American Global Warming WMDs, now with lasers!

[swampyankee]

If the US is going to destabilize the climates of local countries, there's not that many places that actually abut the US. Most USians who do not wear tinfoil hats do not consider Canada a threat, and making things worse in Mexico would probably be less than beneficial to the US.

It is nice to know that there are some prominent Russians (or at least prominent enough to make the news on Radio Free Europe) who seem to wear tinfoil hats, at least in private. Or is July 30 the Russian analogue to April 1?

[Garrison]

If the US is going to destabilize the climates of local countries, there's not that many places that actually abut the US. Most USians who do not wear tinfoil hats do not consider Canada a threat, and making things worse in Mexico would probably be less than beneficial to the US.

It is nice to know that there are some prominent Russians (or at least prominent enough to make the news on Radio Free Europe) who seem to wear tinfoil hats, at least in private. Or is July 30 the Russian analogue to April 1?

Climate change weapons wouldn't make a lot of sense. We know global weather patterns interact, so how do you guarantee that a baking hot Russia doesn't translate into crop ruining rain and floods in some friendly territory?

[Sir Knots A Lot]

How much could all the oil burning in the gulf contribute to climate change?

[Swift]

How much could all the oil burning in the gulf contribute to climate change?

I saw the number somewhere and the answer was very little. IIRC, the entire spill was equivalent to a couple of days worth of fossil fuel use in the US. And if the oil had gone where it was supposed to, up a pipe and to a refinery, it would have eventually been burned anyway.

[Sir Knots A Lot]

I saw the number somewhere and the answer was very little. IIRC, the entire spill was equivalent to a couple of days worth of fossil fuel use in the US. And if the oil had gone where it was supposed to, up a pipe and to a refinery, it would have eventually been burned anyway.

Just curious. I know Hurricane Andrew, a catergory 5 hurricane, followed the year after the first Gulf War. Lots of oil fields burned during that time.

[Glom]

i believe that it was called "two days before the day after tomorrow".
definitely one of the better episodes.

Also the bit with the Jew gold.

[Abaddon]

Also the bit with the Jew gold.

No offence but this is getting under my skin right now. Where did this "ebil joos" notion originate?

And no I am not jewish nor any of my family tree, I just dont get it. where did this come from?

[swampyankee]

I'm not a fan of South Park, but what I know of it is that the show usually treads heavily on the toes of good taste.

[NickW]

While South Park isn't the most tasteful show, it is a show that is highly skeptical about the same issues that get discussed here.

[Strange]

No offence but this is getting under my skin right now. Where did this "ebil joos" notion originate?

We probably can't discuss this too much without getting into areas that are problematic for BAUT. But it goes back a long way. Some of it is just the perennial dislike of the "other". I suspect Gypsies and Jews have got the rough end of this for centuries because they can be considered "outsiders" by almost every country, and therefore become scapegoats in times of trouble. Although of course, for balance, one should note that there have been long periods when Jews have been an integral part of various societies, including some (possibly) suprising cases such as Spain under the Moors, certain periods in the history of Istanbul, etc.

There has also been, at times, tension between some Christians and Judaism because of a certain well-known death... This has undoubtedly been exploited at times for political purposes. But we had better leave that there.

[Bobbar]

Just curious. I know Hurricane Andrew, a catergory 5 hurricane, followed the year after the first Gulf War. Lots of oil fields burned during that time.

There were what, 2 or 3 hurricanes that season? The only one to make landfall MUST have been caused by man by an activity he did the previous year.

The oil fires burned about 6 million bbl a day for 10 months, thats a little less oil than what is burned by America every 90 days.

[Sir Knots A Lot]

There were what, 2 or 3 hurricanes that season? The only one to make landfall MUST have been caused by man by an activity he did the previous year.

The oil fires burned about 6 million bbl a day for 10 months, thats a little less oil than what is burned by America every 90 days.

Current world oil consumption is around 86 million barrels a day. An increase of 6 million barrels a day would amount to a 7% increase in the total world oil consumption, which seems like a fairly high spike to me. In terms of countries, it's almost like adding another China or Japan to the world for 10 months. They currently consume 7.5 and 5 million barrels a day each.

