| Pages:
1
2
3
4
5
..
9 |
lewmt
Junior Nomad
Posts: 79
Registered: 4-12-2017
Member Is Offline
|
|
So are any of those swirling masses of wind and water going to hit or are they just going to send in some really nice swell & green the place up a
bit?
|
|
|
caj13
Senior Nomad
Posts: 999
Registered: 8-1-2017
Member Is Offline
|
|
Quote: Originally posted by Timinator  | | Quote: Originally posted by caj13 | | Quote: Originally posted by Timinator | [/rquote]
Timinator wrote" I am an Atmospheric Scientist."
Yeah, right, if that was true, you would be on the payroll of Exxon, or some other polluting corporation, that paid you to confuse the issue, so the
polluters could continue making money polluting the enviroment.
[/rquote]
I was! Not working for them specifically, but worked on projects/policies to comply with California's various air pollution control districts and EPA
standards. Including NOAA studies and the largest EPA study on climate every funded and completed in the United States (that's where the funny
business happened). Actually the Degree was in Satellite Imagery and Remote Sensing Techniques which is every Under/Graduate Class in Meteorology,
Atmospheric Science and Climatology plus everything they'll tell us about satellites without clearance. SDSU and I've been retired since I was 41.
I'm 60 now. Have a nice day.
[Edited on 8-6-2018 by Timinator] |
so your not an atmospheric scientist at all - you were remote sensing? weird how that remote sensing technology and capabilities have remained the
same for the last 20 years eah? no change, no improvement?
your training was to look at satelite photos and interprit them - thats a bit of a stretch from that to self declared atmospheric scientist! degree
wise - BA? BS? any statistical analysis - or simply classification stuff? |
I'm sorry, was this degree not adequate for you? Did you miss the every Meteorology class (every one), every Climatology class (every one) and every
Atmospheric Science class (every one), both Under grad, and Grad class offered. Satellite imagery isn't reading or analyzing photo's it's the
science of imaging through, and making mathematical corrections for every atmospheric condition going on in earth optical air mass and getting the
image right. It takes way more than a degree in Meteorology or Climatology, you have to know all that as a precursor to understanding how light and
20 or so different imaging waves change when traveling to and from a satellite. I also designed atmospheric studies, tracer studies, dispersion
studies, and wrote drivers and software to make things talk to each other that weren't designed to, I wrote software for airborne meteorological
devices, and even major Doppler sites. As well as audited every EPA funded Atmospheric Station in the United States for several years. How's
calling me out working for you? BTW, degrees don't mean crap or amount to crap, it's the work you do over your lifetime that counts.
|
no bodys questioning your remote sensing abilities, assuming you are being accurate on that, its the jump to self procaimed atmospheric scientist,
that is troubling me.
since I still have no idea what degree you actually earned - pretty tough to judge.
The fact that you are not willing to list a few publications v- seems pretty suspect to me. I'm sure you understand that scientists careers, and
abilities are primarily judged by their scholarly publications, not by self agrandizing idle boasts in a webforum!
I hold you to your original quote "I am an atmospheric scientist" since we questioned you on that you have blustered about and obtusificated, and
avoided every opportunity to answer direct questions and or clarify you statements -
By the way since you understand having to manipulate data to account for atmospheric differences, your claims about data not being outside the
margins of error, and several other statements leads one to believe that maybe youi don't have a great grasp of post processing, standardizing and
normalizing data to eliminate false variation.
[Edited on 8-7-2018 by caj13]
|
|
|
pascuale
Nomad
Posts: 224
Registered: 2-20-2005
Location: Somewhere South
Member Is Offline
Mood: Lets fish!
|
|
Well, as a lifelong fisherman, San Diego is becoming a more tropical fishing destination. We used to catch Albacore, the Albacore come and go through
the years and have been gone for the last 10, but the past three years we have had Bluefin up to 300lb almost year round, yellowfin and Dorado earlier
and longer. The water temperature is 78 degrees. It has never been this warm. Not even in an El Nino year.
|
|
|
shari
Select Nomad
Posts: 13034
Registered: 3-10-2006
Location: bahia asuncion, baja sur
Member Is Offline
Mood: there is no reality except the one contained within us "Herman Hesse"
|
|
So the Buoyweather wave forecast today got the village abuzz with what may happen if a 21' swell hit our shore at high tide...a few particularly high
risk spots would have problems like the Leyes de Reforma fishing cooperative buildings, Palapa restaurant, and Hotel La Playa. Luckily this evening it
has gone from 21' down to 15' but we shall see what develops.
