Slashdot Mirror
Running out of Hurricane Names
fm6 writes "LiveScience is reporting that the 21 names reserved for tropical storms and hurricanes in Atlantic Basic are almost used up. If there are more than 21 storms, they'll start using the Greek alphabet. The most storms ever recorded was 21 in 1933, before they started giving them official names. The connection between this record-breaking storm year and global warming remains controversial."
Use the Chinese alphabet. If you have a year where you run out, it's all just one big hurricane.
They can't get a baby book out and look up a few more names? They didn't even get a name for ever letter of the alphabet?! What are we paying them for!!?
Shadus
Everything I've seen says that climate scientists say there's no connection at all. The only place I've seen any connection put forward as a fact are people who write letters to the editor in the NY Times and similar papers.
The list of Pacific hurricanes uses X, Y, and Z (but not Q or U), whereas the Atlantic list doesn't use any of those five letters. Perhaps they should add X, Y, and Z names to the Atlantic list too now.
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum sonatur.
They are not inventive enough to develop new names? Also, why use personal names anyways. Why not simply call them Hurricane 2005_21 or 2005_145. Is this really a problem? And who decided on 21 reserved names? Why not 30 or 50? Why is this news?
I haven't thought of anything clever to put here, but then again most of you haven't either.
The Greek thing may not be the best idea... after the big storms the US has endured so far, I doubt anyone would bee looking forward to HURRICANE OMEGA.
If Jesus wants me it knows where to find me.
http://www.ibiblio.org/koine/greek/lessons/alphab
justa being the carma hore that I am.
This is the beginning of the apocalypse .....
/rushes to burn bible for warmth
If we have been only accurately tracking climate for 100 years, and the Earth has been around for hundereds of millions, why are we assuming that global warming is something that humans are doing??
Global warming? Throw more technology at it. Science and technology are the answer (yeah, preaching to the choir here). Aesceticism is pretty much the "work harder, not smarter" option. SciAm ran a piece on diffusing hurricanes ago. Or let's just go to the moon! Transcend humanity with technology.
Transcend Humanity. Please.
Worst. Naming-convention. Ever.
wow FR linked to the front page of slashdot! I never thought I'd see the day. As everyone knows, cooreation is a really bad basis to draw conclusions from.
You will also notice that use of gopher space has gone down with the rise of hurricanes this year. I think it is time we all dropped the internet and went back to gopher space.
The war with islam is a war on the beast
The war on terror is a war for peace
There was a Hurricane Xenia in 1956...time to go back to the old naming conventions, I guess.
we'll see if cyclical decrease in cat 4-5 hurricanes is a reality, or if a new trend is happening. that's fine, we'll still be pumping out more & more C02 so the base conditions of our little experiment won't be altered
These will be a hit with techies...
"That hurricane isn't ready for release."
"Why not?"
"Because it's Beta!"
Thank you, I'm here all week.
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
Only for the global warming fetishists, apparently. National Geographic even had an article last month showing the water surface temperature cycle being a noticably cooler now than it was last time we had these storms kick up (1940s). If global warming were a major factor, why isn't it warmer now? Why did it cool so much in the 1970s and 80s?
Oh Lordy it's rainin, must be global warming!
Oh Lordy it's snowin, must be global warming!
Oh Lordy a TORNADO! We never had those before global warming!
A WHOLE CITY FLOODED BY A HURRICANE! ACK! That surely couldn't happen without global warming!
For the love, what a bunch of fear-mongering horse shit.
The Bushies have been in denial about global warming and have been spreading FUD at every chance. Most real scientists have accepted the fact of global warming. This "controversy" is just another example of denial and FUD.
"Free Republic is the premier online gathering place for independent, grass-roots conservatism on the web. We're working to roll back decades of governmental largesse, to root out political fraud and corruption, and to champion causes which further conservatism in America. And we always have fun doing it. Hoo-yah!"
These people aren't scientists, they are politicians.
I don't read your sig. Why are you reading mine?
The connection between this record-breaking storm year and global warming remains controversial.
So we may hit a total that we hit in 1933. How is this evidence of a change or part of the global warming debate? Shouldn't we be seeing totals consistently higher than the past? Or is someone just trying to stir up a liberal/conservative debate?
Help me take back Slashdot. When did 'News for Nerds' become 'FUD and Conspiracy Theories for Extremist Nutjobs'?
Comment removed based on user account deletion
TFA article confuses more storms and more severe storms, and the editors blithely repeat that assertion.
It's pretty straightforward: the force of the storm depends on the temperature on the ocean's surface. Higher temperature means nastier storms.
Look, if you don't believe humans are affecting the climate with CO2, fine. If you think things aren't getting worse, fine. But can you quit mis-representing people's arguments and research conclusions?
Now back to reading that dupe about IE being more secure than FF. Gotta love editorial standards here.
Information: "I want to be anthropomorphized"
As to the Global Warming/hurricane connection, here are the words of hurricane guru Dr. William Gray:
BTW - I am a meteorologist... or meaty urologist, I never quite remember.They should name it "Celine Dion" - no one will stay, guaranteed. I know I'd be scared as shit.
"the organization adopted a rotating series of women's names" ...
I always wondered why they give them nice polite names.
I think "Hurricane Bastard" or "Hurricane Stalin" would be more appropriate .
Just name them after real scum bags
The only things certain in war are Propaganda and Death. You can never be sure which is which though
What's the point in using the Greek alphabet, since all the US media is going to use English/Roman letters to report the names?
Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
I have to point out that while the science is not necessarily clear on global warming, this doesn't merit the 'we'll just wait until we're sure' approach.
Note how institutions (like, oh, say the office of the president) tend to protect themselves despite attacks not being 100% certain. Note how secret service agents protect the president, even though not all law enforcement officials worldwide agree that it's completely certain that at 12:31 on november the 30th a bullet will enter the presidents head at a 30 degree downward angle fired by a middle aged assassin whose motivations have been understood fully.
That's a very valid approach - overprotect where the downside of a realized small risk would be great. I just wish we were as smart when it comes to protecting the species. As it is, we can't even protect the inhabitants of one city with days of advance warning.
http://www.marklynas.org/
There is no connection between the Hurry-Canes and Global-Warming..... Hurry-Canes go in 10(ish) year cycles, just like sun spots go in cycles of being intense, and then dwindling off. STOP THINKING OF THINGS IN THE REFERENCE OF YOUR LIFE TIME PEOPLE!!!
Quite obviously, all of this has been caused by the dwindling number of pirates (search on the word "pirates" in the preceding link).
Is it just me, or does the idea of a "Hurricane Alpha" sound kinda scary?
...that there was global warming in 1933?
Thanks to file sharing, I purchase more CDs
Thanks to the RIAA, I buy them used...
Is there a correlation between Hurricane Alpha or Hurricane Beta and the number of mosquitos left by any flooding?
Actually, everything I have read indicates that we Global Warming don't know how global warming will effect the number of hurricanes. (http://www.gfdl.noaa.gov/~tk/glob_warm_hurr.html/
However, due to how hurricanes gain strength (by pulling heat from the water) global warming could be linked in an increase in strength.
Parent is not offtopic. If you disagree with the poster, reply to him, don't mod him down inappropriately.
The stroy summary is contradicting itself. How is it possible that in 1933 they had more storms than we had so far this season, but yet, this is a record breaking season all at the same time.
Look at the current satellite for North America. There are 5 huricanes at the same time! Map.
is the funniest and yet most poignant thing I have read in a long time.
So on the one side we have Science magazine, a top scientific publication which extensively peer-reviews work before publication... on the otherside we have a bloke with a website.
There are some areas that are unclear, but its classic head in the sand behaviour (reminds me of creationists) to compare the output of Science (or Nature or any other top scientific journal) to the website of a bloke who goes by the name of "Ernest at the beach".
Sheesh...
An Eye for an Eye will make the whole world blind - Gandhi
>> The connection between this record-breaking storm year and global warming remains controversial."
I'll start to worry when we get a year that has a hurricane named like an AOL email address.
"As you can see on Doppler Radar hurricane Edward476 is headed straight for Galveston>"
Guess I show have previewed my comment before declaring how Global Warming thinks it will effect hurricanes.
causing global warming. It's the decline of pirates: http://www.venganza.org/piratesarecool4.jpg
Clones are people two.
