It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Rockpuck
reply to post by reesie45
It's called La Nina .. cooling of ocean water.. follows El Nino which is the warming of ocean waters.. this follows a cycle, has for millions of years.
Global Warming was a false attempt by Progressive to get us to pay more for "Green" items, and pay hefty taxes for "Sustainability"
Climate Change is the false idea by Progressives to replace Global Warming after it was proven to be a sham .. the end goal is still the same, taxation and corporate profits.
La Nina is supposed to suppress storm formation off the Pacific coast- not enhance it.
No, not really, im glad you know me so well. Tell me what color is my shirt? you fail.
Originally posted by potential_problem
Originally posted by thedeadwalkk
reply to post by reesie45
Heres a quick lesson on global warming:
Yes it has the name WARMING in the title, but that doesn't mean all it will do is WARM. It can WARM and COOL places based on their location.
--------------------
And btw to everyone saying this weather isn't "normal". Do you have the weather data for the past 10k+ years? no I didn't think so. When the earth has been around for millenia, you can't say "this weather isn't normal" based on weather nomalities for the past 30 years, because the Earth has been around for so long, 30 years is basically a milisecond in timespan.edit on 5-6-2011 by thedeadwalkk because: (no reason given)
Star for you.
OP soon will blame humans for ice-age(with sCIENTIFIC PROOF!).
Ridiculous babbling of ignorants here is overwhelming...at last they know how to set avatar.edit on 5-6-2011 by potential_problem because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by AnotherYOU
reply to post by incrediblelousminds
deny ignorance before walking around spreading it
and even how much your claims may be right, the fact IS
that the people pushing the "Global Warming(c)" and "Climate Change(c)" issues to the forefront do not have the interests of the planet in mind or any concern for the weather patterns.
they just see it as an untapped area to impose further regulations and taxation upon the population.
you are failing to realize that while "A" maybe right, it only precedes "B" and "C" wich may not be as right.
Originally posted by Rockpuck
reply to post by incrediblelousminds
You completely miss the point.. and because you miss the obvious point everything you say is dead wrong.
Climate Change, Global Warming, Etc etc etc..
These are used to bring about taxes, carbon taxes, emission regulation, $50k sedans that get an average 10 more mpg.
Everything about the "science" of "climate change" always comes back to money.. whether it's taxes or government subsidies for lightbulbs.. it doesn't matter.. it's always, always, always about the money.
The science it's self is so pathetic it cannot be called science..
Originally posted by Rockpuck
reply to post by Stratus9
La Nina is supposed to suppress storm formation off the Pacific coast- not enhance it.
Erm... no .. it's not.
Weather is impacted by water temps, as the temp of the water effects the temp of the air, and the temp of the air effects wind currents, which in turn effects the disruption of average seasonal weather patterns.
La Nina cools the West Coast, this in turn creates cooler temps and wetter than normal seasons.. usually Winter and Spring specifically.
It warms the South East and into the North East, the alteration in the weather pattern pushes more rain into the plains states, which then in turn can create severe storms into the Mid West and East Coast.
In Oregon and Washington it rained quite literally every day from December to June .. our temps average -10 below normal.
La Nina is particularly strong this year, meaning temps dropped more than average at the Equator.
My advice?
Get an education. Research something before believing it. People scream about natural disaster because they are apparently more "frequent" .. this is false.. the fact is that we build cities in stupid places, and because our population is continuously expanding, each disaster will effect more people. Law of probability. No moronic Progressive has ever given me even an ounce of evidence to suggest anything to the contrary.
Current Conditions As of mid-May 2011, SST anomalies have weakened to the point of reflecting cool ENSO-neutral conditions in the central and eastern equatorial Pacific. For April the SST anomaly in the NINO3.4 region was -0.77 C, indicative of weak La Niña conditions, and for the January-March season the anomaly was -1.01 C. Currently the IRI's definition of El Niño conditions rests on an index of SST anomalies, averaged over the NINO3.4 region (5S-5N; 170W-120W), exceeding the warmest 25%-ile of the historical distribution, and similarly for La Niña relative to the 25%-ile coldest conditions in the historical distribution. The NINO3.4 anomaly necessary to qualify as La Niña or El Niño conditions for the May-Jun-Jul and the Jun-Jul-Aug seasons are approximately (-0.50C, 0.45) and (-0.50, 0.45), respectively.
Are you slow? Do you know how to read right? I said in my opinion. wow your a joke. thanks for the contribution though.
Originally posted by thedeadwalkk
reply to post by reesie45
Do you have the scientific evidence to support this?
I mean really, ATS slogan is "Deny ignorance" but you are very ignorant.
I'm willing to say you know nothing about climate change, and global warming. That is a fact based on your OP, and your few posts are your OP.
Please, show me ANYTHING that says mother nature is "putting on her boxing gloves and getting ready"
Please, show me. If you are basing these claims on something with minor factual tangeability, then you shouldn't have a problem providing me, OR this thread with your sources.
If you do have sources, 100% chance they only look at data for the past few years ( 1900 + )
When the Earth has been around for as long as it has been, you can only make these claims when you know weather patterns for HUGE time frames ( IE 10k, 100k, 1M years )
------------------
reply to post by Stratus9
Over a short period of time? Again your are wrong. Read the text above as it also applies to youedit on 5-6-2011 by thedeadwalkk because: (no reason given)