PDA

View Full Version : Wired weather‚¬ī..



halmex
01-12-2005, 10:12 AM
It is january 12th.. In finland at this time it use to be very cold and a lot of snow.

But there is no snow and almoust +7 celcius and a lot of big storms all the time. This is the third one stireking tonight.

http://www.fmi.fi/saa/sadejapi_5.html

Then we have the Asian tsunami and volcanos going off..

====================================
Three Volcanoes Erupt in Guatemala

Wednesday 12th January 2005

Three volcanoes have erupted almost simultaneously in Guatemala. Pacaya, Santa Maria, and Fuego have all been emitting ash and lava, forcing residents to be evacuated. It is 31 years since all three volcanoes erupted together.
Pacaya erupted a 75 m lava flow SW of the central crater. Santa Maria had incandescent explosions of lava with ash column to 1.6 km altitude. Ash fall reached nearby villages. Fuego erupted grey plumes 800 m above the crater. Incandescent lava was emitted 30 m above the crater and occasionally caused an avalanche of blocks towards the valley Taniluy√°.
=========================================

The ‚¬īlist goes on.. with freaky weather phenomens etc...

Gone are the good old days with lot of snow and cold winter here in Finland.

halmex
01-12-2005, 10:12 AM
It is january 12th.. In finland at this time it use to be very cold and a lot of snow.

But there is no snow and almoust +7 celcius and a lot of big storms all the time. This is the third one stireking tonight.

http://www.fmi.fi/saa/sadejapi_5.html

Then we have the Asian tsunami and volcanos going off..

====================================
Three Volcanoes Erupt in Guatemala

Wednesday 12th January 2005

Three volcanoes have erupted almost simultaneously in Guatemala. Pacaya, Santa Maria, and Fuego have all been emitting ash and lava, forcing residents to be evacuated. It is 31 years since all three volcanoes erupted together.
Pacaya erupted a 75 m lava flow SW of the central crater. Santa Maria had incandescent explosions of lava with ash column to 1.6 km altitude. Ash fall reached nearby villages. Fuego erupted grey plumes 800 m above the crater. Incandescent lava was emitted 30 m above the crater and occasionally caused an avalanche of blocks towards the valley Taniluy√°.
=========================================

The ‚¬īlist goes on.. with freaky weather phenomens etc...

Gone are the good old days with lot of snow and cold winter here in Finland.

Trogdor93
01-12-2005, 10:19 AM
Those storms look almost like hurricanes do you know what the wind speeds are?

halmex
01-12-2005, 10:26 AM
In europe we dont use mile per hour. we use m per hour when talking about winds.

It is now over Norway winds speed are

Wind: SW at 24 mph (39 km/h)

http://weather.cnn.com/weather/forecast.jsp?locCode=EN41

Demon_Mustang
01-12-2005, 12:40 PM
The world climate and conditions constantly change every couple thousand years or so apart, some say this is "global warming" caused by man, others believe it's simply these normal "mood swings" the planet goes through and have been going through long before humans were even a major species. So who knows...

Gunny Highway
01-12-2005, 05:25 PM
And media attention makes it seem as weather is getting worse. News isn't local anymore with the spread of the Internet and coverage from TV it brings it directly into our homes faster and more often.

In Denmark we felt the hurricane too, toppled a lot of trees and made structual damages to building and power lines and flooded costal or cities close to bodies of water. Four people died here in Denmark, and 4 in Sweden I think.

About global warming, I saw a pretty convincing documentary(eitehr BBC or Danish I forget) saying that you can't say that global warming is attributed to man's industrial usage.
Not saying that polluting is okay by any means, just the fact that the emissions of greenhouse gasses etc into the air, can't be blamed for it solely.
The increases might as well be a natural occurrence, it basically conclued, and the ppl that say global warming is solely because of emissions of greenhouse gas trusted their own computer model too much and perhaps on wrong basis. And I stress that I make a difference in polution and greenhouse gasses.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by halmex:
In europe we dont use mile per hour. we use m per hour when talking about winds. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

The United Kingdom still use miles, and I like to think the still are a part of Europe http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Halmex, does Finland use the mile system as in Norway and Sweden where 10KM is equal to 1 mil (mile) too?

