And they will say that it is caused by AGW
You shout as if you are a little sissy,
no cite, no story, typical denialism.
Q
--
The difference between us and the Titanic is the band.
Correct, local weather. A high pressure anticyclone west of the British
Isles, and low pressure over Europe forces cold air down from the North
pole.
How come that people that don't even understand the basics of standard
weather forecasting feel qualified to pontificate about global warming?
T.
Yes we know!
Hot weather is caused by .
. GLOBAL WARMING!
. EXTREME WEATHER!
. THE ENVIRONMENT FIGHTING BACK!
Cold weather is caused by .
. a dry air mass and clear skies.
. a cold front.
. nothing in particular.
Warmest Regards
Bon_0
"It is a remarkable fact that despite the worldwide expenditure of perhaps
US$50 billion since 1990, and the efforts of tens of thousands of scientists
worldwide, no human climate signal has yet been detected that is distinct
from natural variation."
Bob Carter, Research Professor of Geology, James Cook University, Townsville
Hypocrite, when the high pressure anticyclone was
over the East Coast of the US in 2007 for the month of
August and temperatures in record dry air were 10 F
warmer than normal the whole month that helped
the myth that it was Global Warming.
So why 6�c in Vancouver? And the forecast for Nuuk, Greenland for
tomorrow is 4�c. http://www.wunderground.com/global/stations/04250.html
Explain.
>
> Seems the coordinate system must have moved in your sick brain.
I am praying to God you are right in assuming the
month of January average will be "perfectly normal
winter weather", but the first week has been way
below normal, not a daily temperature, but the
number of days so much colder than normal.
South Greenland should always have a more
moderate temperature because of the Gulf Stream
and great ocean mass, England being so cold
may be due to a minor cyclonic, but there are
just too many places that are much below normal.
There isn't much chance of setting either
a high or low locally in January, it is only the
length of the cold spell that is extraordinary,
and that will have an effect on global averaging,
consider possibility of saving face by waiting
for January numbers before crowing.
Who are they? If you mean climatologists, they are already reporting
it as natural variation caused by a combination of regular atmospheric
and oceanic conditions.
Isn't it a surprise Petey didn't note the near record high
temperatures in S. Greenland, with +10 C at Narsassuaq.
What, you mean it isn't all because of Global Warming,
I just bought some air conditioning stock.
Let me guess, you've seen a - WEATHER forecast.
T.
Obviously, Narsassuaq is not the whole NH...
--
The lines between climate science and religion continue to blur.
Both of these locations are on the west coast of land masses, near to
open ocean water. Given the generally westerly wind direction in the
northern hemisphere, it makes sense that the temperature would be
similar to the water temperature. In both of those locations the
ocean rarely if ever freezes. Liquid water, as you might be aware,
will tend to be over 0°c.
Probably, but a real weather forecast based on the
best information available for the next few days, not
the tea leaf reading of alarmist climate "scientist".
The agw frauds, jmoron.
> If you mean climatologists, [...]
yes, the agw frauds, jmoron
Don't disgrace meteorology by aligning them
falsely with the AGW BS.
Only nuts would mouth off about climate
instead of waiting to see how long the white
stuff lasts.
Good news though, maybe in 5 days it
will get up to 5 or 6 C here, almost normal.
>I M @ good guy wrote:
>> On Fri, 08 Jan 2010 18:18:06 -0600, Tom P <wero...@freent.dd> wrote:
>>
>>> I M @ good guy wrote:
>>>> On Fri, 08 Jan 2010 14:33:58 -0600, Tom P <wero...@freent.dd> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Peter Muehlbauer wrote:
>>>>>> German meteorologists are announcing a century winter.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Low "Daisy" will snow up the whole Europe with unbelievable amounts of
>>>>>> snow and ice from next Friday on.
>>>>>> The actual prevailing catastrophic conditions will develop to an almost
>>>>>> deadlock of traffic and supply.
>>>>>> Actually a lot of of important supply goods have already ran short.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> THAT will be a catastrophe!
>>>>> Let me guess, you've seen a - WEATHER forecast.
>>>>>
>>>>> T.
>>>> Probably, but a real weather forecast based on the
>>>> best information available for the next few days, not
>>>> the tea leaf reading of alarmist climate "scientist".
>>>>
>>> Ah, but will it be based on the indisputable principles of global
>>> cooling? Or on the drug-crazed tree-hugging religion of meteorology?
>>
>>
>> Don't disgrace meteorology by aligning them
>> falsely with the AGW BS.
>>
>Please explain how a meteorologist doesn't make use of atmospheric physics.
In their regular work they are not hysterical
about the temperature in 2100 like the AGW alarmists.
If there would not have been this plateau since
1998 then AGW would still be a gossip fad, as it is,
AGW is a big joke, at least it was until it got so hot
everybody started freezing.
23 degrees F below normal high temperature
here today, do you realize that might have doubled
my heating bill, doubled my CO2 emissions, and
I won't be able to afford as many Reese Cups.
Did I say it was? I didn't point out Germany is not the globe either,
even though they tried hard to make it so 70 years ago.
You clearly did some research before making such an investment. What
persuaded you it was a good buy?
Climategate proves nothing, just as much as Peter muleblower knows about
science.
Well I agree with A & B. Since we are dealing with abnormally *cold*
temperatures that haven't occurred in decades in various locations
around the globe, the situation *might* be evidence of global
cooling. It sure isn't evidence of global warming. However, you can
rest easy because I am not going to ask that we spend money to fight
global cooling. Now if you would just have the same courtesy with
respect to your pet theory of global warming, we would all get along
fine.
Of course not, it would have made your argument look very silly.
>I didn't point out Germany is not the globe either,
> even though they tried hard to make it so 70 years ago.
Evasive action noted. You lost.
Too bad we do have to pay extra for cooling, it is
mind boggling to think of how much more it costs with
each degree colder, it is probably not linear with
temperature.
So you suggest it's Global Warming, what I see just right out of my window,
piling up to the lower edge of my windowsills?
This is a winter I can't compare with any other since 50 years.
And it's not local only, it's just the same on whole NH.
Silly AGW dreams, eh?
General advise for anyone still reading this newsgroup:
********************************************************
**** Don't listen to Peter Muehlbauer, listen to me ****
********************************************************
As I point out in other threads, the denialists, having lost any
semblance of reality in scientific argument, are now reduced to
treating CC debate as some sort of point scoring game. Q.E.D
Better advice, ignore leftists AGW alarmists, use
as little or as much fossil fuel as is needed to keep warm
and get to work to pay for food and fuel.
From all indications, the Global Warming agenda
is nothing more than an attempt at a new style of
colonialism by the know-better-than-anyone-else
control freaks in England and Europe.
I would gladly support Global Warming if
only the next two months have a little bit of
warmer.
from you, thats a joke...
Nobody debates back, they may need some CO2,
the usual suggestion is to breath in and out in a small
paper bag a few times, sometimes that helps stop the
hyper-ventilation.
yeah, roving retard-the euro-trash-cornholing-fucktard.
Dumbassed weather post.
Crazyassed lie.
cuckoo cuckoo cuckoo
That's what makes it such fun. Did you imagine you were in a
scientific discussion group, or what? Just look at the sigs of some of
the major posters here.
Perhaps you lied about that A/C stock., just as you do about
everything else on this NG.