Surfers were here today checking out the weather sites to figure out where to go....and where NOt to go in case there is rain with the storm. Sounds
like the Hurricaine party will be here.
The waves are forecast to be very intense with the wave energy over 11,000 something rarely seen here.
But the water temps are still fairly cool up here so John may be lured over to the gulf side as often happens this time of year.
Perhaps it's time to start bets on if it will rain in Asuncion! But there is no doubt there will be a hefty swell at the least.
|
|
|
chippy
Super Nomad
Posts: 1698
Registered: 2-2-2010
Member Is Offline
|
|
https://www.nhc.noaa.gov/refresh/graphics_ep2+shtml/212725.s...
This could definitely be a big wave maker.
|
|
|
blackwolfmt
Senior Nomad
Posts: 802
Registered: 1-18-2014
Location: On The Beach With A Blackwolf
Member Is Offline
Mood: dreamin of Riden out a hurricane in Baja
|
|
cool info on previous Baja hurricane tracks
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Baja_California_Penins...
So understand dont waste your time always searching for those wasted years
face up and make your stand and realize that your living in the golden years
|
|
|
azucena
Nomad
Posts: 193
Registered: 8-25-2012
Member Is Offline
|
|
Just a quick comment on the "climate change arguements"
The earth's climate has clearly over millenia changed drastically.( If you are one of those true wackos that thinks the earth is only 6000 years old,
discontinue reading now.)
The earth's climate will continue to change. The issue is that since the dawn of the industrial revolution, we humans have likely been accelerating
changes, that have incrementally increased due to our footprints.
Like it or not, we do have an impact. Can we change a cyclic pattern that our planet has been doing literally forever? Likely no. But we sure as hell
can change some of our behaviors and actions that are escalating the process. To not do so, would be grossly irresponsible.
So, quit arguing and start doing what you can as an individual.
|
|
|
mtgoat666
Select Nomad
Posts: 17385
Registered: 9-16-2006
Location: San Diego
Member Is Offline
Mood: Hot n spicy
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by pascuale | | Well, as a lifelong fisherman, San Diego is becoming a more tropical fishing destination. We used to catch Albacore, the Albacore come and go through
the years and have been gone for the last 10, but the past three years we have had Bluefin up to 300lb almost year round, yellowfin and Dorado earlier
and longer. The water temperature is 78 degrees. It has never been this warm. Not even in an El Nino year. |
Yes, BUT that ONE palm tree is still alive 
Woke!
“...ask not what your country can do for you – ask what you can do for your country.” “My fellow citizens of the world: ask not what America
will do for you, but what together we can do for the freedom of man.”
Prefered gender pronoun: the royal we
|
|
|
joerover
Banned
Posts: 676
Registered: 2-3-2011
Location: earth
Member Is Offline
Mood: sleepy
|
|
 o
I have a ticket to go here, tomorrrow morning
should get there about the time the big swell hits shari
https://www.nhc.noaa.gov/graphics_ep2.shtml?cone#contents
[Edited on 8-7-2018 by joerover]
the fat lady is breeding
which means
The fat ladys are breeding
|
|
|
joerover
Banned
Posts: 676
Registered: 2-3-2011
Location: earth
Member Is Offline
Mood: sleepy
|
|
that 800x600 makes it to small to read.
| Quote: Originally posted by shari | So the Buoyweather wave forecast today got the village abuzz with what may happen if a 21' swell hit our shore at high tide...a few particularly high
risk spots would have problems like the Leyes de Reforma fishing cooperative buildings, Palapa restaurant, and Hotel La Playa. Luckily this evening it
has gone from 21' down to 15' but we shall see what develops.
Surfers were here today checking out the weather sites to figure out where to go....and where NOt to go in case there is rain with the storm. Sounds
like the Hurricaine party will be here.
The waves are forecast to be very intense with the wave energy over 11,000 something rarely seen here.