Plus, when it comes to lost oil, I have my doubts as to how much the estimates have been lowballed. The current 'Gulf' situation would be a good example.

And it wasn't just that it was a hurricane making landfall in the US, it was a catergory 5 hurricane making landfall in the US, which is slightly unusual.

[Bobbar]

Current world oil consumption is around 86 million barrels a day. An increase of 6 million barrels a day would amount to a 7% increase in the total world oil consumption, which seems like a fairly high spike to me. In terms of countries, it's almost like adding another China or Japan to the world for 10 months. They currently consume 7.5 and 5 million barrels a day each.

Plus, when it comes to lost oil, I have my doubts as to how much the estimates have been lowballed. The current 'Gulf' situation would be a good example.

And it wasn't just that it was a hurricane making landfall in the US, it was a catergory 5 hurricane making landfall in the US, which is slightly unusual.

Right, but did that event have any measurable affect? It sure didn't if you're only looking at hurricanes from the following year. It was a light season, one of many.

And from looking at the chart you linked, cat 5 landfalls look totally normal, cat 5 and cat 4 have an equal number of landfalls.

Looks to me like the '92 season was business as usual.

[CJSF]

Perhaps I missed it (and I lack the motivation to go back and read for it), but what the heck do hurricanes have to do with either the original post or with the burning off of oil?

CJSF

[Sir Knots A Lot]

Right, but did that event have any measurable affect? It sure didn't if you're only looking at hurricanes from the following year. It was a light season, one of many.

And from looking at the chart you linked, cat 5 landfalls look totally normal, cat 5 and cat 4 have an equal number of landfalls.

Looks to me like the '92 season was business as usual.

Except there catergory 5 landfalls in the continental US are a rarity. Normally a catergory 5 hurricane ends up much further south. The '92 season was one of the most destructive on record, btw. The name 'Andrew' had to be retired.

It's kind of misleading to suggest that cause and effect in this situation should follow immediately. Have you ever studied process control? Sometimes a controlled variable doesn't respond immediately to changes in the manipulated variable, depending on the capacitance of the system.

[NEOWatcher]

... or with the burning off of oil?

Burning oil causing hurricanes (or another method of controlling the weather).
No, I don't subscribe to that idea.

[Sir Knots A Lot]

Burning oil causing hurricanes (or another method of controlling the weather).
No, I don't subscribe to that idea.

Tsk.

Burning oil alters weather patterns. I'm pretty sure the use of fossil fuels since the start of the Industrial revolution has demonstrated that to anyone who believe GW is real.

Unless you wanna say that Hurricane Andrew was an Iraqi counter-attack.

[NEOWatcher]

The '92 season was one of the most destructive on record, btw.

Really? That's not what wiki says.

The 1935 Labor Day hurricane ... The second tropical cyclone, second hurricane, and second intense hurricane of the season marked the most destructive Atlantic hurricane of the United States;

And the amount of destruction is only a result of the combination of intensity, location and duration. So; it's not a good indicator of the intensity of a season.

[Sir Knots A Lot]

Really? That's not what wiki says.


And the amount of destruction is only a result of the combination of intensity, location and duration. So; it's not a good indicator of the intensity of a season.

I said 'one of', one of three if you want to be specific. Only 3 catergory 5 hurricanes made landfall in the continental US during the last century. The labour day hurricane, camille and andrew. There was a global temperature spike during the late 30s that could explain the labour day hurricane, the 90s were hot to begin with, but I don't know of a similar correlation for camille.

[NEOWatcher]

I said 'one of'

Ooops. Sorry about that.

[Bobbar]

Except there catergory 5 landfalls in the continental US are a rarity. Normally a catergory 5 hurricane ends up much further south. The '92 season was one of the most destructive on record, btw. The name 'Andrew' had to be retired.

It's kind of misleading to suggest that cause and effect in this situation should follow immediately. Have you ever studied process control? Sometimes a controlled variable doesn't respond immediately to changes in the manipulated variable, depending on the capacitance of the system.