Is that "Global Warming" is an extremely stupid name for global warming. Global warming isn't the entire world getting warmer. In a sense, the earth and sun form a closed system (I know this is grossly inaccurate, but the sun gives us about the same ammount of energy year after year ...). Weather systems redistribute the suns energies around the earth, and what we're seeing is a change in that redistribution -- some places are getting warmer (poles for instance) and other places are getting colder (such as California). So global warming should really get called something more like "holy shit california was barely warm this summer."
Religion is a gateway psychosis. -- Dave Foley
I suppose, but gee, the earth must of have heated up a bunch in the last year, after all, this is the year of "Global warming is causing all these hurricanes". Last year there was virtually no outcry of "global warming causes hurricanes" yet this year something magical happened.
Perhaps the advocates of global warming should realize people saying "OH NOS TEH GLOBAL WARMING CAUSES TEH HURRICANES!!111" just makes them look well.... unscientific.
1q2w3e4r5t6y7u8i9o0pqawsedrftgthyjukilo;p'azsxdcf
Of course it is humans doing it. Those few thousand Neanderthals had to light freakin enormous fires to melt the glaciers 11000 years ago. It is all their fault.
However, in really ancient times the warming was all caused by dinosaur farts. The Honourable Ralf Klein, Prime Minister of Alberta said so, therefore it must be true.
Oh well, what the hell...
Everyone knows that the reason for global warming is lots of pirates. Look, yesterday was speak like a pirate day, and today, an article about global warming? 'Tis definitely the work of the great noodly one!
I'm sure it was... Yeah, right!
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= - The Celtic - =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Wake up people!!! it's right in front of your face!!! Repent now and accept the Flying Spaghetti Monster before it's too late!
I agree.
CO2 emissions only cause a greenhouse effect in a LAB.
Until the green lobby manages to build a 1:1 scale model of Earth, IN A LAB, I am not going to believe any of that science stuff applies on a large scale.
It's just like that poo-pooing science on second hand smoke. When I exhale, the smoke gradually DISAPPEARS. It's only smoke in my lungs, and for a few seconds afterwards.
Science has a do-gooder agenda. In the case of global warming, they're making this stuff up to "share the wealth" and limit the US' ability to manufacture. I'm pretty sure outsourcing helps fight global warming anyways.
I think we need to start letting corporations sponsor hurricanes. In exchange for getting their name on a hurricane (and thus in the press), they'll pick up 50% of the damanages.
Just think: Pepsi Presentes Hurricane Melvin. Hurricane Ashlee: A Joint Venture of Wal-Mart, Google, and Dell.
When I becomes president, I tells ya.
Nothing unusual happening here! Terrible storms are nothing new - just read your local popular religion book describing a big flood!
Volcanos! I'm sure there's some volcanos somewhere that sprouted these hurricanes!
More completely new study! No scientist anywhere has any real data on this subject - we've got to study for at least another, oh, let's say decade before we can really say anything! For funding... I think it's the responsibility of the education department to decide how much of their funds we've allocated to them they want to shift towards this vital research into this great controversy tearing apart the scientific community.
Butterflies! I think I heard Australia has had a large run of butterflies. If this continues, I can't imagine the destruction that may continue - we must eliminate the Aussie threat!
Retribution of the supernatural! My accupuncturist said something about ghost chi causing these problems. We should be devoting at least as many resources as the whole fundamentally flawed "science" thing towards looking into the many REAL causes of human failings and the natural retribution any number of things would have towards humanity. We're angering ancient noodly forces here, people - WE NEED TO GET SERIOUS ABOUT THIS.
We can't keep going on this path - we have to stop puting our faith in "facts", like these. If we do that, all we'll end up doing is succumbing to the environmentalist myth! We can't do that - we can't just change our whole lives everytime some verification of a threat to our lives comes about - we've got to push foreward and make sure our existing economy never fails to meet the exponential demands we HAVE to place on it!
There is just as much evidence that the abundance, intensity and duration of these hurricanes is effected by global warming as there is that it's effected by the decline of pirates. Can I get a Ramen!
"Hurricane Geico killed my dog, destroyed my house and my whole friggin town, but I saved a lot of money on car insurance!"
Think of it the National Weather Service or the National Hurricane Center could sell hurricane naming rights to corporate sponsors. We could have Hurricane Halliburton, Hurricane News Corp., Hurricane Home Depot, Hurricane Martha Stewart, Hurricane Microsoft, Hurricane SBC, Hurricane Krispy Kreme, Hurricane Starbucks, or even a Hurricane Slashdot. Then people would really know what the Slashdot effect is.
Too bad we couldn't have Hurricane Enron, Hurricane Tyco, Hurricane WorldCom, etc.
"You'll get nothing, and you'll like it!"
There are 21 names each in 6 year-long cycles. They alternate between men's and women's names. Whenever there is a major hurricane, the name is retired (i.e. Katrina, Andrew). Otherwise, the names ascend alphabetically from A-W in 6 year cycles. Why do Greek letters when they could simply add Xavier, Yolanda, and Zach if there are too many storms in a season?
I for one would like to see more ethnic names added to the list. I'm getting pretty bored with all of these bland names that we have. Arlene, Bret, Cindy, Dennis, Emily? Can I get a Hurricane Xang, or how about a Tropical Storm Tyrell? The names should be more inclusive of the people in our country if you ask me. The full list of names is located here if someone wants to look:
/ 2005names.htm
http://geography.about.com/od/physicalgeography/a
Finance tutorials and more! Understandfinance
That sounds like a bargain-bin computer game (possibly featuring the voice of Steven Segal).
But perhaps it's because you've unfairly maligned our C-in-C. He believes (quoting from the above URL) that global warming is "an issue that we need to take very seriously." For making such a bold claim, he deserves a doctorate in science! (Btw, I recall him not only admitting the reality that is global warming, but also admitting that it was due to anthropogenic factors. Unfortunately, I cannot find this quote.)
Ben Hocking
Need a professional organizer?
I must have missed the day the motto changed to "news for fascist whack jobs." Of course their mirror-image twins at democraticunderground.com aren't much more reliable, but they tend to be more polite. Neither site is a suitable source for science information.
Brackets contain world's first nanosig, highly magnified:[.]
Greater insulation from CO2 means more heat is prevented from radiating away from the planet.
Thus things get warmer. Globally. Thus Global Warming.
Hey, I'm just your average shit and piss factory.
And from the first of December to whenever the season starts again, the hurricanes are not allowed out to play and must wait in the waiting room of waitingness where they must endeavour to get along without trading blows.
From TFA: q, u, x, y and z are not used
I, for one, welcome our new freak hurricanes, QueerAsAThreeDollarBill, Uvula, XenaWarriorPrincess, Yoohoo, and Zipadeedoodah.
Anybody want a peanut?
Guess I feel like answering idiots today. People were saying that, but no one in the press cared. The irony:
5 hurricanes hit florida, possibly (I say probably) enhanced by Global Warming.
Bush sends shitloads of money to Florida.
Florida votes anti-global warming Republican.
Hey, I'm just your average shit and piss factory.
with any luck it'll hit the rich and loosen up some of those tax cut dollars into the economy.
And exactly WHY is it always the first reaction of people like yourself to say "punish the rich and their tax cuts" when the more appropriate statement should be "get those jackass Congressmen to stop spending money like it's theirs, knock it off with their bullshit pork projects, and give the money back to us since it's OUR money"?
The Overrated mod is for reversing inappropriate, positive mods, not for voicing disagreement with a post.
Were the 21 hurricanes in 1933 caused by global warming?
Hmm, what if Hurricane alpha is a major hurricane and then alpha is retired, is this just a finite set of extra names?
-Sean (OutdoorDB - The Outdoor Wiki)
What gets me is all of these "record breaking lows/highs" and along with it comes "it hasn't been this hot/cold/stormy/etc since (insert 30 to 70 year old year here)". Well what was the excuse back then? Seasons and temperatures fluctuate all the time. Records aren't broken every day, nor every year...they just get randomly broken.
So please explain to me why exactly, when referring to 1933, there were 21 storms back then - was it global warming? No.
