On Sat, 23 Feb 2008 13:56:30 -0800 (PST), "
wrote:

On Feb 23, 6:06*am, T. Keating wrote:
On Fri, 22 Feb 2008 07:14:17 -0800 (PST), "





wrote:
On Feb 21, 6:24*am, dave wrote:
wrote:
On Feb 19, 1:25 pm, "V-for-Vendicar"
wrote:
*Nope, you are still too stupid to know the difference betweenclimate
and
weather,

(cut crap)

* Climate is what you EXPECT, *weather is what you GET.
*Didn't expect snow *in Greece or Saudi Arabia did you Vendicar?
What's the probability that this will happen with *exponentially
increasing
worldwide temperatures? *I'd guess somewhere between slim and none-
A. McIntire

Or Brazilian tornadoes...

Anomalous weather phenomena are expected to increase due to global
warming; *snow on the Mediterranean MAY be such a sympton. *It might be
prudent to assume that it is, as opposed to latching onto the snow as
simplistic false proof that there is no warming.

That's wrong! * With more CO2 in the atmosphere, there would

not really.. *see below..

theroretically be little change in the tropics, *where the CO2 effect
is swamped by water vapor. *Most of the change in temerature would be
in the dryer areas closer to the poles. * The average temperature
gradient between equator and poles would drop, REDUCING weather
volatility- A. McIntire

With more CO2 in the atmosphere results in higher vertical (20-40
mile) *thermal gradients, where most violent/extreme weather events
obtain their energy.

*Verses delta gradients spread over thin atmospheric shell several
thousand miles in length. *

I.E. Delta T per km Vert Delta T per km *horiz.. *

. Weather fronts provide enough energy to destabilize, nearly all the
rest of the energy comes the local V delta T.- Hide quoted text -




Not even the extreme AGW folks at RealClimate believe severe drops
in
temperature are the result of global warming. From

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php...-tale-of-three...


"Due to Global Warming, one of the predictions for the changes we'd
see
is for greater variability in weather due to more energy in the
atmosphere. Hotter hots. Wetter wets. Dryer dries. And even, in
places, colder colds.-Comment by Jeffrey Davis - 9 Apr 2007 @ 7:19 pm


[Response: Actually, I don't think this is a fair statement.

Whoa... You disagree with you own link... tsk.. tsk..

As I pointed out previously

1. The vertical delta T(per km)(3 to 4C/km) over any point of
earth's surface represents far more potential energy than the
horizontal thermal gradients of weather fronts (0.001 to 0.02 C/km
average)

2. Increasing CO2 levels is having a far greater impact on vertical
delta T (divisor ~30km) than horizontal delta T's(divisor ~2000km) .