GW Critic for hire. And some here think that the money follows the alarmists. Right...
http://www.livescience.com/environme...al_critic.html
Printable View
GW Critic for hire. And some here think that the money follows the alarmists. Right...
http://www.livescience.com/environme...al_critic.html
I may work for one solution of GW and just don't know it yet. We grind lots of sulfur, but I don't know if we can do this much.
http://www.livescience.com/environme...ct_sulfur.html
This looks like it has the fingerprints of GW all over it!
THAT WAS THE WAVE THAT WAS
Bay Area's string of hot days is longest on record -- odd weather patterns blamed
- Glen Martin, Chronicle Environment Writer
Thursday, July 27, 2006
The Great Heat Wave of 2006 was not just an epic meteorological event -- it was an epochal one, unprecedented in the north state's weather annals, meteorologists agree.
It has been hotter for longer than ever before, and the weather patterns that caused the scorching temperatures were positively freakish. The region's last significant hot spell -- in 1972 -- lasted two days, and never in the past has the Bay Area suffered through as many consecutive days of temperatures above 110.
"We've had several one-day wonders over the years," said consulting meteorologist Mike Pechner in Cordelia, "but nothing of this extent and duration. It has been truly extraordinary.
"From an historical perspective, what happened in the nine Bay Area counties was particularly noteworthy. We didn't set many all-time temperature records in the Bay Area, but we did set records for the number of consecutive days with temperatures above 110."
Pechner said there was no previous record of Bay Area temps hitting 110 degrees for four consecutive days.
According to Pechner, who uses data from the National Weather Service and Bay Area Air Quality Management District, there were five consecutive days this month with temperatures above 110: July 21 (111 degrees, Vacaville); July 22 (114 degrees, Morgan Hill); and July 23-25 in Rio Vista (110 degrees, 113 degrees, and 111 degrees, respectively).
Weather Underground, The Chronicle's weather-information provider, uses different weather data and recorded four consecutive days above 110 in the Bay Area -- July 21-24.
Basil Newmerzhycky, a meteorologist with the National Weather Service, said some of his agency's secondary stations in the Sierra foothills and northern San Luis Obispo County recorded 117 degrees.
By any account, the last two weeks have been Saharan. At least one city has reached 100 degrees or above since July 16, according to Weather Underground. That's supposed to ease by this weekend. For example, Livermore -- typically one of the area's hottest cities -- will be comparatively mild this weekend, with numbers hovering around 90 or even lower, Weather Underground has forecast.
The last comparable hot spell to hit the Bay Area was in 1972, Pechner said. And compared with the current scorcher, it wasn't much in terms of duration, lasting two days -- July 13 and 14.
Some of the temperatures in 1972 were higher, however: Palo Alto hit 105 in 1972 but reached 102 in the current wave. Petaluma reached 110 in 1972 and topped out at 108 during the past week. Kentfield registered 111 in 1972 and 107 recently. San Jose temperatures tied in 1972 and 2006 at 108.
As of Wednesday, the state Office of Emergency Services said 75 recent deaths probably were due to the heat wave. The victims' ages range from 21 to 95, although most were elderly, said Ronni Java, an emergency services spokesman.
That many deaths is unusual for California, according the Department of Health Services. From 1999 to 2004 -- the most recent period compiled by the state agency -- roughly 30 people died every year from heat-related causes. In 2000, 40 people died from the heat.
Heat and solar radiation on average kill more U.S. residents each year than lightning, tornadoes, hurricanes, floods or earthquakes, said Karl Swanberg, a forecaster with the National Weather Service. Between 1936 and 1975, about 20,000 U.S. residents died of heat.
In 1980, temperatures well above 90 degrees lingered in the central and southern United States from June through September. Kansas City, Mo., endured 17 days of temperatures above 100 degrees. About 1,250 people died in that heat wave, Swanberg said.
Only a handful of California weather stations have data extending back for a century or more, but the ones that do demonstrate the significance of the current heat wave.
Sacramento's records reach back to the 19th century, and there is nothing in them to suggest equivalent events, Newmerzhycky said.
"The greatest number of consecutive days for triple-digit temperatures for Sacramento was nine," Newmerzhycky said. "That was reached several times, the last in 1996. But we broke it (Tuesday) with 10 days."
On Wednesday, Sacramento made it an 11-day streak when temperatures reached 100 late in the afternoon.
It's not just the scorching days that made this heat wave remarkable. It's also the hot, sticky nights. In Sacramento, Newmerzhycky said, nighttime temperatures typically fall to 65 degrees or lower during even the most torrid heat waves. Not this time.
The current heat wave broke Sacramento's record for highest overnight temperature. The record was 78 degrees and was established in 1909.
"That record was broken on July 22 with 79 degrees, then smashed on July 23 with 84 degrees, and broken again on the 24th with 79 degrees," he said.
If the heat wave is unprecedented, so is the weather pattern that has caused it, Newmerzhycky said. Typically, the Central Valley's heat is mitigated by intrusions of cool marine air penetrating the Golden Gate and adjacent low-lying areas. That's what shut down the 1972 heat wave and virtually every other coastal California hot spell on record.
But offshore water temperatures recently have been 2 to 4 degrees above normal, Newmerzhycky said.
"That temperature difference could be preventing the thermal barrier that's required to usher cool marine air into the Central Valley," he said.
Additionally, the Bay Area was visited by something truly alien during this hot spell: huge quantities of moisture from the Gulf of Mexico and Gulf of California. An anomalous high-pressure flow swept humid air from those areas into Northern California. There the high pressure remained stationary, Newmerzhycky said.
