Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Ophelia post mort

Expand Messages
  • Mike Doran
    Ophelia post mort: (Do not read if you are an apologist for corporate fossil fuels Hurricane Ophelia churned and stalled along the coast of Florida,
    Message 1 of 1 , Sep 18, 2005
    View Source
    • 0 Attachment
      <b>Ophelia post mort: (Do not read if you are an apologist for
      corporate fossil fuels</b>

      Hurricane Ophelia churned and stalled along the coast of Florida,
      stair stepped, and then stalled and churned along the Carolina
      coasts, the eyewall running ashore over the Outer Banks, making it a
      landfalling hurricane. Then it sort of stair stepped again along New
      England and the eyewall was gone--it was extra tropical at best and
      it sped off north and landfell into Canada as a tropical storm. In a
      word, not much of a threat to anyone. Meanwhile, Tony Blair has
      given up on Kyoto, a move long expected since he sold out to
      employment with the Carlyle Group. And here in the United States,
      Chris Landsea has quit the IPCC and some others are writing skeptical
      papers on tropical storm statistics casting some doubt on the impacts
      of human activity. But these things are based on ignorance.

      So let's look at some history to compare Ophelia with.

      www.sepp.org

      From that website:

      "Roger Pielke Jr., director of the University of Colorado's Center
      for Science and Technology Policy Research, agrees. In a forthcoming
      paper in the Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society he
      analyzes the damage caused by hurricanes that have hit the U.S. since
      1900. Taking into account tremendous population growth along
      coastlines he finds no trend of increasing damage from hurricanes.

      "I don't think you could find any hurricane scientist that would be
      willing to make the statement that the hurricanes of last year or
      Katrina are caused by global warming," he told Denver's Rocky
      Mountain News.

      MIT climatologist Kerry Emanuel IS a scientist and stirred up a
      Category Five controversy with his recent letter in Nature claiming
      there's no trend in the frequency of hurricanes but "future warming
      may lead to an upward trend in tropical cyclone [hurricane]
      destructive potential." "

      A hurricane Category 5 happened on Sept. 19, 1938, instead of Sept.
      21. Average speed 161 mph.

      It could have caused the destruction mentioned.

      In this following link there is a map for hurricanes paths from 1930
      to 1940. The path for 1938 shows a hit in the New England area.

      http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/hrd/Landsea/deadly/Figure4.htm

      In this table

      http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/hrd/Landsea/deadly/Table13.htm

      the year 1938 appears with a "normalized after correction for
      inflation" destruction costs of $20.057 billion.

      Now let me preface my remarks by stating clearly I am NOT A WARMER
      from CO2 as a green house gas. I think that the forcing from CO2 is
      ELECTRICAL. And in that context the moon or sun forcings, which I
      think are electrical, and then the discussion of the Little Ice Age
      (the rage about the hockey stick), I think it is important to
      consider that the Keeling Whorf period is 1,800 years on the moon,
      and the sun spot observations occurred over a smaller period. See:


      http://www.pnas.org/cgi/content/full/070047197

      So it would appear just looking at climatology we have doubled the
      amplitude of the Little Ice Age cycle and halved its frequency. So,
      yes, Bob, I think colder is coming. Twice as fast and as hard. The
      danger being instability. The cold body of earth, so to speak,
      becoming room temperature.

      Consider that if ice starts to build up on the land from the oceans,
      the oceans less fresh water become more saline, and then as more
      saline, more conductive. That means as more inputs come from the sun,
      these inputs are communicated more conductively.

      The conservatives argue, chaos was, chaos is, burn fossil fuels. But
      with a living earth, the problem is much different and much more
      complicated. It is modulation was, modulation is, sustain a living
      earth. It is a much more difficult and complex problem than the
      conservative propagandists and paid 'scientists' would have you
      think, and we are starting to get hit over the head with it. This is
      global 'fever' now, but the illness, the defects in feedback loops is
      the concern.




      The corporate state spins misconceptions and statistics as Masetti is
      discussing. However, if you look at the 1938 storm specifically,
      knowing the mechanism, a different frightening picture appears, even
      as you look at Ophelia.

      1938 had up to what we had here this year--the letter 'F' or
      Franklin. Franklin was in JULY. We are in peak season now, worried
      about Rita and the Texas coast. Stories of the Arctic melting as
      never before, Glacier National Park having no glaciers, and Alaska
      melting, tundra thawing, and Alaska forrests tilting in the melt like
      Bush on a youthful drunken binge.

      As to damage statistics, again, without appreciation of underlying
      mechanism of these storms, the statistics are very misleading.
      Because these storms are electrical in nature, it may well have been
      a solar flaring event in that year that specifically sparked a storm
      to high organization in the form of a catagory 5 storm and then led
      that organization straight north, which happened to be northeastern
      high dollar properties. However, even now you cannot be sure that
      there were not local hydrology changes at that time which would have
      made the region more conductive and suseptible for the storm to both
      explode and turn in that direction. Consider that the CCC was very
      activity during the time of the New Deal and in particular there were
      many public works projects on rivers.

      But the fact remains, that the solar inputs, the moon roiling inputs,
      have DEPENDANT relationships with CO2 because CO2 impacts
      CONDUCTIVITY. So as long as the researchers are doing their
      statistics without care of cause, they fail to capture the forcings
      involved. Those forcings have greatest danger in climate
      instability. Presently we are seeing us rising, per the Keeling
      Whorf paper on the Little Ice Age, twice as fast and twice as hard to
      the peak. And because when the glaciers are relaid the oceans will
      become more saline, IMHO we will fall twice as hard and fast possibly
      to a neo glacial.

      That's what the conservatives will have on their souls. All based on
      IGNORANCE!

      The idea that a 1938 hurricane would behave in a distructive manner
      racing straight north and the fact that there have been fewer
      landfalling storms in the NE is in itself a clue to the EMF character
      of these storms. The melting in the Arctic, Greenland, is well
      documented, and impacts salinity, and, therefore, conductivity of
      these regions. You would have a changing pace of the Gulf Stream
      from relatively dense, salty water sinking, and the draw north of the
      Gulf Stream would be different--perhaps farther reaching north. And
      then, as I mentioned, local river change. It is well documented at
      that time some of the problems of pollution with the Great Lakes at
      the time. The bottom line is this--it's electrical and Lansea's and
      others arguments about economics are highly flawed and decietful.
      Meanwhile, Tony Blair in England clearly has seen impact from higher
      CO2 increasing conductivity but the short term condition of the
      melting glacier waters decreasing salinity, and, therefore,
      decreasing conductivity. So the regional change in England does not
      appear to be troublesome. But it is, as the neo glacial will be
      sparked from storms as it runs the other way. Geological history
      clearly shows that these neo glacial storms last merely 10 years!
      That's it. You are talking about the Day After Tomorrow, and I am
      giving you straight out the mechenism.

      We live in a day when 25% of all species of plants and animals have
      gone extinct. Because of us. And whether you consider yourself
      conservative or liberal, this is something, as Art Bell says, you
      should at least notice.
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.