb temperatures dropping into the -10 to -15 range. I know this is a long way out but the storm that will move through here Sunday & Monday will bring some colder air behind it. If the models verify or at least the pattern after this weekend there could be a couple of storms the bring us a couple shots of colder air. Not as cold as we see above but still colder than we've been.
When you live in this part of the country, you know March is a very up and down month as warmer air tries to dethrone the colder air of winter. That means lots of ups and downs and March Madness (which you can only watch here on WROC-TV News 8 starting tomorrow, yes shameless plug) can apply not only to basketball but the weather too.
The other topic I want to briefly address is the recent trend in quickly attributing recent weather events to Climate Change. The new buzz phrase when talking about current weather and Man Made Global Warming is "Consistent With" Al Gore did just that this week on a conference call on Monday. “Just look at what has been happening for the last three days,” Gore said. “The so-called skeptics haven’t noted it because it’s not snow. But the downpours and heavy winds are consistent with what the scientists have long warned about.”
The difference between weather and climate is a measure of time. Weather is what conditions of the atmosphere are over a short period of time, and climate is how the atmosphere "behaves" over relatively long periods of time. That means one weather event like last weekends northeast storm doesn't prove or disprove climate change. I don't care if you put "consistent with" in front of it or not. I feel very strongly about this. I also feel the same way when those who claim climate change is a hoax used the cold in Florida and the Southeast this winter as a way to disprove climate change.
Here is where I stand, and I will make this brief. Climate change has been occurring on this planet with or without humans so for those who ask yes I "believe" in climate change but I take it a step further and know the climate changes. Do humans have an impact on climate and the environment around them? Absolutely we do, to think otherwise would be foolish in my opinion. Are we playing a role in the current climate changes we are seeing? Yes I think we have a role where I question is how large of a role and to be honest I don't think we are the lone cause of what we are seeing and there needs to be more debate between the 2 sides on this topic. That doesn't mean I'm against being a littler greener, a little cleaner. When governments get involved to legislate drastic changes in people's lives because of climate change then I get nervous, but whatever we can do we should do.
There were other topics I have in mind but I will keep those for another day, and for those who have been curious or thinking about asking. Scott is ok and is healthy. He just scheduled some time off this week and is back with your evening blog post and weather later today. Be safe, be smart on this St. Patrick's Day, Erin Go Braugh.
Thanks for letting us know about Scott, we do get nervous when he's not on-camera for a while.
ReplyDeleteI appreciate your comments about climate change. It's more nuanced than you might think by listening to either extreme. When in doubt, read more science!
Great post, Brian!
ReplyDeleteI fully agree with you on the global warming issue. Humans are impacting things to some extent, but it's WAY to premature, in my opinion, to sit here and say we are the sole cause when computer models struggle just to figure out what happens 384 hours out. And it's not only premature, but irresponsible for politicians to get involved and try to make sweeping changes to our freedoms based on this.
And am I the only one that sees a double standard when it comes to linking storms to climate change? When it's a warmer storm (i.e, rain not snow), then it's what scientists have been calling for all along and a sign of warming. But when it's a cold pattern, then we hear all about the difference between weather and climate, and how one storm, or even one cold winter, means nothing. Of course lately, they gave up on that and just said flat out that big snows in DC are "consistent" with climate change. The more skeptical we become, the more bold and transparent they get in their statements? A sign of desperation or just a blatent underestimating of our intelligence?
Anyway, you just wait till this summer. The first heat wave that sweeps across the country the media will be all over it like it's something rare and unprecidented.
MUST READ blog by Joe Bastardi on exactly this topic:
ReplyDeleteNo one that loves the weather should sit idly by and let government based agendas go unchallenged in the weather business. The idea that climate change caused the record snows, in a winter that NOAA had no idea was coming, can not simply be let go by the wayside. As I am seeing in several other debates in this country. people are making headline grabbing statements and not being fact checked. I didnt hear anyone from there saying how bad this winter would be. It was one of the nicest winters ever in much of Canada, giving them a break from the last 2 very cold ones. Why isnt that because the climate isnt changing. As for the flooding, our own Mike Smith of Weather Data came out a month ago with this idea. That NOAA is coming in a month later and stating the obvious is late to the party But its now open season on reasoning in the climate and weather. Look at this, and I wonder where their politics lie: "Climate change is also being blamed for a long-term trend toward severe flooding, according to an Interagency Climate Change Task Force report issued today. Climate Change Implicated RThe task force has found that climate change is affecting, and will continue to affect, nearly every aspect of our society and the environment,S according to the report issued jointly by NOAA and the White HouseUs Science and Technology Office and Council on Environmental Quality. The climate change task force..The White House Science and Technology Office and Council on Environmental Quality. You might as well call it the politboro, as I am sure there is not one voice of dissent in there. You people screaming keep politics out of the weather... How can you with this stuff going on. Its not weather, its not climate, its not science, its all politics and that is all it is. And it is now all so obvious.. Gore comes out first, and then they come right in after Their backing of the AL Gore position that climate change is causing this, is no different than other agenda driven positions that ignore the facts, no matter what they are.