"It stayed so long the humidity penetrated to ground level," he said. "That contributed to the triple-digit daytime temperatures and prevented the nighttime cooling you typically see."
While the Gulf of California humidity has diminished recently, its residual effects still are being felt. Such a strange concatenation of meteorological phenomena is unheard of for the Bay Area and delta, Newmerzhycky said. But that doesn't necessarily mean it won't happen again.
"We all have opinions on something like this," he said. "Does large-scale global warming mean we'll see more humidity escaping from the Gulf of Mexico and Gulf of California, or is it something anomalous? It's probably a question best left to climatologists, not meteorologists."
Didn't somebody post that we should evacuate a week or so ago due to a hurricane that came out of nowhere... What happened with that? Oh yeah... It was a thunderstorm.
Quote:
Originally Posted by saltydawg
No doubt that this has been unusual for the Bay Area. But Pechner does take a few liberties in spinning his story. The three towns he cites for having five days above 110 is a bit misleading. Only one of those towns experienced more than ONE day. Vacaville had one, Morgan Hill had one, and Rio Vista had three. But the real misleading thread here is calling those "Bay Area" towns. Vacaville and Rio Vista are in the California Delta, where it routinely gets into the 100's this time of year. Morgan Hill is southeast of San Jose, also not part of the Bay Area proper and also in an area that routinely gets to 100's. But I guess it makes it sound worse if you compare those temps to the normal mid-summer highs of about 60 in SF proper.
When I lived in Danville, in the San Ramon Valley, about 35 miles east of the Bay, it routinely got into the low 100's in July and August. The Bay Area proper and the nearby surrounding areas are very uinique in that there are 5 distinct "micro-climates" within a 60 mile radius of San Francisco. This is due to the unusual topography and wind currents. It's quite common to have SF at 60 degrees, and Oakland, 10 miles east at 75 degrees and over at Danville, another 20 miles east at 104 !!!
."[/quote]
Boy, where have we seen this storm track before?
We need this sucker to traverse across Hispanolia and Cuba so it will weaken. If it makes it into the Gulf as even a minimal Cat 1....
http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/refresh/grap...247.shtml?5day
For the last 5+ years I have been monitoring Wind Speed forecasts with developing systems. The vast OVERWELMING majority have had 1 thing in common; Actual acheived maximum sustained winds end up higher to MUCH higher than NOAA's forecasts when the systems first develop.
A big part of forecasting is relying on historical data. Problem is, historical data is based on storms that developed when Ocean waters were cooler. NOAA needs to stop relying so much on historical forecating.
Checkout this chart. Yesterday, the chance that Chris would develop into a Cat 2 or greater was a cumulative 10%. Today, 25% chance. Altadawg forecast chance? Id say 50++%.
http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/refresh/grap...47.shtml?table
I have to agree alta. I've been watching since a.m. yesterday. As you know the temperature of the water in the gulf is almost like bath water-I'm predicting at the very least a Cat 2.Quote:
Originally Posted by altadawg
What's going on? I haven't been able to watch the news since I evacuated for that storm that came out of nowhere. Is it clear to come back yet?
Would you please pull up the post where someone declared that a hurricane popped out of nowhere and everyone should evacuate? I recall posting about a tropical system that formed in the SW Gulf and I said it was a good thing that it was likely to move inland.Quote:
Originally Posted by duckbillplatty
Nope, no one said evacuate. I'm just pointing out that it is silly to post a thunderstorm to a global warming thread and then assign it it's own theme music. It was a little.. shall I say it? Alarmist? Oh wait, no, the other thing. Funny.Quote:
Originally Posted by altadawg
Thanks for the anonymous red dot, whoever that spineless person may be.
FYI:
Tropical Storm CHRIS
Home Public Adv Fcst/Adv Discussion Wind Probs Maps/Charts Archive
http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/storm_graphi.../180617_sm.gif
Hurricane Wind
Speed Probability
http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/storm_graphi.../180617_sm.gif
50-knot Wind
Speed Probability
http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/storm_graphi.../180617_sm.gif
Trop Storm Wind
Speed Probability
http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/storm_graphi...180617T_sm.gif
Wind Speed
Probability Table
http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/storm_graphi...180617W_sm.gif
Warnings and
3-Day Cone
http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/storm_graphi...80617W5_sm.gif
Warnings and
5-Day Cone
http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/tafb_latest/...gif/180617.gif
Mariner's
1-2-3 Rule
Wind
History Coastal Watches/Warnings and 5-Day Cone
Click image to zoom in http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/storm_graphi...180617W_sm.gif
It was me. Ive given you about 3 red dots and will continue to do so as long as you continue to twist my words.Quote:
Originally Posted by duckbillplatty
Oh, BTW, it wasnt a thunderstorm. It was a tropical low. Go bone up on your weather terms and then maybe, just maybe, I will cut you some slack.
Don't you guys look back at yourselves and see the problem here?
I totally believe that global warming is a real problem. I totally believe that we should take strides to prevent global warming. I totally believe it is foolish to throw your arms up every time a hurricane (or thunderstorm) brews and come post it on a Global Warming thread.
For goodness sake, it's an August hurricane...
Thank God for that system. It brought much needed rain to areas that needed it.Quote:
Originally Posted by altadawg
So long as you admit that you can't take a little humourous jabbing from someone who agrees with your position without vindictive, (to date) anonymous red dotting. And sorry if I offend you by my improper use of meteorological terminology, geez... I better go, it's getting kinda cloudy outside. I don't know if those or cirrus clouds or not... Oh GOD is it safe!?!?!?Quote:
Originally Posted by altadawg