Mass. Flooding

A repository for everything else. Introductions, off-topic threads, testing and so on. When in doubt, post it here.

Moderators: Moderators Emeritus, Moderators

User avatar
LoveSickJerk
Posts: 1261
Joined: Tue Apr 22, 2003 2:02 pm
Current Heading: Ascending
Location: Buffalo, NY et al.
Contact:

Mass. Flooding

Postby LoveSickJerk » Mon May 15, 2006 8:08 am

New England Flooding

I'm pretty sure we have some board members from this area, are you all doing OK?

User avatar
Liesbeth
Posts: 3259
Joined: Sat May 03, 2003 4:27 am
Current Heading: West
Location: megaland
Contact:

Postby Liesbeth » Mon May 15, 2006 9:05 am

also, an area as big as the Netherlands has flooded in Surinam in South America - and it's only the start of the rain season there...

Ogdred Weary
Posts: 22
Joined: Tue Apr 11, 2006 9:33 am
Location: around these parts

Postby Ogdred Weary » Mon May 15, 2006 4:19 pm

Geez. And global warming is fiction, right. Ha. Send some of that rain to California. We can afford some major flooding.

User avatar
chelsea
Posts: 726
Joined: Mon Jun 02, 2003 8:53 pm
Location: Queen Anne Hill
Contact:

Postby chelsea » Mon May 15, 2006 5:49 pm

speaking of global warming, anyone seen this trailer in theatres lately? i've seen it twice, and it's terrified me both times.

User avatar
dchris
Posts: 278
Joined: Sun Jul 13, 2003 8:45 pm
Location: Fort Lauderdale, FL
Contact:

Postby dchris » Mon May 15, 2006 7:00 pm

I love Al Gore so much.

Can I take a moment to show appreciation for Gore's recent appearance on SNL? Glaciers that once were melting are now on the attack.

A dear friend of mine mentioned in conversation this afternoon that she's "not sure global warming exists." I was speechless.

User avatar
Betty Felon
Posts: 1779
Joined: Wed Jun 25, 2003 4:15 pm
Location: miserable degrees fahrenheit
Contact:

Postby Betty Felon » Tue May 16, 2006 6:22 am

I hate to horrify y'all, but global warming....I occasionally have my doubts. Blame it on the Bush adminstration removing every shred of my ability to trust the media anymore (they did a good job, because the lack of trust is retroactive.)

This article is a bit convincing in its claim that the real science behind the issue is being exploited by politics. It's convincing enough, anyway, that I don't know who to believe anymore:

There IS a problem with global warming....it stopped in 1998

"Consider the simple fact, drawn from the official temperature records of the Climate Research Unit at the University of East Anglia, that for the years 1998-2005 global average temperature did not increase (there was actually a slight decrease, though not at a rate that differs significantly from zero)."

Please disabuse me of the notion if the article is wrong. It's a fairly important issue to be right about, for sure, but I've been believing in global warming for so long, I can't remember why anymore.

User avatar
sour29
Posts: 2057
Joined: Tue Dec 09, 2003 7:53 am
Current Heading: Ascending
Location: Toronto, Canada
Contact:

Postby sour29 » Tue May 16, 2006 6:50 am

My friend's boyfriend is a geologist. Apparently one of the things they learned at University was that Global Warming was a scam. I don't know enough details to elaborate intelligently, but I remember it being a vehement belief that the whole thing was BS and a misunderstanding of conventional cyclical shifts in climate.

Ogdred Weary
Posts: 22
Joined: Tue Apr 11, 2006 9:33 am
Location: around these parts

Postby Ogdred Weary » Tue May 16, 2006 10:52 am

Well, there may be truth to that arguement. Lack of education on hot topics in general is prevalent. But, the fact that glaciers are steadily melting and polar bears are steering near the way of the dodo is "tad" unsettling for me. Pandas can go extinct though....freaking bears have perfect teeth but are on the brink of extinction just 'cause they like to eat only bamboo.

User avatar
Karousme
Posts: 530
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2003 12:20 am
Location: Your Smelly Face
Contact:

Postby Karousme » Tue May 16, 2006 2:44 pm

What about the melting at the end of the last ice age? We had no autos or factories or aerosol cans back then.

User avatar
chelsea
Posts: 726
Joined: Mon Jun 02, 2003 8:53 pm
Location: Queen Anne Hill
Contact:

Postby chelsea » Tue May 16, 2006 6:23 pm

if global warming isn't real, then why are the snows of kilimanjaro disappearing?

