We got the drill too ... in Upstate New York. I doubt it had much to do with tornado frequency, since tornadoes there are possible but rare. No one has a shelter and very few have witnessed one up close. It's training for the naive ... by the naive.Originally Posted by The Rani
Marx: Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies.
Lennon: You either get tired fighting for peace, or you die.
We had the same drills. While our state also had tornadoes back in the day, some severe, the intensity and frequency appears to be the current concern.
Now they are encouraging people to go to the lowest level possible and get under the stairs or similar structure. Anywhere away from windows or outside walls. If there is no lower level, the center of the structure or bathtub is suggested.
"The only Good America is a Just America." .... pbrower2a
So, you got drills in response to something real. OK. We didn't, but we got them anyway. I witnessed one tornado (actually, a water spout) from a distance of a mile or so, but it was weak and petered out less that a minute. We had one real one in the mid-60s, but it cut through an unoccupied park at night, so no witnesses there. We never gave them a whole lot of thought. YMMV.
Of course, the plains see these things all the time. If I had lived in Kansas, I'm sure my experience would be a lot different. Were you there in '67?
Marx: Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies.
Lennon: You either get tired fighting for peace, or you die.
I heard an expert just recently on NPR say that basements of frame houses may not be all that great. His recommendation: get away from windows and near the plumbing. I had never heard that one before.
Marx: Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies.
Lennon: You either get tired fighting for peace, or you die.
Southwest corner was the drill. May not be valid anymore. Plumbing acts as a crude vertical barrier against horizontal flying objects.
The Missisippi and Missouri Rivers are in full flood mode. West Alton is being evacuated, again (another example of someplace humans should not live), and Portage Des Sioux's levee was failing.
There is no global warming. Just ask your insurance company.
Excellent point. Tornadoes are not just in Kansas anymore!It appears that tornado alley is expanding over an even wider area. Our state is included. Over the past three years, we have experienced an increase in severe storms and tornadoes. Joplin, of course, was the worst.
While my main concern with these tornadoes, are the lives at stake and the devastating damage they cause, but also, the ever increasing cost of home insurance. We have seen our rates increase every year. This is but another factor in the cost of global warming.
It will likely be more than a pond. Maybe an entire inland sea!
I was referring to your understanding that people were to go to a southwest corner.
"The only Good America is a Just America." .... pbrower2a
"Anymore"?
I can recall at least three occasions when I was a kid (call it 1979-1983) when tornadoes touched down near where we lived in north Georgia. One of them even had the common courtesy to hit my school after the kids had all left. I remember going back whenever the next day was and how cool we all thought the tree stuck through the cafeteria's brick wall was.
"Qu'est-ce que c'est que cela, la loi ? On peut donc ętre dehors. Je ne comprends pas. Quant ā moi, suis-je dans la loi ? suis-je hors la loi ? Je n'en sais rien. Mourir de faim, est-ce ętre dans la loi ?" -- Tellmarch
"Человек не может снять с себя ответственности за свои поступки." - L. Tolstoy
"[it] is no doubt obvious, the cult of the experts is both self-serving, for those who propound it, and fraudulent." - Noam Chomsky
In the event of an EF-4 or EF-5 tornado you need to be in an underground shelter built of reinforced concrete or under a reinforced-concrete building. The problem is that your radio reception and cellphone use gets troublesome, but that matters little if you get a head injury.
I don't know what most often kills people in a tornado, but it would seem that debris is a huge killer, which distinguishes the difference in lethality of 'mild' (F0 and F1 tornadoes) and severe (F4 and F5 tornadoes) that do the bulk of the killing. As soon as the floor is torn from above you you become a target for debris. (That is the old measurement, but that fits the study of 1950-2011 storms, most of which are described in the old Fujita Scale).
