AccessBlaster
Registered User.
- Local time
- Today, 10:58
- Joined
- May 22, 2010
- Messages
- 7,549
Asking for a friend...
Controlling the weather
- Thread starter jpl458
- Start date
- Local time
- Today, 12:58
- Joined
- Feb 28, 2001
- Messages
- 30,130
Whether I'm wrong or not, the poor people of the world will continue to use carbon-footprint fuels in all of the jungle, near-desert, swamp, or tundra villages in all of the still-developing nations. Because most of their parent countries don't have the means to supply any kind of distant-sourced power to them. Solar power doesn't work well during blizzards and other precipitation storms. Wind farms require frequent maintenance and really high winds will topple the rotors. But then, their appliances aren't based on electricity anyway. Go ahead. Tell them that they can't use wood, petroleum products, or even burning fertilizer to cook their food, to heat their baby's milk, to provide hot water for a good (and more sanitary) bath. Tell them that they must be condemned a life of darkness because even a CANDLE is contributing to the carbon footprint. Tell them that they will have to shiver in cold weather and risk freezing their children because you think I'm wrong about the origin of climate change. However, there are enough articles online to suggest that I just MIGHT be right. Look up Milankovich cycles and see if you can find an article about how we are exiting an ice age. That latter shouldn't be difficult.
The REAL solution to our problems is to drastically reduce the number of people in the world by a double-digit percentage and the first digit won't be a 1... or a 2. Good luck with THAT initiative. Before you announce that it has to be done... please notify us of where you will be making this announcement so we can be elsewhere when your time comes.
- Local time
- Today, 12:58
- Joined
- Feb 28, 2001
- Messages
- 30,130
For the record, Moke, while you and I have different politics, I DO appreciate a good parody of a song when it is done with wit and a nod to the artistry of the original work.
And also for the record, I do not deny the onset of climate change. I reserve the right to disagree with its purported causes as being primarily man-made. At most, it might be slightly exacerbated by greenhouse gases. But I believe that climate change is the result of a natural long-term weather cycle for which evidence exists of other similar instances from LONG before the onset of the industrial age.
Ergo, we are all doomed. And our grand children, who wil face the brunt of it.
moke123
AWF VIP
- Local time
- Today, 13:58
- Joined
- Jan 11, 2013
- Messages
- 4,749
- Local time
- Today, 12:58
- Joined
- Feb 28, 2001
- Messages
- 30,130
Not sure about "ALL doomed." But probably some difficult times ahead for many people.
I remember many years ago a cartooned Public Service Announcement from a religious group in which a chorus in voice-over cries out "More" several times. Each time the scene shifts to show progress in culture but with more people. And finally, the scene shows a multitude of people and the voice cries "More" - but another voice from the heavens says "No more." This was maybe 60 years ago. Nobody listened then either, and that was long before the atmospheric and climate studies.
- Local time
- Today, 12:58
- Joined
- Feb 28, 2001
- Messages
- 30,130
Since I'm not a "swiftie" and don't keep up with her discography, I can't make the comparison to her closest corresponding work.
I want to make something clear about my political stance. There is no good candidate (again!) Therefore I will have to vote AGAINST the one I think is worse. Which is why I will vote against Kamala. DJT is divisive, abrasive, and arrogant. But KH's policies - and FAILURES - in the past have been made clear as well, and it is a no-win situation for the country. I have to decide who will do the greater damage to the country and vote against that person.
I think that this election went sour when DJT become the Republican nominee. The old "sleepy Joe" switcheroo made for good theater but didn't help the politics for even a nanosecond.
Cotswold
Well-known member
- Local time
- Today, 18:58
- Joined
- Dec 31, 2020
- Messages
- 925
A video is in the press today claiming to be of the Milton hurricane in Florida.
From the shots of all of the cars I tend to think that it was taken in the last century.
If I was a conspiracy theorist I'd be saying the storm is total fiction for whatever reason.
p.s. Maybe this is what we get when the media rely on AI to create the content in a newspaper etc?
From the shots of all of the cars I tend to think that it was taken in the last century.
If I was a conspiracy theorist I'd be saying the storm is total fiction for whatever reason.
p.s. Maybe this is what we get when the media rely on AI to create the content in a newspaper etc?
Attachments
Last edited:
Isaac
Lifelong Learner
- Local time
- Today, 10:58
- Joined
- Mar 14, 2017
- Messages
- 11,087
I laughed when I read the CNN article. The last sentence bemoans the very idea that people might base their opinions on the reality they observe with their own eyes rather than what the news media tells them and it sounds funny to hear them say it out loud, as if it's shocking or profound
- Local time
- Today, 12:58
- Joined
- Feb 28, 2001
- Messages
- 30,130
People believing their eyes? OH, MY GOSH! What a disaster. It's almost like people have lost confidence in the news organizations. How will those biased news wonks survive?