And here's the second part of his post:
ReplyDeleteThe boldness of this distortion is nothing short of alarming. NASA data, not some right wing think tank, is showing the opposite going on with the decrease in specific humidity in the atmosphere, not the increase they claim cause such things. Given that they were clueless, as their winter forecast demonstrated, to the severity of the winter, means they should shut their mouths until they can see such things before hand. In addition, the warm ocean theory is nonsense. The structure of the ocean this winter, with the atlantic ocean tripole, is what favored the pattern near the east coast, for it favored the very blocking that caused this AND ITS BECAUSE THE WATER WAS COLD, NOT WARM, IN THE ATLANTIC EAST OF THE US, with the exception of the gulf stream. This enhanced baroclinicity and drew storms far enough offshore to allow it to be cold enough to snow. A WARMER OVERALL WESTERN ATLANTIC WOULD HAVE MEANT WARMER THICKNESSES AND MORE RAIN, AND TRACKS IN CLOSER TO THE COAST. But its natural processes and that is why the big winter was seen here way in advance. That they come in, and start this garbage, and that is what it is, is the same thing people of their ilk have done to Bill Gray, explain after the fact something they did not see before, and then discredit the person that did see it because his reasoning does not fit their agenda.
And here's the third and final part of Joe Bastardi's post:
ReplyDeleteIn the rage over the winter, lets look at the NOAA idea. 63% of the "divisions" were colder than normal,and even though that covers over 75% of the nation, they dont term it that way, they say 63% of the nation was colder than normal. That is nonsense. First of all if we weight the cold and warm, where cold gets one point much below gets 2 points, and coldest ever gets 3 we find this as the score by weighting properly: 324 cold, 51 warm. Lets see what that is in weighted percentage is, shall we: Here is the map, for you to look at: http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2010/images/divisionaltrank200912_201002.gif Here is their "expert: assessment "For the winter season, 63 percent of the country experienced below normal temperatures" Any 3rd grader can see that is more than 63%, unless you twist it with saying you are counting divisions, with their unequal areas, but only the divisions. But lets do this right okay, NOAA, lets weight the cold vs the warm like any basic statistic class will teach you, so that minor warmth doesnt outweigh major cold. That comes out to a weighted divisional score of 86.4% of the nation cold. How about them apples. I will tell you what, lets look at that map and pretend its an electoral college. California is a draw with one cold, one warm and the rest neutral. But how many states out of the 48 looked at here ( not 57 as one of the candidates said, we have a total of 50, but for our sake, lets look at the 48) New England and New York fall to warm, as do the pac northwest. The rest of the nation is cold. So we have 10 states warm, 1 tie and 37 cold. So what does that work out to as far as percentage. 78.7% Only in the wizard of oz world that has now engulfed us today can these things be happening. This is a top down driven agenda, a counter-offensive starting, which as soon as they can get too, they will shove down the throats of the America people. But right now another big bill which I wont comment on is occupying the main attention, but these unchallenged assertions by the mainstream media ( example, the atlantic city press article I showed where in spite of the destruction at the shore, the writer simply accepted the NWS spokesmans assertion that the winds were topping out at 40 mph in most places), are just the start of the counter-offensive on climate, which fueled by a hurricane season that because of strictly natural causes will bring this back to a full boil, will subject the public to another onslaught by people that only wish to drive their ideas down the throat of this nation. You mark my words. If they can use cold and snow for their own purpose and completely ignore the facts that say what they are saying is nonsense, what will they do when hurricanes show up again.
Back to climate change and my position. I am open to learning and doing more. I try to read both sides. I visit sites like ClimateProgress.org. I read Joe Bastardi's blog post on AccuWeather.com. There's so much out there and to be honest the real loser in this discussion and name calling that I see on some of these sites are all of you. These sites, and climate experts on both sides are either yelling at you, calling the other side names. Making you feel guilty for what is happening. Scaring our children with pictures of polar bears and blaming weather like Katrina on humans. It's hard to get a real good scientific analysis of whats going on.
ReplyDeleteIf you get the chance I recommend Dr. Jeff Masters' Wunderground Weather Blog.
http://www.wunderground.com/blog/JeffMasters/show.html
I think he does a good job at telling the science. He tends to be more towards man made climate change but it is a good read. He's also brilliant in discussing the tropics. A must weather blog. -Brian
You hit the nail on the head with that, Brian. As everyday people, all we can do is be spectators to all of this shouting on different sides of the aisle. In some instances in politics, the people can make great changes, but when it comes to science, it's like if you don't have an opinion that alligns with the so called "consensus" then somehow you're a bad person. And if you don't have a degree in science, then forget about it all together, you're a nobody. I don't want to go so far as to compare what's happening to other regimes, as a person like Glenn Beck might....BUT, with that said, I don't like the direction that we're going.
ReplyDeleteWhen Al Gore, backed by the scientific community and the government, starts visiting our schools and telling our children that because of their parent's ignorant, greedy ways, their planet is facing doomed...that's when the line is crossed.
The number one rule in the fascist / nazi playbook: Create a false crisis in order to force the people into complying with the government. Those who refuse to comply are labeled as bad for mankind. Sound familiar?
I don't think I submitted this right the first time, so if I send it twice, my bad.
ReplyDeleteI personally find it a little creepy and disturbing that Al Gore and his gang, backed by the scientific community and the government, are visiting our schools and telling our children that they know what's best for them over their parents. And that it's because of their parent's wrong doing that their home, earth, is nearly doomed. And then supply them with scary books about how their ancesters destroyed the earth. Seems to me that a similar regime applied the same type of tactics once upon a time - create a false crisis and manipulate the people into doing what you want in order to avert it. By this method, those who do not comply are, by default, bad for the world. Hmmm, sound familar?