User avatar
icapants
Posts: 403
Joined: Mon Sep 05, 2005 11:51 am
Location: Seattle, WA
Contact:

Postby icapants » Tue May 16, 2006 6:25 pm

I think this graph may prove to be insightful for everyone:

http://www.venganza.org/piratesarecool4.jpg

You may be interested to know that global warming, earthquakes, hurricanes, and other natural disasters are a direct effect of the shrinking numbers of Pirates since the 1800s. For your interest, I have included a graph of the approximate number of pirates versus the average global temperature over the last 200 years. As you can see, there is a statistically significant inverse relationship between pirates and global temperature.

User avatar
Betty Felon
Posts: 1779
Joined: Wed Jun 25, 2003 4:15 pm
Location: miserable degrees fahrenheit
Contact:

Postby Betty Felon » Tue May 16, 2006 7:53 pm

Ogdred Weary wrote: Pandas can go extinct though....freaking bears have perfect teeth but are on the brink of extinction just 'cause they like to eat only bamboo.


Remember that Simpsons with the endangered scream-a-pillar who needed constant reassurance or it would die of depression and was sexually attracted to fire? hehe

Except pandas are worth the trouble because they are made of concentrated cuteness. Even the adult ones look like dolls.

Btw- bamboo is, like, the fastest growing grass on the planet...there's no lack of bamboo in the world. The panda problem is probably related to the pirate problem.

User avatar
grant
wears the boots
Posts: 1485
Joined: Tue Apr 22, 2003 10:16 am
Current Heading: West
Location: peninsular america
Contact:

Postby grant » Wed May 17, 2006 7:18 am

As you can see, there is a statistically significant inverse relationship between pirates and global temperature.


This actually is fairly accurate science -- piracy being a good index of industrialization of wildnerness (the open ocean being the last great wild space on the planet, with phytoplankton having some enormous effect on greenhouse gases).

Long term climate change is pretty contentious stuff, but the consensus is even if things would be warming up anyway, the extra bit of C02 and other stuff we're pumping into the atmosphere is definitely speeding up the process.

Ogdred Weary
Posts: 22
Joined: Tue Apr 11, 2006 9:33 am
Location: around these parts

Postby Ogdred Weary » Wed May 17, 2006 9:15 am

Okay, I shall change my rant from freakin' bears to freakin' pirates. Hee hee, I can't argue with that logic.

User avatar
grant
wears the boots
Posts: 1485
Joined: Tue Apr 22, 2003 10:16 am
Current Heading: West
Location: peninsular america
Contact:

Postby grant » Fri May 19, 2006 7:33 am

Oh sweet Jesus...

Yesterday, the Competitive Enterprise Institute – a front group funded by ExxonMobil and other big oil companies – launched two advertisements in response to Al Gore’s new movie, An Inconvenient Truth.

The first ad portrays global warming science as a vicious smear campaign against carbon dioxide. The ad, which despite appearances is not an SNL parody, helpfully reminds us that carbon dioxide is “essential to life” because “we breath it out.”

It’s comforting to know that this is the best global warming rejectionists can come up with.


The ad's at the link.

User avatar
Betty Felon
Posts: 1779
Joined: Wed Jun 25, 2003 4:15 pm
Location: miserable degrees fahrenheit
Contact:

Postby Betty Felon » Fri Jun 30, 2006 9:25 pm

weeeeellll, being not-so-happy about being lumped in with the rejectionists by none other than the venerable grant, I have been paying some serious attention to this global warming media push.

Turns out the article I linked is from a super super conservative paper. Sorry. And there IS a lot of open to the public, free, hard science available. Its a tad bit dry reading, however.

World Getting WARMER?: Yup, almost certainly. Chelsea was right about the snows of kilamanjaro. There is significant evidence (tree rings, ice isotopes, boreholes, coral fossils, etc) that the world is indeed getting unnaturally warmer in the last 150 years. Also, there is a measurable amount of certainty as to how true the theory is.:

National Research Council Report on "Surface Temperature Reconstructions for the Last 2,000 years" The National Research Council is made up of members from the National Academies of Science, Medicine and Engineering. (This link is a treasure trove of solid data. Full of free texts on tons of geek-wonderful things. e.g., the nutrition needs of horses, AIDS in Haiti, US import/export analysis, etc. )

Anyway, WHY the world is getting warmer:

This is due phenomenon called "Climate Forcing", the climate is changing to restore balance to an imbalance caused by external factors like solar flares, volcanoes and human beans.

It concludes that natural phenomena cannot account for the changes in the 20th century and that human activities are responsible.