Ok then. Yes, cat 5 landfalls on the US are rare. But, why would you only be looking at the US? The bigger picture says every thing was pretty darn normal, if not sub par for that year.

The year after is immediately following. Changes in climate happen over MANY years, tens of years, not one.

[Gillianren]

I said 'one of', one of three if you want to be specific. Only 3 catergory 5 hurricanes made landfall in the continental US during the last century. The labour day hurricane, camille and andrew. There was a global temperature spike during the late 30s that could explain the labour day hurricane, the 90s were hot to begin with, but I don't know of a similar correlation for camille.

"Catergory" 5 is not the only level which produces enormous devastation upon landfall. The Galveston hurricane of 1900 was only a category 4 upon landfall. It's considered the most deadly hurricane in US history, and the third-most deadly Atlantic hurricane in recorded history. And that's just talking about deaths on the US mainland, which--as pointed out--is leaving out quite a lot of hurricane country.

[Sir Knots A Lot]

Ok then. Yes, cat 5 landfalls on the US are rare. But, why would you only be looking at the US? The bigger picture says every thing was pretty darn normal, if not sub par for that year.

The year after is immediately following. Changes in climate happen over MANY years, tens of years, not one.

Having a country like Japan double its oil consumption is an unusual occurance. One that would normally occur over many many years.

Having american oil consumption go up by 30% overnight for a period of 10 months would be a similar situation.

"Catergory" 5 is not the only level which produces enormous devastation upon landfall. The Galveston hurricane of 1900 was only a category 4 upon landfall. It's considered the most deadly hurricane in US history, and the third-most deadly Atlantic hurricane in recorded history. And that's just talking about deaths on the US mainland, which--as pointed out--is leaving out quite a lot of hurricane country.

I'm not talking about devastation, really. I'm talking about changing weather patterns. The level of a hurricane is measured by its windspeed, not the amount of damage it does.

[CJSF]

It is NOT measured solely by windspeed. It is measured by the total amount of energy imparted to the storm. Yes, windspeed is highly correlated to that energy; howerver, a very large-area storm with only category 2 or 3 winds can have the same overall energy as a category 4 or 5 storm. At times this is expressed by the storm surges these huge storms can produce, but even then, it's not the only measure.

CJSF

[MartianMarvin]

Just curious. I know Hurricane Andrew, a catergory 5 hurricane, followed the year after the first Gulf War. Lots of oil fields burned during that time.

Would you be so kind as to show us the connection between these two events? I am at a complete loss as to how the burning oil fields could have any influence on Atlantic hurricanes.

[Sir Knots A Lot]

Would you be so kind as to show us the connection between these two events? I am at a complete loss as to how the burning oil fields could have any influence on Atlantic hurricanes.

A sudden increase in greenhouse gases?

Carbon dioxide has a variable atmospheric lifetime, and cannot be specified precisely. Recent work indicates that recovery from a large input of atmospheric CO2 from burning fossil fuels will result in an effective lifetime of tens of thousands of years.

[Sir Knots A Lot]

Could someone tell me more about this paper?

I'm not familiar with most of the jargon.

I'm wondering about the data sets on page 16, specifically the peak that appears just after 1991.

[Sir Knots A Lot]

No one?

[HenrikOlsen]

It would likely have helped a lot if you had listed the title and authors.

On the determination of climate feedbacks from ERBE data
Richard S. Lindzen and Yong-Sang Choi

It was discussed here, with the point being it has some bad flaws in its analysis.

[Bobbar]

Could someone tell me more about this paper?

I'm not familiar with most of the jargon.

I'm wondering about the data sets on page 16, specifically the peak that appears just after 1991.

An anomaly caused by a volcanic eruption?

Note that appreciable fluctuations of the anomalies are due to El Niņo events (in
1982/83 1986/87, 1991/92, and 1997/98), La Niņa events (in 1988/90), and Pinatubo
eruption (in 1991)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mount_Pinatubo

That was a pretty major event. It certainly would have more influence than some oil fields burning.