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
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


(cut)


The Mediterranean is not the tropics.

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.

On Feb 23, 6:04*am, dave wrote:
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
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

* (cut)

The Mediterranean is not the tropics.- Hide quoted text -

What's THAT got to do with anything? Do you suffer from simple
reading comprehension?

"Or Brazilian tornadoes... "

Most of Brazil IS in the tropics. My point was, your hypothesis of
increased weather volatility due to global warming is a bunch of crap!
Models predict a reduced temperature gradient between equator and
poles, and that would REDUCE volatility-

wrote:
On Feb 23, 6:04 am, dave wrote:
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
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
(cut)
The Mediterranean is not the tropics.- Hide quoted text -

What's THAT got to do with anything? Do you suffer from simple
reading comprehension?

"Or Brazilian tornadoes... "

Most of Brazil IS in the tropics. My point was, your hypothesis of
increased weather volatility due to global warming is a bunch of crap!
Models predict a reduced temperature gradient between equator and
poles, and that would REDUCE volatility-

A scientist would not use a term like volatile unless describing the
propensity of a liquid toward vaporization, or some such like that there.

On Feb 23, 12:43*pm, dave wrote:
wrote:
On Feb 23, 6:04 am, dave wrote:
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
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
* (cut)
The Mediterranean is not the tropics.- Hide quoted text -

* *What's THAT got to do with anything? *Do you suffer from simple
reading comprehension?

"Or Brazilian tornadoes... "

*Most of Brazil IS in the tropics. * *My point was, your hypothesis of
increased weather volatility due to global warming is a bunch of crap!
Models predict a reduced temperature gradient between equator and
poles, and that would REDUCE volatility-

A scientist would not use a term like volatile unless describing the
propensity of a liquid toward vaporization, or some such like that there.- Hide quoted text -

Acutally, the people most apt to use the term "volatility" would be
those trading on stocks, bonds, or commodities.

Volatility is the measure of the state of instability. You think
weather
would be more volatile with global warming, I say that cooling would
have a more volatile effect.- A. McIntire

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. There is
evidence for the dry places getting dryer, and wet places getting
wetter - mainly in the tropics and subtropics. And there is evidence
for greater intensity of rainfall events due to increased specific
humidity. Evidence for greater variability per se is much weaker if
it
exists at all. What we are seeing this month are extreme excursions
of
the jet stream - but in most of the models there is a weak increase
in
the 'NAO' pattern, which is actually associated with less winter
variability in the jet stream and reduced extreme cold outbreaks. I
am
not aware of any study suggesting that extreme cold events should be
more likely or more extreme. Be careful not to fall into the
contrarian trap of blaming everything (and therefore explaining
nothing) on global warming.... - gavin] "


- A. McIntire

wrote:

Acutally, the people most apt to use the term "volatility" would be
those trading on stocks, bonds, or commodities.

Volatility is the measure of the state of instability. You think
weather
would be more volatile with global warming, I say that cooling would
have a more volatile effect.- A. McIntire

So McIntire is a stock broker?

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. There is
evidence for the dry places getting dryer, and wet places getting
wetter - mainly in the tropics and subtropics. And there is evidence
for greater intensity of rainfall events due to increased specific
humidity. Evidence for greater variability per se is much weaker if
it
exists at all. What we are seeing this month are extreme excursions
of
the jet stream - but in most of the models there is a weak increase
in
the 'NAO' pattern, which is actually associated with less winter
variability in the jet stream and reduced extreme cold outbreaks. I
am
not aware of any study suggesting that extreme cold events should be
more likely or more extreme. Be careful not to fall into the
contrarian trap of blaming everything (and therefore explaining
nothing) on global warming.... - gavin] "


- A. McIntire



If the jet stream has more energy will it not swing more wildly?

On Feb 23, 3:57*pm, dave wrote:
wrote:

* Acutally, the people most apt to use the term "volatility" would be
those trading on stocks, bonds, or commodities.

Volatility is the measure of the state of instability. *You think
weather
would be more volatile with global warming, I say that cooling would
have a more volatile effect.- A. McIntire

So McIntire is a stock broker?

So you're not smart enough to understand the definition?- A. McIntire

On Feb 23, 4:02*pm, dave wrote:
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. There is
evidence for the dry places getting dryer, and wet places getting
wetter - mainly in the tropics and subtropics. And there is evidence
for greater intensity of rainfall events due to increased specific
humidity. Evidence for greater variability per se is much weaker if
it
exists at all. What we are seeing this month are extreme excursions
of
the jet stream - but in most of the models there is a weak increase
in
the 'NAO' pattern, which is actually associated with less winter
variability in the jet stream and reduced extreme cold outbreaks. I
am
not aware of any study suggesting that extreme cold events should be
more likely or more extreme. Be careful not to fall into the
contrarian trap of blaming everything (and therefore explaining
nothing) on global warming.... - gavin] "

- A. McIntire

If the jet stream has more energy will it not swing more wildly?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Going off on a tangent about the Mediterranean, and implicitly
calling your prophet, Gavin, a liar, you have a definite reading
comprehension problem:

"- but in most of the models there is a weak increase
in the 'NAO' pattern, which is actually associated with less winter
variability in the jet stream and reduced extreme cold outbreaks. I
am not aware of any study suggesting that extreme cold events should
be more likely or more extreme. Be careful not to fall into the
contrarian trap of blaming everything (and therefore explaining
nothing) on global warming.... - gavin] "

- A. McIntire