Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Right Wing Extremist Thread -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (50447)	9/4/2005 11:43:38 AM
From: GROUND ZERO™	Respond to of 59480

Then take the initiative and be prepared, unlike those masses who do nothing for themselves but depend on government to spoon feed them and wipe their butts... what we now witness in New Orleans is indeed the result of decades of a social welfare state that eliminated self reliance and personal initiative, the very sense of individualism that made our country great in the first place... GZ

To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (50447)	9/4/2005 1:33:24 PM
From: CYBERKEN	Respond to of 59480

The fraud of global warming is dwarfed only by the fraud of Social Security. Junk welfare queens believe in junk science...

To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (50447)	9/5/2005 12:06:32 AM
From: Hope Praytochange	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 59480

kennyboy: the storms are forming way out from Africa and moving to this continent - they are NOT just formed in the gulf of mexico !!

To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (50447)	9/5/2005 7:57:23 AM
From: Pat W.	Respond to of 59480

"There will be other such storms in the near future." That statement has to rank right up with there the prediction that the sun will rise tomorrow. "Global warming has increased the water temperature in the Gulf of Mexico. The warm water intensifies the storms." Can you substantiate the above? I doubt facts will alter your opinion, but these excerpts may be of interest. "Because hurricanes form over warm ocean water, it is easy to assume that the recent rise in their number and ferocity is because of global warming. But that is not the case, scientists say. Instead, the severity of hurricane seasons changes with cycles of temperatures of several decades in the Atlantic Ocean. The recent onslaught 'is very much natural,' said William M. Gray, a professor of atmospheric science at Colorado tate University who issues forecasts for the hurricane season.'" Giant hurricanes are rare, but they are not new. And they are not increasing. To the contrary. Just go to the website of the National Hurricane Center and check out a table that lists hurricanes by category and decade. The peak for major hurricanes (categories 3,4,5) came in the decades of the 1930s, 1940s and 1950s, when such storms averaged 9 per decade. In the 1960s, there were 6 such storms; in the 1970s, 4; in the 1980s, 5; in the 1990s, 5; and for 2001-04, there were 3. Category 4 and 5 storms were also more prevalent in the past than they are now. As for Category 5 storms, there have been only three since the 1850s: in the decades of the 1930s, 1960s and 1990s The Kyoto advocates point to warmer ocean temperatures, but they ought to read their own favorite newspaper, The New York Times, which reported yesterday: "Because hurricanes form over warm ocean water, it is easy to assume that the recent rise in their number and ferocity is because of global warming. But that is not the case, scientists say. Instead, the severity of hurricane seasons changes with cycles of temperatures of several decades in the Atlantic Ocean. The recent onslaught 'is very much natural,' said William M. Gray, a professor of atmospheric science at Colorado State University who issues forecasts for the hurricane season.'" Indeed, there is no evidence that hurricanes are intensifying anyway. For the North Atlantic as a whole, according to the United Nations Environment Programme of the World Meteorological Organization: "Reliable data…since the 1940s indicate that the peak strength of the strongest hurricanes has not changed, and the mean maximum intensity of all hurricanes has decreased." Full article at: techcentralstation.com.

To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (50447)	9/8/2005 2:41:35 PM
From: HPilot	Respond to of 59480

Even the "scientists" who are believers in global warming have not been able to link hurricanes to global warming. Fact is if you take a 20 year moving average of the storms frequency you will find a slight increase in the 19th to early 20th century, then it is remarkably flat. In the 30's, 33 I think the record for the most Atlantic hurricanes was set at about 23 storms. Activity has recently increased beginning in 95, but only three storms out of about 30 hit land, usually about 1 in 3 hit land, so much of this is just plain dumb luck!