Before you mod this flamebait or troll, I'm just trying to make a logical point. I'm not a believer or non-believer of global warming, I just get sick of the years-ago referrals as if it were significant without someone thinking it out logically.
Content Management System: A pretentious way of saying "text editor."
Ok first clarification that most people don't understand, they are using the romanized names for the letters from Greek, alpha, beta, delta, epsilon, and so on. NOT words written in Greek.
Second. This year is one of the large amount of tropical storms and hurricanes, but in additions it's broken records (at least averages) in most areas with number of "major" hurricanes (3+ I believe) hurricanes, and tropical storms(what actually get the names)
Third, the problem with the global warming arguement is the arguement usually starts with "global warming creates unpredictable behavior in nature" unfortunatly Hurricanes have always been unpredictable and always can be violent, in addition they come in cycles, there are times of big bad hurricanes before that devistated the America area. and then it waxes and wanes as it wish.
However Global warming theorists have claimed this proves their points because an unpredictable system is "even more" unpredictable? Some how I think a BS meter would blow up at that one.
Fourth and most interesting, if this hurricane hooks and shoots right into New Orleans it's entirely possible that the 2 foot or more surges will flood New Orleans again.. And if that wasn't bad enough, it could hit the levee and screw them up again. Long story short? more flooding is likely, if not very likely.
But then again I'm in Florida so it's hard for me to feel pity when we get wrecked yearly and people act like we're idiots for staying here.
Clipped from the report, The Deadliest, Costliest, and Most Intense United States Hurricanes from 1900 to 2000:
(1901-1910), (1911-1920), (1921-1930), (1931-1940), (1941-1950), (1951-1960), (1961-1970), (1971-1980), (1981-1990), (1991-2000)
Figures 1 through 10 show the landfalling portion of the tracks of major hurricanes that have struck the United States 1901-1999 (there were no major hurricane strikes on the United States in 2000). The reader might note the tendency for the major hurricane landfalls to cluster in certain areas during certain decades. Another interesting point is the tendency for this clustering to occur in the latter half of individual decades in one area and in the first half of individual decades in another area. During the very active period of the thirties this clustering is not apparent.
--
Today's Anger Level: Orange - Easily irritated by little things.
My little brother's girlfriend is named Katrina. She's pretty pissed about being blamed for the destruction of the Gulf Coast. She hears about it all the time. Luckily, she's a fairly balanced person, but what about all those other Katrina's out there. How long before they start suing? Not that I'm hoping they will...
I think that they ought to name the hurricanes after Jerry Bruckheimer movies. I mean, one disaster deserves another.
Yeah, I'm as old as my UID would suggest.
Different areas use different lists of names.
The Central North Pacific has a single circular list of 48 names. If the last storm of one year is Hana, the first storm of the next year is Io. Some other regions take a similar approach.
Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
I think one of the interesting things, was the retiring of names after a significant damage causing storm.. Katrina will never be used again, as will Andrew. That is why no names start with Q, U, X, Y and Z. Not enough names to use.
I'm fine with the Greek names... Hurricane Alpha, Beta, etc. no problems here.
Now once we get to hurricane Lambda Lambda Lambda I might have a problem. Just imagine what would happen if hurricane Lambda Lambda Lambda met up with hurricane Omega Mu, the consequences are astounding!
In fact I take back my earlier stance. I'm thinking that we should start naming hurricanes after sororities and fraternities. Delta delta delta and delta gamma would be some great looking hurricanes.
How about "Windows(tm) Hurricane, where do you want to go today", "F-150 Hurricane, presented by Ford", "GHurricane, Google family member"...
The money made with these publicities will be used to help people after the hurricane...:)
The only one that dupes itself almost allways... I would run as hell from that one!
Wife: Hurricane Beta is approaching oue city. We must live the city now. Husband: Oh, commoon. It's just a beta.
If enithin kan gow rong it whil. (Murfey)
have a CONTEST to gather new names!
As a result they got tons and tons of ideas for new typhoon names, [many of which are food names....what can I say we're fond of food...]and from those they picked out 4 that had a lot of special meaning for Hong Kong's peoples and history.
contest details from last year :n troe.htm
http://www.hko.gov.hk/activities/tcname_contest/i
The post includes only one link about the possible connection between more killer storms and global climate change - and that one link goes to an ultraconservative web site? Huh? Newsflash: far right-wing political sites are probably NOT the best source for science news, unless you're looking for a rehash of the Scopes trial (again!) or various apologetics defending the most anti-science administration in modern history.
Is global warming responsible? Fuck if I know. But don't we ALL know in advance what freerepublic.com or whoever the hell they are is going to think about this topic, irregardless of the evidence? If the planet were being crushed by killer storms all carrying placards reading "We are caused by global warming" - even then, aren't we all pretty sure what freerepublic.com and other right-wing cronies would have to say about it? Why not just link to the flat earth society?? Why should I care what political hacks, of any persuasion, have to say about a scientific issue - wouldn't it be a better idea to hear what actual no-kidding scientists have to say about it?
Since when is Slashdot following in the footsteps of Fox News?
Chinese zoologists report a surge in native butterfly populations unseen since 1933.
The REAL jabber has the user id: 13196
What you do today will cost you a day of your life
"These people aren't scientists, they are politicians."
Fine then, ask the scientists. William Gray, the grand daddy of hurricane forecasting and the go-to guy at the beginning of the season thinks the hurricane-to-global-warming connection is way overblown to non-existant.
If that is too definitive for you, a group of scientist out of the University of Colorado have come to the conclusion that the claims of a linkage between global warming and hurricane impacts are premature [PDF]. So the brightest minds in hurricanes don't see it and I doubt that they would be in denial.....
Bryan R.
The price of freedom is eternal vigilance, or $12.50 as seen on eBay.....
Right, That's it, I'm revoking all your geek licenses.
Why? Because, here we are, discussing how they are running out of letters for hurricane names, and there's not ONE COMMENT 3 or above saying "Destructive force of nature - we should be using KLINGON names!"
COME ON! What kind of nerds do you think you are!
DROP AND GIVE ME TWO! (we are talking nerds here.)
www.eFax.com are spammers
Hurricane Jobs?
"We are all geniuses when we dream"
- E.M. Cioran
Was on /. last week, there was an interesting thread on M&M sizes.
Ok, here's something I've wondered about for a long time. The storm names usually seem very European, or dare I say "white", with the occasional Hispanic name thrown in. Why don't we ever see names like Latrelle, Tanisha, Akbar, etc? Would that be politically incorrect and if so, why? Those are just as valid names as any other. Personally I think Shaniqua would be a great name for a hurricane!
Whoa, cowboy. Who said anything about punishing the rich, besides yourself? Disaster hits poor people and look how speedy the prez moves. Disaster hits business, industry or the rich and he moves considerably faster. BTW, of all that money to fix up New Orleans, how much do you think will really be spent on the areas worst affected? I can't see that bill being Billions of Dollars, not for a bunch of seedy old slums. I know what $25 million will do in terms of construction. Where's the billions going?
get those jackass Congressmen to stop spending money like it's theirs, knock it off with their bullshit pork projects, and give the money back to us since it's OUR money"?
Fastest way to a 50% tax cut is to stop deficit spending and pay off the debt. The government will need only 50% of what it collects for nonimal spending levels (unlike today's Spend Like There's Gonna Be No Tomorrow levels.)
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
What can I say? With Basic you can't have your cake and eat it too. I started learning programming with Applesoft Basic, and naming was hellish. No matter what names you used, they all referred to the same name whenever the first two characters are the same.
I say, use arrays.
But what does it matter anyways how you name things? Reality and interpretation are two different things. An interpreted language merely represents reality, and a storm will hit you regardless of its presence in a symbol table.
Know your pads. One time pad: good for cryptography. Two timing pad: where to take your mistress.
I don't know which is more impressive: the fact that you got modded up while arguing against global warming, or the fact that you used an article from FreeRepublic to do it.
First, the climate has become slightly warmer over the past hundred years. This is known fact, over the period for which accurate measurements and records are available.
Second, there are suggestions from analysis of tree trunk rings that the climate has become progressively warmer over the past several centuries. This research is controversial, and not everyone accepts it.
Third, records from antarctic ice show that there is much more carbon dioxide in the atmosphere now than at any time in the recent, or even quite distant, past.