2001 UN IPCC Report
Legimate Climate Scientists Blog

However, there are indeed some a-political legitmate publishing scientists who disagree with the consensus:Wikipedia is keeping track of them for you

Joe Szczepaniak
Posts: 45
Joined: Fri Jun 16, 2006 10:04 pm
Location: Omaha, NE
Contact:

Postby Joe Szczepaniak » Sat Jul 01, 2006 3:21 am

Let's just start by saying that this movie has been twisted from an original vision to Al Gore's slide-show version of it. The "most important issue of his [Gore's] life"is really Gore jumping on a bandwagon he's never even seen before.

Do you want to argue science?

In the movie Gore relies heavily on a so-called "hockey stick" theory. Dr. Michael Mann's "hockey stick" theory, which claims that the climate remained the same for some 900 years before spiking during the 20th century, has been refuted by scientists-citing that it doen't account for both the Medieval Warm Period and the Little Ice Age. Check out this: http://epw.senate.gov/pressitem.cfm?party=rep&id=257697

"Gore’s claim that global warming is causing the snows of Mt. Kilimanjaro to disappear has also been debunked by scientific reports. For example, a 2004 study in the journal Nature makes clear that Kilimanjaro is experiencing less snowfall because there’s less moisture in the air due to deforestation around Kilimanjaro." -US Senate Committee on Environment and public works

And scientists are NOT giving overwhelming praise to Gore's movie. The Associated Press has ignored the expertise of many scientists who disagree in making that statement.

So what does it all boil down to?

Al Gore was almost elected president, but was not. When Bush leaves office the Republican party will have one heck of a time getting another Republican elected so who's going to step up to the plate? Is it possible that Gore might be up for it? Hmmmm.... Maybe not even this coming term, but the one thereafter? Either that or he's prepping the public for his party's next candidate.

Al Gore is a sad little man who jumped on the first cause he could find that had nothing to do with religious-moral issues, so it's his safest bet.

+joe

User avatar
Flyn
Posts: 377
Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2003 11:05 am
Location: Ballard
Contact:

Postby Flyn » Sat Jul 01, 2006 9:16 am

I saw Gore talking about a global warming related issue (saturation of gasses in water decreasing as temperatures go up) on Bill Nye the Science Guy in 93 or 94, at which point he was already well known for his environmental stances. So, maybe he was grasping for a good topic to be passionate about at some point, but it certainly wasn't anytime recently.

User avatar
Betty Felon
Posts: 1779
Joined: Wed Jun 25, 2003 4:15 pm
Location: miserable degrees fahrenheit
Contact:

Postby Betty Felon » Sat Jul 01, 2006 5:32 pm

Szczepaniak, Im gonna have to respectfully completely disagree with you. And I dont care about the politics around the movie...at all.

But, anyway, as far as science goes, um...Im gonna trust the report from the National Research Council over some goofy Senate Committee hearing. Nature is a respectable journal, but your committee is citing only ONE published paper (about only one phenomenon too).

The Council report, which I linked in its entirety for your reading pleasure, was requested by Congress last year. It was just released last week.

The National Reseach Councils members come straight from the National Academy of Science, the National Academy of Engineering and the Institute of Medicine. Fairly credible dudes. They were asked to review all the science and answer the questions-- 1.) How has temperature varied over the last 2000 years? and 2.) How certain is the answer to that question. The results are exhaustive and dont talk about any hocky sticks.

The report doesnt make policy recommendations, but it does provide a rigorous study that warming exists, that there is certainty about that. And it covers your areas of complaint:

"Large-scale surface temperature reconstructions yield a generally consistent picture of temperature trends during the preceding millennium, including relatively warm conditions centered around A.D. 1000 (identified by some as the 'Medieval Warm Period') and a relatively cold period (or 'Little Ice Age') centered around 1700."

The report doesnt really focus on why, but it does state that because other factors (volcanic activity, radiation from the sun) are not anomalous with the last 1000 years, science`s best guess is that greenhouse gases that are causing the warming in the last 25 years.

In other words, global warming, like any theory, is still a theory, but there is more than significant scientfically rigorous evidence that its true.

P.S- I had my doubts too (see start of thread), but...well, its long, but read the report for yourself. (Or part of it anyway, i havent read it all yet, I admit.)

User avatar
junker347
Posts: 251
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2004 7:42 pm
Location: Reading, MA

Postby junker347 » Sat Jul 01, 2006 9:29 pm

to respond to the original post here :p
i'm from new england (MA) and everything is currently, and was a month ago, fine. just quite wet. i've been trying to touch up my car paint and have been trying to find a day where I knew it wouldn't rain. that day came today, and i had been planning to do this since late may. woo.


Return to “Cattywampus”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests