Hurricane Otis' Wind Speed Increased by 115 mph in 24 Hours. That's Normal... Right?

[CrusaderFrank]

View attachment 850725

The bar graph in the upper right labeled "Change in Global Temperature" provides the information you've been seeking Frank.

This is from Page 92 of TS.3 from Working Group I's Technical Summary in The Physical Science Basis from AR6.

If you repeat this query, my response will be "ASKED AND ANSWERED".

Fucking hilarious!!!

But you cannot EVER repeat this temperature increase in a lab by controlling for CO2, correct?

 

[Crick]

Toddsterpatriot said:
How many died from radiation at Three-Mile Island and Fukushima?



You were in such a rush to play gotcha that you didn't bother to read what Mushroom was responding to. The question wasn't if radiation had been released. The question was how many people died as a result of what happened at Three-Mile Island and Fukushima. Your link proved what Mushroom had said was correct. That was a classic strawman argument that you destroyed but didn't come close to a correction of Mushroom's statement.

You are absolutely correct. The problem is that I have Toddsterpatriot on ignore and didn't bother to open his post. Mea culpa, mea culpa. My apologies to poster Mushroom.

However, it wasn't a strawman argument because it wasn't intentional. I thought he had been asked about radiation releases and thus my response.

 

[Grumblenuts]

And your belief that anything that can not be proven but you believe must be true and is actually part of a conspiracy is almost bordering on insanity.

But once again, I see no reference, therefore using the scientific method I must reject any such claim as completely unverified and therefore garbage.

Never look into a mirror, hypocrite. You'll scare yourself to death.

 

[Crick]

But once again, I see no reference, therefore using the scientific method I must reject any such claim as completely unverified and therefore garbage.

Is that how the scientific method works? I note the only reference you've provided here refuted your claims. How does all that work?

Hypotheses fail when they are falsified. You haven't falsified jack shit.

 

[Grumblenuts]

Reported? Of course they do. Keep stabbing that straw..

Mushroom chops that down to:

Of course they do.

A plain lie of omission, stripped of critical context. Then stupidly asks:

And of course you can provide a verifiable reference to prove that, right?

Uh, hello?

Reported?

These clowns earn being ignored and no apologies.

 

[Grumblenuts]

Data Visualization

NOAA's satellites provide highly detailed information that helps us learn about how Earth works.

www.nesdis.noaa.gov

These examples of “Data Maps” show variables such as light absorption, energy radiation, and surface temperatures, which can be used to measure the state of our planet.

So say some denier jerkoff really wanted to know

How much does of a temperature increase does a 120PPM increase in CO2 cause, insults, crickets, or pointing to IPCC

Seems really dumb avoiding the IPCC as a reference of course, but whatever. One must first attempt their best to translate that abortion of a question into English.

My guess:
About how much would average global surface temperature increase given an average global rise in atmospheric CO2 concentration of 120ppm?

So find the pertinent NOAA data and do some arithmetic. Here's the first number:

The average surface temperature on Earth is approximately 59 degrees Fahrenheit (15 degrees Celsius), according to NASA.

Now fetch the average surface temperature on Earth back when the atmospheric CO2 concentration was 120ppm less than it is now.. Go ahead! Run kiddies! You can do it!

Just remember, there's some lag and about a thousand other things to consider.. which you could learn a lot about from reading IPCC reports.. But never mind. Keep it simple. You be you. An idiot.

 

[Mushroom]

Uh, hello?

Uhh, hello? No reference?

It's rather obvious, one can not have any kind of intellectual debate at all with you.

Have a good day.

 

[Grumblenuts]

Uhh, hello? No reference?

Woosh! HELLLLLLLOOOOO!!!

Reported? Of course they do. Keep stabbing that straw..

 

[Weatherman2020]

Welcome to the new normal.

https://www.cnn.com/2023/10/25/weather/hurricane-otis-rapid-intensification-climate/index.html

Why do you doomsdayers hate science?