Debris isn't simply a 2x4 or lighting rod that impales you. It could be a book, a dinner plate, a TV set, a computer printer, boots, a camera, or a microwave oven that gets loose that slams you in your face or neck. A rifle that hits you at the speed of an F4 or F5 tornado could be as lethal as a bullet fired at you. It could even be someone's household pets. A greyhound at full speed (about 40 mph) could knock you down with a very serious injury. At three times its full speed it strikes as hard as a charging lion. At four times such a speed it might as well be a tiger. A tiger charge will kill you, and so will a greyhound or a dog of similar size at 170 mph.
The F0 and F1 tornadoes kill because someone is in a really-inappropriate place, such as next to a chimney or on a boat. F2 and F3 tornadoes destroy mobile homes. F4 and F5 tornadoes largely destroy frame houses. We have never seen an F6 tornado (by the old standard) -- but we have been getting closer to it. Reinforced concrete falls at F6 speeds should they ever occur. An F6 tornado that goes through the central business district of a large city would differ from an atom bomb in having a clear track and no thermal or radioactive damage. If an F6 (old scale) tornado struck Kansas City it might cause its path in Kansas City to look much like The Day After, the made-for-TV movie depicting the consequences of a nuclear attack. OK, the Geiger counters would not show anything strange, and there would be no fireballs. Nobody would get radiation sickness unless some nuclear power plant is in the path (that could be a Chernobyl in its own right. There would be no genetic damage. There would be plenty of ways in which to die and few in which to survive.
The greatest evil is not now done in those sordid "dens of crime" (or) even in concentration camps and labour camps. In those we see its final result. But it is conceived and ordered... in clean, carpeted, warmed and well-lighted offices, by (those) who do not need to raise their voices. Hence, naturally enough, my symbol for Hell is something like the bureaucracy of a police state or the office of a thoroughly nasty business concern."
― C.S. Lewis, The Screwtape Letters
Poor premises lead to poor models, which lead to poor predictions.
Good premises lead to good models, which lead to good predictions.
Well, if you want to buy the Homo Global Warming premise:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...152512364.html
...Instead of carbon dioxide emissions, Mr. Lu argues that ozone-depleting chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) and other halocarbons caused global warming... CFCs have been phased out by developed countries. After a lag, Mr. Lu argues that global temperatures peaked around 2002 and predicts they are set to gradually fall over the next five to seven decades...
...In contrast to the poor predictive record of CO2-driven warming, with CFCs it is a different story. According to Mr. Lu, global surface temperature has a "nearly perfect" linear correlation with CFCs and other halocarbons in the atmosphere since 1970. Making careful calculations of the warming effect of halogenated gases, Mr. Lu can reproduce observed temperatures since 1970 and a cooling trend for the past 10 years. But Mr. Lu cannot reconcile the observed temperatures between 1850 and 1970 or the recent cooling using the IPCC's equation for the greenhouse effect of carbon dioxide...
BTW, found this little reminder:
Anytime you want to have an honest discussion of the data go ahead. Lu is full of shit
Why the gay smear? The proper word is anthropogenic. But your credibility is suspect anyway.
The primary cause of carbon dioxide emissions is fires -- forest fires and brush fires. Next comes vehicle exhausts. Although motor vehicle use has nearly flatlined in the US, Japan, and western Europe it is rising in Russia, China, India, Indonesia, and Brazil. So we have growing emissions anyway....Instead of carbon dioxide emissions, Mr. Lu argues that ozone-depleting chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) and other halocarbons caused global warming... CFCs have been phased out by developed countries. After a lag, Mr. Lu argues that global temperatures peaked around 2002 and predicts they are set to gradually fall over the next five to seven decades...
A more powerful greenhouse gas is water vapor, also a consequence of fires and vehicle emissions. As temperatures rise, the capacity of the atmosphere to hold water vapor rises rapidly. The key is the dry-bulb temperature.
Coincidence more than anything else. CFC long closely paralleled emissions of carbon dioxide. That is over.[B]...In contrast to the poor predictive record of CO2-driven warming, with CFCs it is a different story. According to Mr. Lu, global surface temperature has a "nearly perfect" linear correlation with CFCs and other halocarbons in the atmosphere since 1970. Making careful calculations of the warming effect of halogenated gases, Mr. Lu can reproduce observed temperatures since 1970 and a cooling trend for the past 10 years. But Mr. Lu cannot reconcile the observed temperatures between 1850 and 1970 or the recent cooling using the IPCC's equation for the greenhouse effect of carbon dioxide...