But the water temps are still fairly cool up here so John may be lured over to the gulf side as often happens this time of year.
Perhaps it's time to start bets on if it will rain in Asuncion! But there is no doubt there will be a hefty swell at the least.
|
the fat lady is breeding
which means
The fat ladys are breeding
|
|
|
Timinator
Nomad
Posts: 242
Registered: 6-27-2014
Member Is Offline
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by caj13 | | Quote: Originally posted by Timinator | | Quote: Originally posted by caj13 | | Quote: Originally posted by Timinator | [/rquote]
Timinator wrote" I am an Atmospheric Scientist."
Yeah, right, if that was true, you would be on the payroll of Exxon, or some other polluting corporation, that paid you to confuse the issue, so the
polluters could continue making money polluting the enviroment.
[/rquote]
I was! Not working for them specifically, but worked on projects/policies to comply with California's various air pollution control districts and EPA
standards. Including NOAA studies and the largest EPA study on climate every funded and completed in the United States (that's where the funny
business happened). Actually the Degree was in Satellite Imagery and Remote Sensing Techniques which is every Under/Graduate Class in Meteorology,
Atmospheric Science and Climatology plus everything they'll tell us about satellites without clearance. SDSU and I've been retired since I was 41.
I'm 60 now. Have a nice day.
[Edited on 8-6-2018 by Timinator] |
so your not an atmospheric scientist at all - you were remote sensing? weird how that remote sensing technology and capabilities have remained the
same for the last 20 years eah? no change, no improvement?
your training was to look at satelite photos and interprit them - thats a bit of a stretch from that to self declared atmospheric scientist! degree
wise - BA? BS? any statistical analysis - or simply classification stuff? |
I'm sorry, was this degree not adequate for you? Did you miss the every Meteorology class (every one), every Climatology class (every one) and every
Atmospheric Science class (every one), both Under grad, and Grad class offered. Satellite imagery isn't reading or analyzing photo's it's the
science of imaging through, and making mathematical corrections for every atmospheric condition going on in earth optical air mass and getting the
image right. It takes way more than a degree in Meteorology or Climatology, you have to know all that as a precursor to understanding how light and
20 or so different imaging waves change when traveling to and from a satellite. I also designed atmospheric studies, tracer studies, dispersion
studies, and wrote drivers and software to make things talk to each other that weren't designed to, I wrote software for airborne meteorological
devices, and even major Doppler sites. As well as audited every EPA funded Atmospheric Station in the United States for several years. How's
calling me out working for you? BTW, degrees don't mean crap or amount to crap, it's the work you do over your lifetime that counts.
|
no bodys questioning your remote sensing abilities, assuming you are being accurate on that, its the jump to self procaimed atmospheric scientist,
that is troubling me.
since I still have no idea what degree you actually earned - pretty tough to judge.
The fact that you are not willing to list a few publications v- seems pretty suspect to me. I'm sure you understand that scientists careers, and
abilities are primarily judged by their scholarly publications, not by self agrandizing idle boasts in a webforum!
I hold you to your original quote "I am an atmospheric scientist" since we questioned you on that you have blustered about and obtusificated, and
avoided every opportunity to answer direct questions and or clarify you statements -
By the way since you understand having to manipulate data to account for atmospheric differences, your claims about data not being outside the
margins of error, and several other statements leads one to believe that maybe youi don't have a great grasp of post processing, standardizing and
normalizing data to eliminate false variation.
[Edited on 8-7-2018 by caj13] |
The QA/QC of the instruments has parameters the data that has to fall within for the instrument to remain accurate. That's the problem with
standardizing and normalizing atmospheric data, when a thermister or transducer is no longer accurate because of the harsh environmental conditions,
and you don't know over a month or two's time when it drifted, normalizing the data isn't accurate enough to say with any confidence the number is
correct to 1/10 of a degree. Besides that problem with almost every instrument, you had data logger failures with months of missing data, weeks,
days, half days, etc., that was....made up and inserted into the data set. Wife's B-day, have to do my thing.
|
|
|
JoeJustJoe
Banned
Posts: 21045
Registered: 9-9-2010
Location: Occupied Aztlan
Member Is Offline
Mood: Mad as hell
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by BajaNaranja | David, kudos to you for absorbing new info about volcanic vs. man made C02 emissions, and adjusting your personal fact set. Respect!