Accepting global warming requires a belief that the first item is part of a trend, and that it is a result of human behaviour. Although that isn't proven, it does seem a distinct possibility, especially in light of the third item.
Whoever corrects a mocker invites insult;
whoever rebukes a wicked man incurs abuse.
--Proverbs 9:7
If hurricaines were to have corporate sponsored names, the names could be assigned to storms based on how much devistation they are expected to cause, and people would be able to relate to it! Forget these "categories".
Just think about it, hurricaine "Bob's Used Exercise Equipment" wouldn't be that big of a deal, but people would be fleeing their asses out of town once hurricaine "RIAA" or hurricaine "Microsoft" was being warned for!
A community-oriented lyrics site
How can it be that Global Warming isn't responsible for storms when storms form over and warm surface water in the oceans strengthened them?
FalconShould there be a Law?
Media agencies are running out of anthropomorphized behaviors for meteorological phenomenon.
"Targets gulf coast"
"Directs its wrath at..."
Hurricane season is almost over anyway. After Sept, theres usually just 2 or so tropical storms if they even get that strong. Look back at some of the past hurricane seasons
"In the game of life, someone always has to lose. To me, if life were fair, that someone would always be Oklahoma." -DKR
..."The connection between this record-breaking storm year and the decline in the number of pirates worldwide since the 1800s remains controversial." Correllation does not imply causation! (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flying_Spaghetti_Mons terism under "Beliefs.")
"Anything that's invented after you're 35 is against the natural order of things" - Douglas Adams
If you have a year where you run out, it's all just one big hurricane.
Sixty six thousand storms is a lot but if needed Mongolian ideograms could be used. That'll give you another 77,000 words.
FalconShould there be a Law?
there were 21 hurricanes in 1933...i doubt anybody thought to say "global warming" then.
why then in 2005 does it happen again and suddenly it's "global warming"?
give me a series of 21 hurricane years in a row (a trend?) and maybe you'll make a believer out of me that something has changed.
It always pisses me off that the hurricanes are usually named using a sweet girl name. I happen to know a girl called Katrina ( a cutie by the way :P ) and the poor little girl is totally devastated and besides has to suffer lots of pranks. I ( claiming not originality) humbly propose better names for the next Hurricanes:
:p )
Hurricane Condie
Hurricane Dick
Hurricane Dubya
Hurricane Darl McBride
Hurricane Bill
Hurricane RIAA
Hurricane MPA
Hurricane Exxon
Hurricane Saddam
Hurricane Ferguson ( you english folks know who i am talkin about
Hurricane Wacko Jacko
and a long so on...
Please use this form I specially made:
Hurricane ___
Hurricane ___
Hurricane ___
Hurricane ___
Oh no! It's hurricane Mulva!
but hire a black mom to name the hurricanes. There will never be a repeated name in the next 100 years.
Michaels, P.J., and R.C. Balling, Jr. 1999. Global warming: The political science of exaggeration. Prometheus 1, 63-70.
Hansen, J.E. and P.J. Michaels. 2000. AARST Science Policy Forum, New York. Social Epistemology 14:133-186
Michaels, P.J., and R.C. Balling, Jr. 2000. The Satanic Gases. Cato Books, Washington DC. 234 pp.
Additionally, his research interests on that UVA page (where he is the CATO Institute Senior Fellow in Environmental Studies) include:
The core issue over the next ten years will not be "How much will the climate warm?" but, rather, "Why did it warm so little?" My research also leads me to believe that the next decade will see the emergence of a paradigm of "robust earth," as opposed to the fashionable "fragility" concept. The papers listed below provide some evidence for these observations. It is entirely possible that human influence on the atmosphere is not necessarily deleterious and that it is simply another component of the dynamic planet.
Ok, so let's look at 'Tech Central Station,' the location hosting the article the free republic is referencing. Dr. Michaels articles on there include:
Stepping up the Pressure:The all-out, last-ditch effort by global warming alarmists to find any excuse to compel the US to take action.
Tip of the Iceberg:Yet another predictable distortion.
Conjecture vs. Science: Are the editors of Science are more interested in conjecture than in firm scientific findings?
And, incidentally, as stated on the About TCS webpage, 'Tech Central Station' is published by DCI Group, LLC. And, DCI LLC is "top Republican lobby and PR firm associated with telemarketing company Feather Larson & Synhorst DCI and the direct-mail firm FYI Messaging. The DCI group publishes the website Tech Central Station and has close ties to the George W. Bush administration." according to Source watch.
This is pretty clearly an guy who does not buy into global warming as a concept, despite near universal agreement in the scientific community. To hear him proclaim 'no its not' arguments to scientific articles in both Nature and Science seems to carry rather little weight...particularly when he is publishing on a clearly partisan website. Write a Science/Nature (or hell PNAS, whatever) article refuting this, have it peer-reviewed and then there might be some reason to talk. Until that point, this is little more than personal ideaology posing as "science."
-Ted
-=-=- Quantum physics - the dreams stuff are made of.
Did you even read your post????????
How can they use only 21 names with a 26-letter alphabet? What about Xena, Yvonne, and Zella? Use the model employed by fraternities when they run out of one-letter names: Use two-letter names. First would be AA, followed by AB, and AC, etc. The next year that two-letter names are required use BA, BB, and BC. In the third year that they run out of 21 single-letter names, use CA, CB, and CC.
signature pending slashdot approval
Katrina_1 ...
...
Katrina_2
Katrina_3
Katrina_666
Hundreds of Nobel Prize winning scientists come out and say Global Warming is a reality, and it's the greatest threat we face. Bush refuses to believe it.
The weapons inspectors in Iraq say there is no evidence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Bush refuses to believe it.
It seems to me that there is far more evidence for global warming than there is for WMDs, yet people (from soldiers to children) are dying in Iraq (not to mention the billions being spent - so much for the so-called Peace Dividend), and Americans still drive their Range Rovers.
Is it any wonder that there isn't much love for Bush (and, as a result, America) in the rest of the world??
naming one after Slashdot ;-)
It's not an informed one, but there are many people who hold that belief. In general, they hold the belief that warmer weather leads to an increase in both number and intensity of violent weather events.
I can logically PROVE there will be more hurricanes.
A tropical storm is a storm with wind speeds up to 73MPH. Assuming you believe in science, and thus global warming, it is safe to assume you agree that warmer oceans. These storms are heat engines, more heat = more powerful storm. Thus, global warming leads to (slightly) stronger storms. If just one tropical storm of 73MPH winds is increased to 74MPH winds, TA DA, we have more hurricanes due to global warming!
Yes, I know that's not what people mean when they say more, but it's not my fault they are inprecise.
Most of the Free Republic article was spent summarizing the science article, which concluded as was quoted. The conclusion they reached first mentioned the observed trend from satellite data over the past 30 years: an increasing frequency of intense hurricanes. They also mentioned that this observed trend is consistent with predictions made by an extremely sophicasted simulator, such as this one(from the science article's references). The simulator's function is to provide predictions of hurricane type, location, and frequency based on as wide of a variety of climate conditions as possible, and to provide them as accurately as possible (which is tested by comparison with observations).
So the simulators can accurately predict some trends in hurricane activity. Here that trend was an increasing frequency of intense hurricanes, given an increase in CO2 concentration and an increase in ocean temperatures, which is what has been observed over the last 30 years.
Since the Free Republic author didn't like the conclusion reached by the scientist, he tries to append some non-satellite data to the beginning of the study and make his own new study. Any numbskull would notice that the data he appended is much noiser than the data in the study, and he clearly isn't qualified to attempt such a study (which is why his article wasn't published in a peer-reviewed journal like Science).
The best thing to do in these situations is school yourself and then come to your own conclusions on this matter.
Ignoring your tortured and incorrect sentence structure...
The short answer is that "global warming" refers to *global* average temperatures. *Local* temperatures may be higher *or* lower regardless of the global average. Further, just because a locality is warmer than average during a given year doesn't mean it's "global warming", it could be for other reasons like shifting jet stream patterns. So, what I'm saying is that the ocean can be warmer than average WITHOUT global warming being involved at all.
The other thing you should realize is that "global warming" could happen because of other factors besides people. For instance, the output from the Sun could change, there could be a natural dieoff of ocean bacteria, there could be a release of methane from subsurface methane hydrates and so on. There are also natural changes over time to the climate which aren't well understood.