Last edited by pbrower2a; 06-08-2013 at 08:20 PM.
The greatest evil is not now done in those sordid "dens of crime" (or) even in concentration camps and labour camps. In those we see its final result. But it is conceived and ordered... in clean, carpeted, warmed and well-lighted offices, by (those) who do not need to raise their voices. Hence, naturally enough, my symbol for Hell is something like the bureaucracy of a police state or the office of a thoroughly nasty business concern."
― C.S. Lewis, The Screwtape Letters
Besides cars, trucks and planes, coal and oil burning is still a major contributor to greenhouse gases, especially in China and the USA, although declining in the USA. Methane from meat farming is a major source too. Natural gas contributes as well, including methane released through fracking. Fires are a natural process that restores life, except those in places where forests are being destroyed for crops (Brazil, Indonesia).
RimshotAnthropogenic farts please. 7 billion + farts/day should count for something you know.
(Methane from meat farming = animal farts)
Where you find shit, you find farts.
MBTI step II type : Expressive INTP
There's an annual contest at Bond University, Australia, calling for the most appropriate definition of a contemporary term:
The winning student wrote:
"Political correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and promoted by mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a piece of shit by the clean end."
-You do understand that the whole CO2 Homo Warming theory is based on the correlation which the article supposedly debunks, right?
If correlation is not sufficient to convince you (fair enough), then CO2 is even worse, because it lacks even that virtue.
-You know that homo in this case means "man", right?
Of course not.
You know, PBR, sometimes I wonder if you're a parody of a liberal.
To the contrary. "Homo" exists also as the Greek "homos", which means "same" as in such words as homophone, homogeneous, and homonym, almost always as a prefix. It is a cognate of English same, Attic Greek usually showing an initial English s as an h. One word that uses the prefix is homosexual, which refers to people who have sexual relations with people of the same sex, and it applies to lesbian women, too, many of whom would never have a sexual relationship with a man.
It has nothing to do with Latin homo, whose related prefix is homin- as is hominid. Homosexual is the scientifically-correct. "Homo" is generally used in disrespect unless as short for "homogenized" (as in milk) or in the species name Homo sapiens. "Homo" as short for "homosexual" is rude.
I just saw the Freudian slip. I would do that.You know, PBR, sometimes I wonder if you're a parody of a liberal.
The greatest evil is not now done in those sordid "dens of crime" (or) even in concentration camps and labour camps. In those we see its final result. But it is conceived and ordered... in clean, carpeted, warmed and well-lighted offices, by (those) who do not need to raise their voices. Hence, naturally enough, my symbol for Hell is something like the bureaucracy of a police state or the office of a thoroughly nasty business concern."
― C.S. Lewis, The Screwtape Letters
Nope. What is the absorption spectra of carbon dioxide?
What is the absorption spectra of carbon dioxide?If correlation is not sufficient to convince you (fair enough), then CO2 is even worse, because it lacks even that virtue.
-You know that homo in this case means "man", right?
Of course not.
You know, PBR, sometimes I wonder if you're a parody of a liberal.
Hmm... Ver-r-ry fishy, coming from a soi-disant science-pedant. A material has an absorption spectrum (that is, the portion of energy it absorbs over a range of wavelengths of energy). When a person asks a question that doesn't make sense, like "what is [material X]'s absorption spectra?", or "how many protons in a hydrogen nucleation?", it almost looks like they're just trying to parrot lines they saw somewhere else but didn't really comprehend or make the effort to comprehend...
In and of itself, naturally, it doesn't necessarily mean anything. But of such details are contexts built.
