- Posts: 3444
- Thank you received: 11
I did not make that statement. I do not know if you understand or not. I don't think you even make an effort to understand. If you actually read your linked references, they do not state that there is no link between climate change and tornadoes, they state they do not have sufficient evidence to determine whether there is any link. On the other hand, the reference that I provided cited climate research scientists who provide the common sense explanation that the warmer and more moist air from the Gulf will increase the ferocity of the activity.The Liberals GOP Twin wrote:
Something the Dog Said wrote:
The blog from which you did your cut and paste job stated that there is not sufficient long term data to draw conclusions, it did not state that there are no links between tornadic activity and climate change. I get that you seldom actually read your cut and paste jobs, but you really should.The Liberals GOP Twin wrote:
Something the Dog Said wrote: Thanks, that cut and paste supported my position that climate change, while not necessarily changing the frequency of weather conditions, does affect the ferocity of those conditions through the increased energy.
English is evidently not your first language... the statement was simple... Neither the time series of thermodynamic nor dynamic variables suggests the presence of a discernible trend for April conditions during the last 30 years; any small trend that may exist would be statistically insignificant relative to the intensity of yearly fluctuations. [/b][/i]
There... I made it BIGGER for you.
Then I'll leave it up to the educated 285 Bound members to follow my links and make sense of what you claim I don't understand. Thanks for your help. Just because you say I don't understand doesn't make it true.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
Something the Dog Said wrote: I do not know if you understand or not. I don't think you even make an effort to understand. If you actually read your linked references, they do not state that there is no link between climate change and tornadoes, they state they do not have sufficient evidence to determine whether there is any link. On the other hand, the reference that I provided cited climate research scientists who provide the common sense explanation that the warmer and more moist air from the Gulf will increase the ferocity of the activity.
http://www.technologyreview.com/view/42 ... te-change/
Warmer temperatures and more moisture will give storm systems that much more energy to play with, like adding nitroglycerin to the atmosphere. This month’s possibly record-breaking tornadoes are due in part to an unusually warm Gulf of Mexico, where as Freedman reports, water surface temperatures are 1 to 2.5 C above the norm. The Gulf feeds moisture northward to storm systems as they move across the country, and that warm moist air from the south meeting cool, dry air from the Plains often results in some powerful weather. But at the same time, other studies have forecast that warmer temperatures will reduce the wind shear necessary to turn a routine thunderstorm into a powerful system that can give birth to tornadoes. So in a hotter world we could see more frequent destructive thunderstorms, but fewer tornadoes—although some researchers think we could still end up with both.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/cap ... _blog.html
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/cap ... _blog.html
http://www.technologyreview.com/view/42 ... te-change/
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
The Liberals GOP Twin wrote: (P.S. I spelt the plural of "tornado" wrong in the title, I've corrected that in the body of this comment.)
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
Your cut and paste agrees with me 100%. Did you read it? Go back and read my posts. I stated that while climate change may not affect the frequency of tornadoes, it does increase the ferocity of the tornadoes due to the warmer moister air from the Gulf. Your cut and paste job agrees 100% with this statement. It does state that there is a link between tornadoes and climate change, that climate change is increasing the ferocity of the weather conditions. Thanks for once again proving my point for me.The Liberals GOP Twin wrote:
Something the Dog Said wrote: I do not know if you understand or not. I don't think you even make an effort to understand. If you actually read your linked references, they do not state that there is no link between climate change and tornadoes, they state they do not have sufficient evidence to determine whether there is any link. On the other hand, the reference that I provided cited climate research scientists who provide the common sense explanation that the warmer and more moist air from the Gulf will increase the ferocity of the activity.
Common sense does not have much to do with science, although you would like it to... it's sort of like "feelings." The position that "scientists who provide the common sense explanation that the warmer and more moist air from the Gulf will increase the ferocity of the activity" is not decided and your use of the term "common sense" does not settle the debate.
http://www.technologyreview.com/view/42 ... te-change/
Warmer temperatures and more moisture will give storm systems that much more energy to play with, like adding nitroglycerin to the atmosphere. This month’s possibly record-breaking tornadoes are due in part to an unusually warm Gulf of Mexico, where as Freedman reports, water surface temperatures are 1 to 2.5 C above the norm. The Gulf feeds moisture northward to storm systems as they move across the country, and that warm moist air from the south meeting cool, dry air from the Plains often results in some powerful weather. But at the same time, other studies have forecast that warmer temperatures will reduce the wind shear necessary to turn a routine thunderstorm into a powerful system that can give birth to tornadoes. So in a hotter world we could see more frequent destructive thunderstorms, but fewer tornadoes—although some researchers think we could still end up with both.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/cap ... _blog.html
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/cap ... _blog.html
http://www.technologyreview.com/view/42 ... te-change/
So my thread title "Climate Change has no link to tornadoes" has been suggested by climate scientists. And in those links above, there is still a healthy debate going on as to whether that proposition is settled. Saying that "scientists who provide the common sense" is not a "period" on the issue and has no bearing to the numerous positions that one can find from various sources.
I'll stick by the scientist who indicate that "Climate Change has no link to tornadoes."
(P.S. I spelt the plural of "tornado" wrong in the title, I've corrected that in the body of this comment.)
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
Nobody that matters wrote:
The Liberals GOP Twin wrote: (P.S. I spelt the plural of "tornado" wrong in the title, I've corrected that in the body of this comment.)
Psst.... It's 'spelled', not 'spelt'.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
(splet is a ancient form of wheat)
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
Ah, that's spelt.Something the Dog Said wrote: (splet is a ancient form of wheat)
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
www.thefreedictionary.com/spelt+outNobody that matters wrote:
The Liberals GOP Twin wrote: (P.S. I spelt the plural of "tornado" wrong in the title, I've corrected that in the body of this comment.)
Psst.... It's 'spelled', not 'spelt'.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
good catch, should have been spelt.jf1acai wrote:
(splet is a ancient form of wheat)
Really?
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.