The point of all this is that we need to CLEARLY UNDERSTAND what is happening to the climate before we make changes that drastically effect our lives, the economy, and future progress. Regardless of the validity of manmade global warming, all advanced nations agree that pollution is bad and should be reduced. The only questions are how fast and at what cost.
Don't forget that every year that goes by brings new technologies which potentially make a solution easier, faster and less expensive...waiting is not such a bad option IMNSHO. Also don't forget that regardless of what happens with the advanced nations, third world countries are not likely to become environment-friendly for some time.
Beats the hell out of global freezing... The bigger questions are: 1. Why are stupid people allowed to build cities below sealevel without naming them Atlantis or putting a dome over them? 2. Why doesn't the government stop wasting my tax dollars on providing flood insurance when a company can do it? 3. Why can't the Federal government ignore the incompetent Mayor of New Orleans and Governor of La? With all that Demoncraptic leadership there should be a liberal paradise down there - under the sea.
Could we please not link to strange ultraconservative sites like freerepublic.com? There is really only nutjobs there. This is not news for redneck SUV-Drivers is ir?
Here's a list of the retired hurricanes:
The letters Q, U, X, Y, and Z aren't used because there aren't enough names that start with those letters (in our culture). Otherwise, you run a pretty good chance of having hurricanes Xavier and Quentin pretty much every year.
No one is arguing global warming, but I'm curious what sources you have that say that increased hurricane activity is tied to it.
Every climatologist *I've* heard says that hurricanes follow a 40-50 year cycle and this isn't any worse than the beginning of the last century.
Clear, Dark Skies
Why did you frame 'left' and 'irrational' together? Or do you conclude that any non 'right' argument is automatically irrational?
If so, then you needn't worry - the irrationality here is alive and well, thanks to your efforts. Kudos! :)
On topic, I don't think its irrational to ask the question: is climate change a factor in the hurricane season? The scientific consensus (i.e. peer-reviewed Science and Nature-type consensus) is that it is not a major factor, not the underlying cause. Hurricane seasons appear to be cyclical, historically.
However that same consensus says that global climate change is absolutely, inarguably, happening. The causes of that are measurable and observable. Whether the Earth itself goes through its own cycles or not - and it likely does - we have definitely fucked with that cycle and now the outcome/effects are unclear.
Am I being 'irrational'?
If Jesus wants me it knows where to find me.
No, there aren't many Q, U, X, Y, Z names, but certainly more than one each. But XYZ (and to a lesser extent U) labled hurricanes rarely happen, so to an extent it balances out. So why on earth would you ignore those 3 letters only to skip directly to a system where there are only ONE names per letter, the greek alphabet? And furthermore, why deny us Hurricanes Xena, Yanni, and Zelda?
---If you can't trust a nerd, who can you trust?
"The connection between this record-breaking storm year and global warming remains controversial."
What about the connection between this record-breaking storm year and the declining number of pirates? Hmmmm?
This is an interesting story, and somewhat science/tech related, but not quite "news for nerds."
September 15, 2005 http:www.nsf.gov/news/news_summ.jsp?cntn_id=104428 &org=NSF&from=newsThe number of Category 4 and 5 hurricanes worldwide has nearly doubled over the past 35 years, according to a study by researchers at the Georgia Institute of Technology and the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR). The change occurred as global sea-surface temperatures have increased over the same period.
"Basic physical reasoning and climate model simulations and projections motivated this study," said Jay Fein, director of the National Science Foundaton's (NSF) climate and large-scale dynamics program, which funded the research. "The results will stimulate further research into the complex natural and human-caused processes influencing tropical hurricane trends and characteristics," he said.
"What we found was rather astonishing," said Georgia Tech's Webster. "In the 1970s, there was an average of about 10 Category 4 and 5 hurricanes per year globally. Since 1990, the number of Category 4 and 5 hurricanes has almost doubled, averaging 18 per year globally." -NSF-
Think!!!!
How much energy it takes to raise the entire earths sea????
I bet that I am now "preaching to the converted" because if you can actually read this far, you should be able to think for yourself?
Surely?
PS: Funded by Bush - Vote Republican 2008you'd learn the answer.
Current theories seem to suggest that storm frequency varies on a long term cycle independent of global warming. However weather models do suggest that a warmer ocean means that the storms we get will be stronger.
Clear, Dark Skies
And there is a link, but even if there isn't a link between global warming and bigger hurricanes, it makes the extreme pollution the people reading this comment are responsible for, no less destructive. Climate Change is being contributed to by our air pollution, and things like deforestation, so stop worrying about moot points like weather [pun] or not global warming is making hurricanes worse.
Saskboy's blog is good. 9 out of 10 dentists agree.
Yes, quote some political fucked up group like "freerepublic". You might as well quote the Soviet "Pravda" or some Nazi/KKK or religious propaganda.
Read the science journals not this shit if you want knowledge about science.
How about RTA? Why can't someones views be weighed by what they say not what site posts them? The sad part is if it had been NYT who openly lies and refuses to print a correction noone on this site would talk trash about an article simply because of where it was posted.
I am not trolling/baiting. I just think it is stupid to call an article worthless based on where it was posted.
Religion and politics, without the flame. godgab.org
How could that be? W wasn't the president then. And we've all heard how the number of storms this year is ALL W's fault.
I'm confused. Can some Liberal help me out with this?
Prof. Farnsworth - "Oh a lesson in not changing history from Mr I'm-My-Own-Grandpa!"
When it came to global warming and hurricanes, Kerry A. Emanuel used to be a skeptic. In fact, as one of the foremost theorists who studies such storms, Mr. Emanuel helped write a paper last year dismissing the idea that climate change would make hurricanes significantly more dangerous.
That paper will soon be published in a meteorological journal. But Mr. Emanuel's name will not be on it.
While looking at historical records, the atmospheric physicist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology found that the total power released by storms had drastically increased -- more than doubling in the Atlantic Ocean in the past 30 years. The evidence was so overwhelming that he could not stand by his earlier statements.
"I wasn't even looking for it," says Mr. Emanuel. "The trend was just so big that it stood out like a sore thumb."
He withdrew his name from the forthcoming paper that plays down global warming's influence on hurricanes. Then he published a new study in Nature last month, proclaiming the opposite conclusion.
http://chronicle.com/free/2005/09/2005090803n.htm
Pity the meteorologists didn't connect the same dots.
Clear, Dark Skies
So you want us to return to the ice ace?
About ten days ago, I mentioned a New York Times story on my Web site about hurricane names:
... Katrina, which means pure, reached its pinnacle of popularity as a name in 1980, when it was the 90th most common female baby name. Following only the whims of the fashion climate, 50 years ago the name was 489th in popularity, according to the Social Security Administration. It climbed to its peak 25 years later. But it slipped to No. 127 in 1990 and continued to fall... ... "How about doing away with names?" asked Katrina Heron, author of "Safe: The Race to Protect Ourselves in a Newly Dangerous World" (HarperCollins 2005), and a former editor at The New York Times Magazine. "Every time this horrible natural disaster strikes some group of people gets sideswiped." Ms. Heron has an alternative idea. "I think we should name hurricanes after vegetables we hate."
The New York Times report that each Katrina is handling the problem in her own way. Others with last year's 281st most popular baby name for a girl are coping with their fateful association with the devastating storm by trying everything from defending their name against those who might make fun of it to questioning the hurricane naming system...
A spokesman from the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) in Geneva, which issues names of hurricanes based on an alphabetical list that rotates annually and repeats every six years, did not respond to messages, but Stu Ostro, a senior meteorologist at the Weather Channel, said the world body was unlikely to change the system, which started in 1953. Experts had found that just giving storms numbers or locations was confusing. "The goal is to give valuable information clearly that can help save lives," Mr. Ostro said. "Maybe that's some solace the people named Camille or Katrina or Charley or Ivan can take."
The World Meteorological Organization does have a policy of retiring the names of particularly vicious storms, like Charley, Frances, Ivan and Jeanne, which pounded Florida last year, so this is likely to be the last Hurricane Katrina...
Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
I had a hard time putting two hurricanes on the same port at the same time, and when I finally did, it was just one big mess.
Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
It's completely irrelevant whether global warming is a cause for the increase in hurricanes or not. If it is, then there's nothing we can do to help the problem in the short term--even if we reduced human contributions to global warming to 0, it would still take many years for the damage done already to dissipate. So blaming the especially strong hurricane season on global warming is a bit like blaming your father for the kind of person you've turned out to be. It might make you feel better, but it won't help with the actual problem--that you're a deadbeat drunk and you beat your kids.
There will always be hurricanes. Just like there will always be tornados, droughts, earthquakes, sinkholes and other natural disasters. That's why they're called natural disasters. They're natural. They're a part of nature. The fact that there are 200 hurricanes this year and only 10 next year doesn't help the people affected by them any more or less.
Don't misunderstand me, I'm not saying that there isn't global warming. I have skin. I can tell it's there, even over my relatively short lifespan. We should get in on the Kyoto accord (or at least emulate like we're a part of it), cut back our emissions and do our best not to perturb the natural rest-state of the environment. But in the short term, we need to figure out better ways to evacuate people from affected areas and find better methods to deal with disaster recovery.
I currently have no clever signature witicism to add here.
Oh man, it would have been so great to have news organizations playing Shatner during all of the broadcast intros if the most recent one was Hurricane KHAAAAAAAN!
When you have alot of chicken littles running around crying 'the end is near', and make unsubstantiated claims, nobody can take you seriously. You end up getting compared with crop circles, yeti and ufo's.
Please explain the link between climate models indicating stronger hurricanes and "running out of hurricane names".
Frequency and intensity are not always correlated. I could try to build an argument that, due to increased intensity, previously weak unnamed storms are now more likely to be stronger, named storms, but none of the models say that.
Clear, Dark Skies
List of retired names
Somehow Hurricane Homer and Hurricane Krabapple seem right.
To put a witty saying into 120 characters, jst rmv ll th vwls.
The link between the growing intensity of hurricanes and global warming is not controversial. The vast majority of the evidence currently supports this link, and the current scientific consensus is that there is a link.
The only reason there appears to be a controversy is because of the media's misguided efforts to present a "balanced" story, leading them to quote any crackpot that believes the opposite of the current scientific consensus. Like that FreeRepublic author.
Seriously, saying there's a controversy because some random internet author from a grassroots convervative organisation who has no scientific background claims there is one, is like saying that the moon is made of blue cheese because the hobo yelling at traffic says so. Never mind the actual objective science that says otherwise...
No one's gonna name a storm "Hurricane Porkchop" - it sounds too much like a pro wrestler.
Clear, Dark Skies
We should charge for the right to name Hurricanes. Why stop at coporate 'sponsored' sport venues?
The Luddites were ahead of their time.
Who's going to take a hurricane named Katrina or Ophelia seriously? Here are some hurricane names that might get people's attention to get out of dodge:
- Osama
- Saddam
- Adolf
- Lucifer
- Vader
You have a faulty grasp of how science works. Nothing is ever *proven* in science. Things can only be *disproven*.
Only in math can things be proven, and even then it's just a logical proof within an assumed framework (thank you Godel).
Theories and hypotheses are accepted or rejected based on the weight of evidence supporting them and their coherence with the rest of the accepted body of science.
Currently the theory that nastier hurricanes are caused by global warming has more evidenciary support and is more coherent than competing theories, thus it is the currently accepted explanation.
Demanding "Proof" simply shows your ignorance of how science functions...
RealClimate is not a credible source. It's run by an environmentalist lobbying group out of Washington DC - do a WHOIS on the domain.
Using them as a source is like producing a GOP press release that says that George W. Bush is the best President ever. That may or may not be true, but one can't expect impartial analysis from someone who has a definite interest in pushing one side or the other.
The amoeba were farting long before the first dinosaur crawled out of the primordial ooze!
Slow down, cowboy! It has been 4 hours since you last posted. You must wait another few hours.
Hurricane Report:
Tropical depression #36 has increased in intensity to a tropical storm with maximum sustained windspeeds of 49 miles, and has been named tropical storm Pi. Its eye wall has circularized surprisingly early, and the storm is expected to gain strength as it squares the radial islands of the Florida Keys.
Hurricane Delta continues to change latitude, longitude, pressure, and windspeeds in the west, Atlantic, with d-la=-1.3, d-lo=0.2, d-p=-15 mbar, and d-w=15 mph. This is quite the contrast to last year's hurricane Iota, which refused to change much at all. It is recommended that all residents in the eastern Carribean continue to plot the course of this dangerous storm carefully, as all of this data is subject to change.
Hurricane Beta has been downgraded to tropical storm beta as it decays over the North Atlantic. Beta caused quite a scare after it formed from the reminants of the collision of tropical storm alpha and the eastern antilles, but has passed harmlessly through open water ever since it was spawned.
Tropical storm Lambda continues to redefine itself as it disintigrates now that it has moved inland from the Texas gulf cost. A category 5 hurricane on impact, it left a swath of destruction as a void in its wake. After making landfall, it took a break before continuing for n>3 days across the continental United States. The variable number of refugees that fled in advance of the hurricane are not expected to return any time soon; garbage collection must be done and the environment cleaned up first.
Also, I can kill you with my brain.
... when every school programming exercise began with the single letter variable names you'd use in algebra. First variable was X, second one you needed was Y, the third was Z, the fourth... was... *narf* OMG we've run out of variable names we're doomed!
Jeez. Just go around to A again. It's not like there's not enough other data about these things so we'd never distinguish them, the name is not tied to a date, so you always give a hurricane's name and then mention the month and year anyway...
"Win treats sysadmins better than users. Mac treats users better than sysadmins. Linux treats everyone like sysadmins."
can't they just start over at "A"?
I mean, is it THAT confusing for weather scientists?
(I didn't RTFA, so if they address this, great.)
-Styopa
Quoting the Free Republic as to suggest that the linkage between global warming and increased extreme weather is still in dispute is like quoting Pat Robertson on religious tolerance.
Find a reputable, accepted scientific source that considers the link between the massive weather shifts we've seen over the last 20 years and global warming merely spurious, and perhaps we can have a serious debate. Until that, please stop trying to pretend that politics are science.
***Foucault is watching you..***
Women's names used to be used for hurricanes that had their origin in a particular location. The first place I ever read this I think said that it applied to north of the equator. The article I found recently on the subject says it was for hurricanes that were plotted on the pacific ocean.
Whatever the case, everyone agrees that in the late seventies the naming scheme was changed to include male names due to charges of sexism.
It is a solemn thought: dead, the noblest man's meat is inferior to pork.
Katrina? Is that a hurricane or a server?
Oh your account is hosted on "katrina"? Well WTF is katrina anyway? In the next room, in the next state?
How about a more informative nomenclature for both?
I am very small, utmostly microscopic.
Yeah. Just to the Freepers.
So we have an industry shill and a thinktanker on one side, and almost the entire climatology community on the other. (out of 928 peer-reviewed papers published, NOT ONE denied global warming was real and was occuring now due to human activities. 75% accepted that conclusion explicitly or implicitly, and the remaining 25% made no mention either way.) Yeah that's controversial, and so is the planet being round.
Just last week it was reported that arctic sea ice melting was accelerating, and therefore we have passed the tipping point.
There may have been controversy 30 years ago. The only controversy now is the manufactured one for political gain. Then again, I suspect fm6, also believes that the white house was changing scientific results simply to make it "fair and balanced".
The increase in hurricanes is not due to the increase in global temperatures, rather, it is due to a decrease in the number of pirates.
] D
I don't think the argument is between tax cuts vs. no tax cuts, but rather, does it benefit the economy more to give tax cuts to the poor, or the rich (given that tax cuts are gonna happen)?
Rich people investing their money leads to unemployed people getting jobs, as the companies invested in use the money to expand their businesses and purchase goods and services
We both agree that consumption is what drives an economy; I think bottom-up consumption will do more than top-down. Instead of poor people buying food vs. rich people buying yachts, think 50,000 poor people buying TVs, DVD players, name brand clothes, common "luxury" goods vs. 500 rich people buying yachts, gold-topped walking sticks, true "luxury" goods, etc. It seems to me that the greater distribution of the wealth (and thus stronger economy) will come from the greater number of poor people consuming.