"Qu'est-ce que c'est que cela, la loi ? On peut donc ętre dehors. Je ne comprends pas. Quant ā moi, suis-je dans la loi ? suis-je hors la loi ? Je n'en sais rien. Mourir de faim, est-ce ętre dans la loi ?" -- Tellmarch
"Человек не может снять с себя ответственности за свои поступки." - L. Tolstoy
"[it] is no doubt obvious, the cult of the experts is both self-serving, for those who propound it, and fraudulent." - Noam Chomsky
Eh, man. Go for broke. How many magic ponies can we get to dance on a pin head?
Of course, a cartoon of us Jonesers with apropos ambient scenery/music.
It's pretty spacy, so even Eric may like this one.
MBTI step II type : Expressive INTP
There's an annual contest at Bond University, Australia, calling for the most appropriate definition of a contemporary term:
The winning student wrote:
"Political correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and promoted by mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a piece of shit by the clean end."
-I assume the the difference is singular vs. plural, since there are different types of light.
His "point" is that that CO2 has special light absorbing property which should allow heat in, but not escape.
However, that does not explain why CO2 often seems to rise, while the temperature drops, while CO2 drops, and the temperature rises, which is probably why he answered my question with a question.
-Joys of the internet. I don't Vandal would be a unique case, but again, I think he's (?) just using the plural.
...so after two paragraphs, you agree with me, after disagreeing with me. Homoglobal warming is short for anthropogenic global warming. Homo is shorter. Get over it.
The ignorance... It burns....
Really, there are more parrots grawking on both sides of the issue than there are real, intelligent voices.
(As far as the paleological evidence seems to indicate, by the way, CO2 concentration in the atmosphere has generally begun to rise somewhat after temperature begins to rise, and to fall when temperature does. There's a "small" lag time, but the movements of CO2-concentration and temperature very much do seem to move in roughly the same directions. Not opposite, as you seem to be saying)
"Qu'est-ce que c'est que cela, la loi ? On peut donc ętre dehors. Je ne comprends pas. Quant ā moi, suis-je dans la loi ? suis-je hors la loi ? Je n'en sais rien. Mourir de faim, est-ce ętre dans la loi ?" -- Tellmarch
"Человек не может снять с себя ответственности за свои поступки." - L. Tolstoy
"[it] is no doubt obvious, the cult of the experts is both self-serving, for those who propound it, and fraudulent." - Noam Chomsky
-Please check your posting.
I posted (or art least meant to post) that, in the past, a rise in CO2 does not necessarily correlate with a succeeding rise in temperature. Sometimes it rises; sometimes it falls. It is certainly not proportional (CO2 is currently 400 parts per million; it was previously over 1,000 ppm, without turning the planet into Sea World.
You seem to be saying that there is a relationship, but that rises in CO2 succeed , rather than precede, temperature increases. Is that what you are saying? If so, then:
1) What you say does not contradict my statement;
2) What you say does contradict the usual homoglobowarming line.
If what you wrote here is what you meant, then you did a kinda poor job of stating it the first time. What you said earlier was that when CO2 concentrations rise, temperatures drop, and when CO2 drops, temperatures rise. That is, you seemed to be saying that the CO2-temperature causality arrow is exactly as the True Believers would have it, but that their relationship is inverse, rather than direct. This is flatly untrue.
What you are saying this time -- that CO2 levels and temperature are independent -- also appears to be not true. But, to be fair, it is much less false than what you said the first time.
"Qu'est-ce que c'est que cela, la loi ? On peut donc ętre dehors. Je ne comprends pas. Quant ā moi, suis-je dans la loi ? suis-je hors la loi ? Je n'en sais rien. Mourir de faim, est-ce ętre dans la loi ?" -- Tellmarch
"Человек не может снять с себя ответственности за свои поступки." - L. Tolstoy
"[it] is no doubt obvious, the cult of the experts is both self-serving, for those who propound it, and fraudulent." - Noam Chomsky
-No. Operative word was "often" (which in hindsight, I'd modify to "sometimes"). That would mean that there is neither a consistent direct or indirect relationship between an increase in CO2 and a rise or drop in pressure. AS for that being "not true", you yourself seem to agree that if there is a relationship, that it a succeeding one, but that does not mean that there is any preceding one.