I took another look at the Scientific American article, I don't see where it seems to want the reader to believe that humans are the major source vs.
nature, I see it simply trying to set the record staight regarding this specific mis-information...
Saludos, amigo! |
Hello, Baja Naranja, I'm not sure what side of the argument you are on, but the article you linked, doesn't agree that volcanoes, cause more C02 than
man, which is a clueless "denier" argument posted all over this site.
I also don't think David K, agrees with the argument in the article you linked, because he is also a "denier," who based climate change on what's
going on in Baja, and some tree and local ocean water levels.
___________
From the article, and many other scientist and studies say the same thing. Volcanoes are a drop in the bucket compared to human caused carbon
emissions.
------
This argument that human-caused carbon emissions are merely a drop in the bucket compared to greenhouse gases generated by volcanoes has been
making its way around the rumor mill for years. And while it may sound plausible, the science just doesn’t back it up.
According to the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), the world’s volcanoes, both on land and undersea, generate about 200 million tons of carbon
dioxide (CO2) annually, while our automotive and industrial activities cause some 24 billion tons of CO2 emissions every year worldwide. Despite the
arguments to the contrary, the facts speak for themselves: Greenhouse gas emissions from volcanoes comprise less than one percent of those generated
by today’s human endeavors.
[Edited on 8-7-2018 by JoeJustJoe]
|
|
|
David K
Honored Nomad
Posts: 64526
Registered: 8-30-2002
Location: San Diego County
Member Is Online
Mood: Have Baja Fever
|
|
No Joe, just not so.
Examples of the sea level unchanged for 60 years is from my 60 years living and being on many shorelines around the world... but obviously, some that
I am seeing repeatedly such as here in San Diego and in various places in Baja. The first home I lived in (1957-1964) is on the beach in Del Mar...
the lot and street is still where it was then, just a different house now... but still the same height above the sea. Salt flats behind lagoons would
be underwater all the time rather than a few rare high tides. Harbors and boat ramps would be underwater. Big flat beaches at San Quintín would be
underwater. The list is endless...
The palm tree at El Coyote is just a great example since it has been well photographed since the 1940s (where it was and still is just inches above
the high tide line).
It is fine to be concerned over changes, but make sure the changes are real and also that they are not natural if you think you can change the change
the change. Some things (like climate) naturally change, but over many years and not just during one's lifetime.
The real goal of climate hysteria is for more $$$, as if keeping those people employed or making the government bigger has anything to do with
changing the climate, lol! I just want people here to know the earth goes on and losing your freedom (and money) will not change the climate either
way. Just live well, buy 'green-friendly' products if you want and that is the best you can do. All will be fine.
Since you didn't open the link on Natural vs. human CO2 production:
WHAT ARE THE PRIMARY SOURCES OF CO2?
There are both natural carbon dioxide (CO2) sources and man-made (anthropogenic) CO2 sources.
NATURAL CO2 SOURCES
Natural CO2 sources account for the majority of CO2 released into the atmosphere. Oceans provide the greatest annual amount of CO2 of any natural or
anthropogenic source. Other sources of natural CO2 include animal and plant respiration, decomposition of organic matter, forest fires, and emissions
from volcanic eruptions. There are also naturally occurring CO2 deposits found in formation layers within the Earth’s crust that could serve as CO2
sources.
ANTHROPOGENIC CO2 SOURCES
Anthropogenic CO2 sources are part of our everyday activities and include those from power generation, transportation, industrial sources, chemical
production, petroleum production, and agricultural practices. Many of these source types burn fossil fuels (coal, oil, and natural gas), with CO2
emissions as a byproduct. Of these CO2 sources, electric power generation contributes the greatest amount of anthropogenic CO2 to the atmosphere.
Myth: Carbon dioxide comes only from anthropogenic sources, especially from the burning of fossil fuels.
Reality: Carbon dioxide comes from both natural and anthropogenic sources; natural sources are predominant.