Doc, by your previous post you implied that the situation so dire that we should do nothing to try and change the climate. I agree that there are too many people opn the planet, but the birth rate is way down in China, as is lower here. But that rate will take decades to have an effect. There are new types of nuclear reactors (SMRs), as well as a possible one that is clean. My opinion is that we should try to solve the problem, and even a bit of success would be helpful. If the USA leads, others will follow.
- Local time
- Today, 12:58
- Joined
- Feb 28, 2001
- Messages
- 30,130
In south Louisiana, we have the problem that even with folks who have insurance, they are caught in a vise-grip because insurance costs are forcing them to leave their homes. This is an anecdotal example: If you go down Louisiana state highway 1, which leads you to Grand Isle, a community on one of our barrier islands (think: like the Florida Keys), you pass through Grand Caillou (rhymes with "hi, you"). It is outside of the levee system and has been clobbered by storms including, most recently, Francine. Folks there have been forced to decide to limit their coverage in order to have any coverage at all, and the finance companies require SOME coverage. Well, Francine was the last straw for some folks. A very large percentage of those residents are now looking to pull up stakes and move somewhere inland. Helene proved that even living above sea level doesn't always let you "off the hook" for flooding. A lot of folks will sigh in relief that Milton came ashore as only a Cat 3 storm, not Cat 5. The storm surge was only about half of what it could have been, though the rainfall totals for that area set one-day records - 11+ inches in some areas.
What makes me wonder is when New Orleans catches another big storm like Katrina, what THAT will do to one of the larger port facilities in the USA. Never mind the longshoreman's strike. What will the HURRICANE strike do?
- Local time
- Today, 12:58
- Joined
- Feb 28, 2001
- Messages
- 30,130
Don't think that I am against progress, but you have in your mind solved the problem that you THINK is pending. I'm not sure have correctly identified all of the facets thereof. People think we can solve every problem. But history says we don't. Sometimes we have to ADAPT to the existing problems rather than solve them.
Isaac
Lifelong Learner
- Local time
- Today, 10:58
- Joined
- Mar 14, 2017
- Messages
- 11,087
I'm not sure why MTG's statement that people can control the weather is so shocking to people. There are technologies that absolutely can or are proposed to influence ('control', if you will, tho that's a strong word) weather. There are no fewer than 3 major types of cloud seedings, hail suppression, fog dissipation, experiments in hurricane modification, artificial rain by releasing electric charges in the clouds, and climate modification such as stratospheric aerosol injection and marine cloud brightening. These are in various phases of research, dev and application depending on the item but the general idea is certainly not science fiction, and wasn't invented by Marjorie Green
Good morning Doc. I think both adaptation and reducing the use of fossile fuels are the way to go. I think mans activity has contributed to the problem. I looked at studies that analyzed old air trapped in ICE and the conclusion was that there was a steady increase of CO2 that started with the industrial revolution. Sorry but Ihave to run.
AccessBlaster
Registered User.
- Local time
- Today, 10:58
- Joined
- May 22, 2010
- Messages
- 7,549
Right? We've been attempting to weaponize weather / climate whatever since the 50s and 60s. There is no reason to think these programs were shelved just because democrats are in office.
When the planes are making their cross hatch patterns in the skies, the rain forecast seems a tad more accurate just saying
At best cloud seeding is tenuous, and only partially effective. When chaos theory came along there was a notion of the Butteryfly Effect, which stated that a butterfly flappit's wings in China would have an effect on the weather in New York. And soon aafter that statement a notable scientist Jumped all over it with weather conrol as his objective. But weather was and is a chaotic system. Here is a note about research in Japan. But remember that it's a computer simulation.
Researchers have used computer simulations to show that small adjustments to weather variables could potentially modify weather phenomena. For example, Japanese scientists used a butterfly attractor to show how small changes could prevent extreme events. The operative words are potentially and prevent. But for some one to say that a hurricane can be created by man, and control its direction and intensity is pure folly. There is a big difference between making it rain and creating storms that are controlled.
Chaos theory is tantilizing, but so far it only works in computer simulations with regard to weaather.
Read up on Strange attractors, and the Lorenz Attractor. Here is a picture of a Lorenz attractor the was generated by using the output od a differential equation as input to the same equation. Also read about Mitch Feinberg the assumed father of chaos theory. Mandelbrot sets are also interesting.
Researchers have used computer simulations to show that small adjustments to weather variables could potentially modify weather phenomena. For example, Japanese scientists used a butterfly attractor to show how small changes could prevent extreme events. The operative words are potentially and prevent. But for some one to say that a hurricane can be created by man, and control its direction and intensity is pure folly. There is a big difference between making it rain and creating storms that are controlled.
Chaos theory is tantilizing, but so far it only works in computer simulations with regard to weaather.
Read up on Strange attractors, and the Lorenz Attractor. Here is a picture of a Lorenz attractor the was generated by using the output od a differential equation as input to the same equation. Also read about Mitch Feinberg the assumed father of chaos theory. Mandelbrot sets are also interesting.