As to the investment argument, an increase in consumption will guarantee investment in that market. Look at China. Increasing an affluent person's ability to invest in markets will not guarantee such investment occurs, only increase its likelihood.
...sometimes, in order to hurt someone very badly, you have to tell that person terrible lies. - PA
Looks like yet another case of "Hey, we managed to find one lone scientist who will disagree with everyone else".
GCHQ Quantum Insert installed. If only our tongues were made of glass, how much more careful we would be when we speak
Rich people investing their money leads to unemployed people getting jobs, as the companies invested in use the money to expand their businesses and purchase goods and services.
Depends on how they invest their money. If you look at a big picture of economic growth of a country or maybe they invest in local companies then yes.
However if they invest in luxuries or do not invest their money locally... Say invest in China or a large corporation which does not have much to do with poor people except maybe sell them products (like a pharmaceuticals corporation) then the answer is no.
In theory, a poor person might never see money that a rich person saves on taxes if the rich person invests in things outside of the scope of the poor persons economic realm.
In truth, government and wealthy people will not spend money to directly benefit you or put money directly into your pocket. The best solution is for the individual to avoid paying as much tax as possible through loopholes or as tax filers call "creative accounting".
"I am the king of the Romans, and am superior to rules of grammar!"
-Sigismund, Holy Roman Emperor (1368-1437)
You can't cut taxes for the poor. They don't pay any income taxes in the first place, since by definition they don't have any money
I replied seriously to an earlier post of yours. In my defense, it was a much better Troll than this one.
...sometimes, in order to hurt someone very badly, you have to tell that person terrible lies. - PA
I have never heard an argument about why raising the temperature a few degrees is actually bad, and I'm not talking about raising sea level 5 or 10 feet.
:)
While I tend to agree with the rest of your post, and am very skeptical on long-term global warming in general, this is a pretty idiotic way to argue. You just proved that you have in fact heard arguments about why raising temperatures is a bad thing.
Anyway, here's a few off the top of my head, and I'm pretty sure you've heard them all if you've been reading any sort of news since 1990 or so:
1. raised sea levels
2. increased and/or new desertification (think of the Sahara doubling in size)
3. more extreme weather globally - colder winters, hotter summers, more violent hurricanes/tornadoes/typhoons/monsoons
Then we have the really bizarre things, like:
Melting of the polar ice caps decreses the salinity of the oceans, stopping the gulf stream, and plunging Europe into an ice age. Note, this is much of what the movie "The Day After Tomorrow" was based on. Junk science at its finest, but don't tell me you've never heard of this theory if you've done the slightest bit of reading on global warming.
You may disagree with the arguments, but I'm pretty sure you've heard of them
Endless arguments over trivial contradictions in books written by ignorant savages to explain thunder in the dark.
It's not so much who says it, or what they say, or what anyone believes that's important in Science.
It's the studies that they perform, and how well their arugments stand up to scientific peer review.
Linus Pauling won the Nobel twice, but personally believed (and preached) that Vitamin C plays a vital role in curing / preventing the common cold. He died before he could prove those statements, and never published because he knew that his work was inconclusive and incomplete. His Nobel was for the work he published in other aspects of biology / chemistry.
He might be right about the Vitamin C, (he also might be wrong), but that's just his opinion. Taking someone else's published, defended, and dissected study which survived the rigors of peer review and treating it as if it's equavilent to someone else's opinion is an insult to the lives spent trying to really understand the world.
So don't post "Granddad's" opinions, post his research findings.
ahhh! Global Warming!!!! AHHHH!!!! Read a book and draw your own conclusions. There is NO data that proves global warming even EXISTS.
News:
Robert kills 25,000 in New Orleans while Adolf uproots trees in Toronto.
"Give orange me give eat orange me eat orange give me eat orange give me you." -Nim Chimpsky
Hurricane Puff Daddy...
Vintage computer adverts: http://www.vintageadbrowser.com/computers-and-software-ads
Rock on, good sourcing and research!
Zhrodague.net - I do projects and stuff too.
They just showed a correlation -- again. The number of Cat4+ hurricanes per decade has doubled since the 70's. During this time, sea surface temperatures have increased by one degree. Since it's warm water that drives the hurricane engine, how big a rock do I have to hit you over the head with before you wake up?
Since hurricanes mostly hit Southern states anyway, start using two names after we use up all the
single names for the year. By October we'll get hurricanes like Bubba Earl, Ellie Mae, Joe Bob, etc.
>;k
... the solution is to do nothing and wait to see if weather changes get so drastic that we can't stop the effect. Then we'll know for sure!
is this anything like q-basic, or is this some new hurricane scripting language?
...when Xena would make the most bitchinest name for a Hurricane?
I agree. Which, if you note, is why I suggested some money should be thrown at the research first, so we can have a better idea of what is the best direction to be throwing tens to hundreds of billions in. The cost to the American economy and taxpayers of an unneeded Kyoto implementation would be staggering. The cost of repeated rebuilding from ever increasing hurricanes would be comparably staggering. Let's get some more raw data, some more rigorous statistical analyses, and have some nice testing for correlations to competing and null hypotheses to boot. At a later point, sic some economists into the mix to deal with finding which of the solutions likely to give the least overall costs, and come up with some proposals for the most equitable distribution of said costs.
Perhaps, maybe, we ought to blow up a lot of nuclear bombs to cause a likely "Global-Winter" in order to compensate for the possible "Global-Warming" that might possibly be happening.
Possibly. However if it comes to that, using the nukes to deliberatly induce volcanic eruptions is likely to yield greater net cooling per curie of radioactives released; additionally, volcanic ash is generally beneficial to soil fertility in the modestly longer term.
Fortunately, I'm pretty sure we're not there yet. You don't use an impulse drive if a conventionally fueled rocket will work... especially until you're sure what trajectory you want. There's the old question of whether human-CO2 impact is the only thing delaying an ice age.
All I hear as proof is media stories linking to each other as absolute proof.
Yes, yes, we all read Slashdot: far too much of science reporting in the media is bad reporting, even leaving aside the Weekly World News and such. But how much time do you spend reading refereed climatology journals?
Elegant troll, by the way. =)
//Information does not want to be free; it wants to breed.
"Prevailing wages" is a term from the Davis-Bacon Act. It really means "union wages." A bureaucrat in the US Department of Labor sets them. It's mere pork for Big Labor, to ensure that government projects use only union workers. But there are not enough union workers to do a job this big.
If we allowed a government commissar to set Davis-Bacon "prevailing wages" by fiat, it would take ten times as long to recover from the disaster, because no rational business owner is going to hire people for more than the true value of their labor. That value is bound to be higher than minimum wage, but not as high as Big Labor would like the government to decree.
Union men do tend to be more skilled than the average, and nominally faster, when they are not featherbedding or striking or bitching to their stewards about work rules. However, to force employers to pay every unskilled laborer in a disaster zone as if they were an experienced union journeyman is economic ignorance of the highest degree.
Bush understands this. Leftist ignoramuses like you do not, unless you are the kind of cynical pseudo-leftist who cares only about the well-being of union members, with no regard for the disaster victims they are supposed to be helping.
-ccm
Too much Law; not enough Order.
The conclusion they reached first mentioned the observed trend from satellite data over the past 30 years: an increasing frequency of intense hurricanes.
Sure, over the last 30 years maybe, but what about the past 150 years?
http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/pastdec.shtml
You'll notice that although the number and strengths of hurricanes have increased since the '70s, They're much lower then in the 1940s and 1890s. The chart seems to show a 50 year cycle of strong hurricanes, with us currently being in the next cycle. In fact, we're lower now then the last two cycles.
"That's so plausible, I can't believe it!" - Leela
So in 1933 when we had 21 named storms, we also had global warming?
Oh, it's a petri-dish all right.
Please don't hurt me, it was just a joke in poor taste. (no pun intended, honestly)
"That's so plausible, I can't believe it!" - Leela
Just make up more names... talk about the government red tape... sheesh what? you need to have it in triplicate 3 month prior to the year you want to use them in or something?
Troy
Uma
Vera
Warren
Xerxes
Yvette
Zeke
And if they need another, go back to Q --- Quinten
See the Pictures of the Flood of '08
Let's say this year we find ourselves with a Hurricane Alpha, Beta, Gamma... etc. What if one of those hurricanes causes massive damage enough to get its name retired (like Andrew and Katrina)? What will happen the next time we get more than 21 hurricanes? Skip that Greek letter?