[Edited on 8-7-2018 by David K]
|
|
|
JoeJustJoe
Banned
Posts: 21045
Registered: 9-9-2010
Location: Occupied Aztlan
Member Is Offline
Mood: Mad as hell
|
|
David K, what happens in your little neck of the world, is largely anecdotal evidence, and really immaterial, since Global warming, is really rapidly
going on in the arctic, it would be as silly as me, going down to the beach in San Diego, and saying because the water temperature is nearing 80
degrees it proves Global warming in real.
Do you want to talk about money? Follow the money trail, and ask why who has the most to gain by confusing the issue, and denying global warming is
caused by man? It's Exxon, and all the polluting companies, and they only managed to get about 4% of scientist to agree with them, because they are
on Exxon's payroll, or similar company. What's your excuse David K, for denying global warming is man made?
I could probably come up with 20 scientific articles that all agree that human-caused carbon emissions are merely a drop in the bucket compared to
greenhouse gases generated by volcanoes, but you David K, could probably come up with a couple of dubious studies that have it the other way around.
What you're posting from the " National Energy Technology Laboratory," have already been corrupted by the Trump anti-Science administration where they
have cut funding, and installed Global Warming deniers, to run the agency, and write what you just put up. Notice, they have no links to back up
their data. This agency has also made wild claims about coal, that are just not true.
|
|
|
Bubba
Senior Nomad
Posts: 957
Registered: 2-17-2009
Location: Pismo Beach, Ca.
Member Is Offline
|
|
So what's the latest except a bunch of BS in this post, is Mexico getting hit or not?
Making America Great Again
|
|
|
chuckie
Elite Nomad
Posts: 6082
Registered: 2-20-2012
Location: Kansas Prairies
Member Is Offline
Mood: Weary
|
|
I teenk so....(based upon no data BUT if Shari is concerned?) good enough for me....
|
|
|
blackwolfmt
Senior Nomad
Posts: 802
Registered: 1-18-2014
Location: On The Beach With A Blackwolf
Member Is Offline
Mood: dreamin of Riden out a hurricane in Baja
|
|
So understand dont waste your time always searching for those wasted years
face up and make your stand and realize that your living in the golden years
|
|
|
Bubba
Senior Nomad
Posts: 957
Registered: 2-17-2009
Location: Pismo Beach, Ca.
Member Is Offline
|
|
Thank you!
Making America Great Again
|
|
|
wessongroup
Platinum Nomad
Posts: 21152
Registered: 8-9-2009
Location: Mission Viejo
Member Is Offline
Mood: Suicide Hot line ... please hold
|
|
Regarding the production and/or measurement of CO2 ...
Ice core samples, which go back 650 million years are in fact conclusive
Coupled with that ... The use of oil in developing our industrial society's...
Leaves little doubt with "resonable" individuals and/or groups ... that a highly developed industrial society with significant reliance on oil has
some negative environment impacts to: soil, air and water ... of this planet IMO
| Quote: Originally posted by wessongroup | The only thing which will change minds ... drought and higher temps ... I only hope it takes longer than predicted.
The growth we see in our economy has a net negative to the environment and is not sustainable ... However, human success is measured in "value"
monetarily ... With that fact ... nothing will change until it is life threatening and/or an immediate threat to Public Health and the Environment.
Glad we haven't reach the tipping point completely ... maybe 30 years on the high side ... IF we continue at this growth rate IMO
Not sure where are going to fit all the people on the planet ... must say Russia is big ... the winters can be harsh ... but then it might be like FL
with the changes ... With the possibility of an ice age developing 
Science is a tough sale when it comes to "bottom line" ... trust me |
The first graph is from National Geo .. the second is from API
https://www.api.org/about
[Edited on 8-8-2018 by wessongroup]
|
|
|
JoeJustJoe
Banned
Posts: 21045
Registered: 9-9-2010
Location: Occupied Aztlan
Member Is Offline
Mood: Mad as hell
|
|
Those are very damning charts there Wesson, that shows C02 levels rising through the roof from 1950 on, compared to all those other years including
the pre-industrial years.
But if I were to make a "denier" argument, I would just say, Al Gore, made up those charts, or that Volcanoes were probably really active the last
few decades, and that we should just continue to pollute the Earth, as we wait for Armageddon.
|
|
|
| Pages:
1
2
3
4
5
..
9 |
![[*]](images/xmbforum/default_icon.gif){kind=icon}