BTW - what happened to all those CAT 6 hurricanes we were promised decades ago? Hard to even get a single CAT 2 each year

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Data Visualization

NOAA's satellites provide highly detailed information that helps us learn about how Earth works.

www.nesdis.noaa.gov

So say some denier jerkoff really wanted to know

Seems really dumb avoiding the IPCC as a reference of course, but whatever. One must first attempt their best to translate that abortion of a question into English.

My guess:
About how much would average global surface temperature increase given an average global rise in atmospheric CO2 concentration of 120ppm?

So find the pertinent NOAA data and do some arithmetic. Here's the first number:



Now fetch the average surface temperature on Earth back when the atmospheric CO2 concentration was 120ppm less than it is now.. Go ahead! Run kiddies! You can do it!

Just remember, there's some lag and about a thousand other things to consider.. which you could learn a lot about from reading IPCC reports.. But never mind. Keep it simple. You be you. An idiot.

Can you demonstrate this ability to raise temperature in a laboratory controlled experiment by varying CO2?

 

[Crick]

Why do you doomsdayers hate science?

BTW - what happened to all those CAT 6 hurricanes we were promised decades ago? Hard to even get a single CAT 2 each year

Otis was a Cat 5 when it struck, 24 hours after being a tropical storm. It went through Cat 2 in the time it took you to make your PBJ.

 

[Weatherman2020]

Otis was a Cat 5 when it struck, 24 hours after being a tropical storm. It went through Cat 2 in the time it took you to make your PBJ.

BFD
I was promised CAT 6’s every week.

 

[Crick]

BFD
I was promised CAT 6’s every week.

Liar.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Otis was a Cat 5 when it struck, 24 hours after being a tropical storm. It went through Cat 2 in the time it took you to make your PBJ.

Are you’re claiming that this is the new normal because of American CO2, we can expect the same or worse from the next tropical storm because of more American CO2?

 

[Redfish]

Welcome to the new normal.

https://www.cnn.com/2023/10/25/weather/hurricane-otis-rapid-intensification-climate/index.html

check out what Katrina did in 2005, climate change (AGW) is a bullshit hoax religiion of the mentally challenged.

 

[Weatherman2020]

Liar.

How often was I supposed to get hit by a CAT 6 hurricane then?

 

[ding]

Otis was a Cat 5 when it struck, 24 hours after being a tropical storm. It went through Cat 2 in the time it took you to make your PBJ.

Correct and it did so because the conditions existed (wind shear, water temperature and air moisture) for it to do so. Right?

So you are arguing that those conditions could not have existed unless the planet warmed up X degrees above the planet's post little ice age temperature.

Is that correct?

 

[Mushroom]

Correct and it did so because the conditions existed (wind shear, water temperature and air moisture) for it to do so. Right?

Heck, I would love to know their reactions to an even more unusual storm.

The Great Galveston Hurricane of 1900 was the deadliest storm in US history. And it was only a category 4 when it smacked into Galveston. However, a week earlier when it hit the Dominican Republic and Cuba it was only a tropical storm. But it was still not done.

Like many hurricanes do, it passed inland and lost strength and weakened to a tropical depression. That is, for about 4 days until while over land it strengthened back into a hurricane once again and smacked into Ontario. And it finally died out after another 4 days over Iceland.

Now exactly how often does a hurricane reform over Ontario? Or a tropical storm continue on until it reaches Iceland?

Of course, then you also have Ivan. I remember that one very well.

That one smacked us hard and the tornadoes did a hell of a lot of damage. But most seem to have forgotten that once it passed into the Atlantic, it continued on. Hitting Florida after looping down the Eastern Seaboard, then hitting Louisiana a second time when it smacked into Texas.

There have always been unusual storms as well as unseasonal storms. The only difference today is that we have the capability to watch them in "real time", so are not surprised by them. People seen to forget that those kinds of capabilities have only been around for about a century.

 

[Crick]

check out what Katrina did in 2005, climate change (AGW) is a bullshit hoax religiion of the mentally challenged.

Are you suggesting that Katrina's timeline refutes manmade global warming?

 

[Crick]

How often was I supposed to get hit by a CAT 6 hurricane then?

The question is when you decided it was okay to lie.