The Victorian age saw lots of great names, no longer used much - like Tarquin and Pindar and Cyril and Adelaide.
Help! It's Hurricane Tark!
The Victorians liked to name their spawn with the names of their favorite flowers or foods, too, so you get kids named Daisy and Rue and Cabbage (really!).
And of course, if the wife died in childbirth, the grieving husband might well name the child "bane" or "murder".
Aggh! RUN! It's HURRICANE MURDER!!!!
Yes, actually, we did. Global warming didn't start with the Nixon administration, or even with American industrial pollution. The significant human contributions began with mass burnoffs of forest for farmland, and have caused several eccentricities in the buffered climate cycles. Then the Industrial Revolution combined vastly increased deforestation with more burning, later petrofuels like oil and coal. Which also deforest the surface. By 1933 we'd already stressed the environment, seeing sealevels begin to rise just from thermal expansion. Which warmer seas also increase the hurricane activity.
Of course, the baseline is a variance itself. But the variance in hurricane frequency, hurricane intensity and hot years (and especially thermal variance in a given year) has been pushed towards a new track. The links I offered show that hurricanes might be reaching a prior maximum in frequency, but they're much stronger. That vast extra energy is transferred from the warmer air and water. Energy we pumped and trapped with our pollution, in addition to that produced by the cycles we've altered.
So, if you're going to ask disingenuous questions, try reading the links first. We've already got too much hot air.
--
make install -not war
Unfortunately I can't repeat them in public.
They're the names I call the lovely girls in my life.
They swoop in, there's lots of dampness and blowing at first, but when they leave, they take the house.
corporate sponsorship!
Imagine it. A huge fund is started where the winning bid for each hurricane's name is deposited, and this is what we dip into to pick up the pieces afterward!
This way when Citigroup takes your house, it's because it cleaned it off it's foundation into the Gulf of Mexico!
But really, there will be such heavy bidding for the Category Fives so that every talking-head will be saying "remember this relief effort is brought to you by Walmart."
where'd my typewriter go?
There's no way you could run out of names.
See, the way I read your comment is proof that the M2M has no real merit but I think you mean to imply that somehow this great thing is being done and no one is talking about it.
People will say alot of nasty things about the bush white house but no one will EVER say that they don't know how to spin news like a centrifuge. If this has gotten no press it is only because Rove and others have decided not to.
I mean, I think there is a 1 in a million chance that the BBC, CBC, NPR, CNN AND FOX News are all ignoring the SAME important story. Unlikely but it could happen. However I will never believe that Rove would let something wonderful slip by unused for spin especially if it really is doing some good.
I mod everyone down who says "I'll get modded down for this." I hate to disappoint.
...down here, they are called cyclones.
This deserves to be read, and if I have to burn a little karma to get it seen there's no better use.
Anonymous Coward wrote:
Don't just believe either the detractors or the defenders of junkscience.com - go check it out for yourself. It's a website devoted to debunking some of the more pernicious and pervasive myths of our time.
Of course the authors there have their own point of view, like everyone else, and of course you, the reader, should accept the responsibility to actually think and make up your own mind about things, instead of mindlessly parroting whatever you're told by anyone. So double check their sources. Check the data - see for yourself.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Friends don't let friends enable ecmascript.
Everyone knows it El Nino's fault!
dont 4get hurricane CARRIE !!! y dont they named a hurricane after me ??? :( i no they didnt use carrie yet
I never realized that Floyd, Andrew and Ivan were women's names before.
Clear, Dark Skies
I suggest outsourcing the naming to India, and at a much lower cost.
Hurricane Punjab
Hurricane Krishna
Hurricane Patel
etc...
We rip up all the parking lots. Plant more trees and walk to work it will all go back to normal?
LA and NYC are gonna be pissed.
In other news...
SCO makes claim to ownership of all hurricane names. All females names Katrina shall be recieving ceast and desist letters, along with information on how to properly license their names. When argued that since they were given the names before SCO made their ownership claim, they should be given grandfather status, SCO promptly sent out the goon squad and had them maimed and tortured.
To a noob, root is like a gay bar...and he's wearing assless chaps
I find it really, really funny that this came up. Back when Linus Torvalds said Slashdot was like one big wankfest, a friend and I came up with this:
Prideaux's Three Laws of Slashdot
First Law
In any story involving software, the probability of the discussion turning to open-source software and Microsoft becomes 1
Second Law
In any story involving energy or the environment, the probability of the discussion turning to the merit of global warming becomes 1
Third Law
In any story in YRO or involving peer-to-peer software, the probability of the phrase "there is no loss on any user's part, so it is not theft" or some variation thereof occurring becomes 1
Finn's Supplement to the First Law
If the topic of browsers, standards or the W3C arises, the probability of the phrase "standards are whatever the majority uses" or some variation thereof occurring within the discussion approaches 1 as the discussion continues
According to a former geology professor, back in the day when plate tectonics was still a relatively new concept, there was seemingly always one faculty member per department who refused to admit the validity of the theory. Anthropogenic global warming seems to be a contemporary case of this, except this time with corporate sponsorship.
The article linked cites a worldwide increase of .5 Celsius in SST over the past 30 years. I took the liberty of calculating just how many joules of energy that represents.
.5
The Sea surface Area = 381 x 10^6 sq km
= 3.81 x 10^12 sq m
Surface depth ~ 1 m (assumption)
Volume of water = 3.81 x 10^12 cu m
= 3.81 x 10^15 L
mass of water = 3.81 x 10^15 kg
specific heat of water = 2100 J/(kg*K)
change in energy = spec. heat * mass * change in temp
= 2100 * 3.81 x 10^15 *
= 4.0005 x 10^18 J of energy
A massive number. So always keep in mind when discussing globa temperatures changes that small variations in temperature mean huges changes in energy level.
"The connection between this record-breaking storm year and global warming remains controversial."
It remains controversial because it's a load of crap. We all know of the connection is between the increase global warming and the reduction pirates!
I have been touched by his noodly appendage.
Ramen
Free Republic is a news aggregator. There was no "Free Republic author", the article is from Tech Central Station: http://www.techcentralstation.com/091605F.html.
When things get complex, multiply by the complex conjugate.
I hit enter too quickly, so sue me. Should have mentioned this too:
Read what I wrote - I said quite clearly that it is rising through much of the time period, and that we're in a warming period now. I was just pointing out that it's not as dramatic a warming trend as the one leading up to '38, and the absolute temparature is less as well (because we haven't quite made up for the big drop in the 60s.)
I also remember back in the 70s the big scare was 'global cooling.' Just like we have a barrage of articles in the newspapers and so on about global warming now, there were scare stories and calls for political action back then on the theory that we were making the world colder, and if we didn't return to pre-industrial life we would cause an ice-age.
I think there's a real tendency in certain circles for blowing these things all out of proportion. We get a decade of cooling, or of warming, and either way it's a harbinger of impending doom, and evidence we're messing everything up. Well a decade, or even a century, isn't even a blink of an eye in terms of climate patterns, and any responsible climatologist would tell you that.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Friends don't let friends enable ecmascript.
I propose we go back to numbering hurricanes like we do with security vulnerabilities, and supernovas.
Like 2005.01, 2005.02, 1987A, etc.
I have 200 some odd acres on which to enjoy, as well as living by a State Park.
For hurricanes (such as Katrina) that cause an exceptional amount of damage they retire the name. So if the 22nd hurricane of the year is a monster will they retire "Alpha" as a hurricane name?
... IMHO, of course.
Moderation -2
50% Troll
50% Overrated
TrollMods come out in force when reality-based blame management faults Republican deniers instead of playing their BS blame games.
--
make install -not war
tropical storm Pi: Every time I tell the residents here that the storm is coming I am roundly criticized. I tried to convince them to leave but they are diametrically opposed.
Hurricane Lambda: Nobody could'a predicted that we would see a recursion of storm activity so soon after tropical storm Kappa headed back out into the gulf. It just seems to keep returning. Everywhere people are asking "when will we have closure?" but there is no result, just a bunch of empty arguments. As for me, I'm going to pass on those.