Suppose someone comes along and says, based upon their analysis, the stock market is going to completely crash in 2012. It doesn't. Then they say it's going to in 2013. Suppose it doesn't. And the next year and the next. Some years it goes down some, other years it goes up some, but mostly it stays about the same. Would one conclude their model is wrong, that they need to adjust it?

In the 70s, it was predicted global cooling was going to happen. It didn't. Now they are predicting global warming is going to happen. Now that their prediction has been going on for a couple of decades, one should question how has their prediction worked out. Are they accurate, or way off? How close to reality have their predictions been? Should their model be adjusted?

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/12/19/an...riously-flawed/

Global warming is happening. The evidence is all around us. Warmer seas generate more evaporation and more winds, including more tropical storms. We've seen a large number of hurricanes, cyclones and typhoons in recent years, more so than average. But along with the increased evaporation and winds, more precipitation is brought overland in general. Think floods. We've seen those too. Winds have a somewhat counter-effect in some areas, in that the normal weather patterns may be shifted or blown in another direction. Some areas will have less precipitation than others, but the overall average precipitation will be increased. The actual temperature may change only very slightly, but the pendulum is swung harder with more energy input. This means more extreme weather patterns in both directions, cold and hot. Some areas will have the heat, other areas will have it cooler. This would be consistent with global warming, for the pendulum is swung harder as more energy (heat) enters the system.

As for scientific explanations of the situation, I have no idea why the thought leaders don't speak more clearly on the issue. It seems they don't understand it well themselves. But there is also the unfortunate politics of the oil industry entering the equation, as they feel they have something to lose if the public were to catch on to the idea of reducing its oil consumption to avert global warming.

God has built into our planet, just as He has done with our bodies, a number of good checks and balances. It's not easy to heat the whole planet. There are counter-effects, such as plankton/algae blooms, that can help to absorb more of the radiant thermal energy of the sun and convert it to chemical energy. Meanwhile, man destroys large plants (trees) and swings the pendulum back the other way. We know that in the end, God will be upset with those who have "hurt the earth." There are many ways to do so these days.

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

Many did predict increased hurricanes. But it didn't happen last year. Many predicted droughts overall, but you are saying increased precipitation? I think that gets to the heart of the matter: Many attempt to predict the weather, but most do not agree and hardly any every get it right.

At what point would your predictions be disproved? Or could they?

Talk to most anyone in a country closer to the equator. "Climate change" is real. Aka "global warming." The Amazon just had a "100-year flood" too. It's everywhere. Thailand had its "100-year flood" recently. Bangkok was under a lot of water. If it were just one location, I suppose it could be called a fluke. But it's not. Australia had massive flooding just a few years ago. Myanmar, India, and many other places can be added to the list.

"Snow" is included in the "precipitation" category. Shallow thinkers attribute it to "global cooling." It's not. It started with warmer seas and more evaporation.

Science knows no such thing as absolute proof. But there is plenty of evidence.

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

Regarding hurricane predictions, it's complex. Global warming essentially means there is increased heat energy present in our atmosphere. Heat causes several effects: 1) Increased evaporation of water (warmer waters evaporate more readily); 2) Increased winds are generated (again, powered by heat); and 3) Increased capacity of the atmosphere to hold moisture.

The increased evaporation and winds can elevate the chances of tropical storms, to a degree. However, the tropical storms always start with a depression (a low-pressure area) in which evaporation levels are increased and winds tend to be vertically oriented. A powerful jet stream wind which crosses through would disrupt the depression and/or alter its tendency toward rotational movement. So the same heat which increases wind generation affects both vertical and horizontal winds to a degree, and the horizontal winds will disrupt the vertical and rotational winds of a tropical storm. So it's difficult to make an accurate prediction of major tropical storms given the increased odds of their being disrupted by increased jet stream winds. The jet stream is not exactly stationary, but can shift north or south, whithersoever it "listeth" (to use KJV terminology).

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

Green Cochoa,

On this question of global warming I am in general agreement with you, especially since I moved here to Iceland which meteorologist have called the "weather kitchen of Europe."

We do not understand why we are experiencing close to 10 C daily in February. It should still be winter, but is like spring.

Yes, isn't it. Which confirms the major point I was making. Do you have anything you wish to object to the predictions which were made "cried out" in the 1990's coming true or not?

kland,

I don't know exactly which predictions you might have in mind. If you are referring to the predictions of increased numbers of hurricanes, I don't believe that such predictions are possible. However, if I understand the science correctly, I believe I might be able to accurately predict that tropical storms (hurricanes, cyclones, typhoons) will generally be increasing in intensity though their frequency may be unpredictable. This would be true because as the sea surface warms it is better able to spawn the tropical storms and to feed them. The storms will tend to grow larger and stronger when they are permitted to escape the disruptions of the jet stream. In other words, it's a bit of an exchange. In exchange for less predictability of frequency, we have an increased chance of more intense storms. Both are caused by increased temperatures.

Regardless of the tropical storm activity, if scientists are measuring the average world precipitation per year, I would expect the average to rise if indeed we are experiencing global warming. If there is global cooling, the average would tend to decrease, but the amount of snow, hail and ice would increase while the decrease was noted in rainfall. For a time. If the globe cooled enough, precipitation of all varieties would decrease.

Those are my thoughts based on the few studies and observations I have had in the area of climate science. Living in Taiwan for some years opened my eyes to understand more about tropical storms. I have been caught in the eye of a typhoon that was stronger than Katrina. (Katrina landed as a Cat. 3, this one was just between Cat. 4 and Cat. 5 when it made landfall.) I have watched the tremendous power of the winds as they tore signs and trees to shreds before my very eyes. The brick/block building shuddered, and we were all praying for our safety.

I have experienced at least four or five typhoons as strong or stronger than Hurricane Katrina while in Taiwan, and yet the mainstream media back in the homeland does not cover it. Partly this is because there are much fewer fatalities in Taiwan. But the Philippines gets its share of direct hits as well, and they don't typically fare so well. Thousands have lost their lives there, and the US news rarely says much about it.

Here is a link to info about a super typhoon that has recently made landfall in the Philippines.

Typhoon Bopha, Dec. 2, 2012


Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

Here are some questions I see on the topic:
1) is there global warming?
2) is it man-made?
3) is it bad?
4) is C02 the only solution?

I think on #1, that there is some warming. Not the the degree that it has been reported or predicted, but there has been change. #2, is it man-made? What were the conditions in the past? Was there an ice age? If there was a period of ice, we certainly did not come out of it by industrialization. We should ask Johann maybe, why Greenland was called Greenland? Settlements there thrived for over 300 years, and were occupied for 500 years. Jonestown in North America was settled 400 years ago. How did it fair? Vinland is fairly well agreed upon as being Newfoundland. "Vinland", "vine-land". Do we grow grapes in Newfoundland today? Nope. Was the weather different in the past? Very probably. There has been global warming on Mars. It must be because of all our rovers!!! :-) Or is it perhaps of changes in solar output? Some studies have suggested that the majority of our warming is because of changes in the sun.

#3, is the warming a bad thing? It is if you live in certain areas. But other areas, warming is a very good thing. So it depends on your perspective. Johann, is 10C this time a year a BAD thing in Iceland???

#4 is CO2 the only solution? This one has huge political ramifications. A report in 2006 based on the U.N. report on the global environmental impact of farming showed that we could cut greenhouse gases in half in 10 years by a change in diet, with no changes in transportation. Ha! Fat chance that will happen!

Green, I didn't expect you to speculate and make up some predictions. I was referring to those shown in the link. Maybe you didn't read it.