To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (50447)	9/8/2005 2:59:37 PM
From: DizzyG	Respond to of 59480

Green hotheads exploit hurricane tragedy Michael Fumento September 8, 2005 “The hurricane that struck Louisiana yesterday was nicknamed Katrina by the National Weather Service. Its real name was global warming.” So wrote environmental activist Ross Gelbspan in a Boston Globe op-ed that one commentator aptly described as “almost giddy.” The green group Friends of the Earth linked Katrina to global warming, as did Germany’s Green Party Environment Minister. Bobby Kennedy Jr. blamed Katrina on Miss. Gov. Haley Barbour for “derailing the Kyoto Protocol [on global warming] and kiboshing President Bush’s iron-clad promise to regulate carbon dioxide.” Time for an ice-water bath, hotheads. If you’d bothered to consult the scientists (remember them?) you’d find they’ve extensively studied the issue and found no evidence that global warming – assuming it’s actually occurring – is causing either an increase in frequency or intensity of hurricanes. Thus the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, which believes global warming is both real and man-made, stated in its last assessment (2001) that “Changes in tropical and extra-tropical storm intensity and frequency are dominated by [variations within and between decades], with no significant trends over the twentieth century evident.” So, too, states the Tropical Meteorological Project at Colorado State University. In a paper issued AFTER Katrina hit it noted hurricane activity since 1995 has “been similar” to that “of the mid-1920s to the mid-1960s when many more major hurricanes struck the U.S. East Coast and Florida.” These are the people, chiefly professor of atmospheric science William Gray, who issue the annual hurricane forecasts each May. In fact, according to the National Hurricane Center, the peak for major hurricanes (levels 3, 4, and 5) came between 1930 and 1950. In the wake of Katrina, Gray explained to the New York Times that what might appear to be a recent onslaught “is very much natural.” Until recently we were lucky, said Gray. Then, “The luck just ran out.” Roger Pielke Jr., director of the University of Colorado's Center for Science and Technology Policy Research, agrees. In a forthcoming paper in the Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society he analyzes the damage caused by hurricanes that have hit the U.S. since 1900. Taking into account tremendous population growth along coastlines he finds no trend of increasing damage from hurricanes. "I don't think you could find any hurricane scientist that would be willing to make the statement that the hurricanes of last year or Katrina are caused by global warming," he told Denver’s Rocky Mountain News. As you might guess neither Gelbspan nor RFK Jr. are scientists; they’re professional scaremongers. Having authored two books on the forthcoming catastrophe of global warming, Gelbspan’s fortunes are as tied to this issue as GM’s are to vehicles. Nevertheless, MIT climatologist Kerry Emanuel IS a scientist and stirred up a Category Five controversy with his recent letter in Nature claiming there’s no trend in the frequency of hurricanes but “future warming may lead to an upward trend in tropical cyclone [hurricane] destructive potential.” William Gray, however, told the Boston Globe "It's a terrible paper, one of the worst I've ever looked at." According to the Globe, “He was appalled that Emanuel would take such shaky data on wind speeds, then feed them into a formula that puts such heavy weight on those numbers.” Such a method, he said, can produce any result you want. Yet even Emanuel stops short of blaming Katrina or other recent hurricane strikes on global warming. "What we see in the Atlantic is mostly the natural swing," he told the Times. That hardly supports the overheated rhetoric of those exploiting his Nature letter. Bear in mind, too, that the effects of global warming are supposed to be, well, global. If cyclones are more intense or frequent off U.S. shores, they should also be so elsewhere as in the east Pacific, west Pacific, and Indian Ocean. “This has not occurred,” a June 2005 report from the Tropical Meteorological Project stated flatly. “When tropical cyclones worldwide are summed, there has actually been a slight decrease since 1995.” This isn’t to say alleged warming is actually moderating these awesome storms. But certainly it’s having no moderating effect on the blowhard buzzards ripping chunks off the Katrina disaster to promote their own dubious agendas. Michael Fumento (mfumento[at]pobox.com) is a senior fellow at Hudson Institute in Washington, D.C. and a science and health columnist for Scripps Howard News Service. ©2005 Michael Fumento townhall.com Wrong again, Kenneth. :) Diz-