Deliverance
01-13-2005, 07:53 AM
I suggest you read this article (by the BBC).

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/4171591.stm

To state that the billions of tons of fossil fuels released since the begining of the industrial age are "not affecting" our climate is truly wishful thinking (actively promoted by the US/Chinese/ Russian governments for obvious reasons..)

The prevous major climate changes (the last ice age was approx 20 000 years ago) were a long time coming (often 100 000s of years build up) and were due to reduction in carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, global continental plate movements and other more exotic causes (huge meteors and vocanic activity etc)

The current climatic changes, for example the breakup up country sized chunks of ice in antartica and the drastic reduction of glaciers worldwide have occured within an incredible short time period (50 odd years) which constitutes a mere micro blip in the millions of years of climatic cycles of this planet..

We should be thinking of what lies ahead for our children and our grandchildren..

Trogdor93
01-13-2005, 08:56 AM
Deliverance volcanism is the number one producer of "greenhouse" gases, the human contribution pales in comparison. It's easy to say that the billions of tons that are put out are really, really horrible when you ignore the dominant natural source.

Gunny Highway
01-13-2005, 09:14 AM
@Deliverance

I made the differnece in greenhouse gasses and pollution quite clear in my post.
The article mentions more on how visable pollution and what is called global dimming.
The article however mentions that greenhouse gasses may have a greater effect as a result of global dimming than previously thought with reference to the ice-age climate.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>This means that the climate <span class="ev_code_red">may</span> in fact be more sensitive to the greenhouse effect than previously thought. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

May being the key word. What I tried to emphasis in my first post was the fact that the world leading experts are not in agreement on the issue.

Being sceptical of the different POV in the topic of global warming, doesn't mean one is pro pollution etc. Just that scientist have differences in oppinion on how greatly global warming is a man made 'problem' in our time.

Media has a tendency to only voice the apocalyptic forecast of the pessimisict scientist and researchers in the discussion, but not much is heard from ppl sceptic of their pov.

Sadly I don't have BBC2 only World and Prime so I can't see the show tonight. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/cry.gif Maybe it will be on BBC World another day.

Demon_Mustang
01-14-2005, 01:31 AM
Not to mention the amount of pollutants expelled by cows, horses and other animals both while they live and after they die...

Either way, it isn't completely proved either way, and notice my statement was mentioning BOTH sides of the argument as I was presenting two dissenting opinions, but if you chose to assume I support one over the other based on your own biases then go right ahead, knock yourself out.

halmex
01-14-2005, 04:44 AM
There are many issues happening in the world today. Most of them are urgent and need to have the world‚‚ā¨ôs focus right now. One of these issues is global warming.

In its simplest form, Kyoto is a treaty that will reduce the amount of Carbon Dioxide in the atmosphere. Carbon Dioxide is one gas that is found to stay in the atmosphere for long periods of time, slowly warming the earth.

There are many arguments whether or not global warming is happening, but we need to look at the worse case scenario; if it is happening we must do something now before it is too late. Many countries have ratified this treaty and it is scheduled to take effect sometime in the near future. The United States was behind this treaty under the Clinton administration. However, President Bush sees no future with the Kyoto Protocol in relationship to the United States. However, the Kyoto Protocol needs the United States in order for it to be a successful treaty. With 4.6% of the population of the world, the United States emits about a quarter of all emissions worldwide. This ratio is far more than with any other country in the world. With ratios such as these, Kyoto cannot succeed without the United States being part of the treaty.

Deliverance
01-14-2005, 07:37 AM
I was not trying to distinguish between increasing "green house" effect or pollution,
just to emphasise that the issue is more of a "manmade" creation than a normal nature climate cycle , which tend to take many thousands of years complete as opposed to the recent drastic glacier reduction seen in the last 50 years.

http://www.environet.org/warming/Climate_Predictions_and_Events.pdf

Naturally there is no easy clear visible cause here but bearing mind the ecomomic ratifications of a Kyoto type agreement for the worlds major industrial giants ( drastic reductions in emisiions means massive investment in clean technologies etc) there is immense pressure from these countries governments to play down or distort the information currently available and to "pass the hot potato" to the next incoming administration.


The danger here is that this crucially important issue will become tainted as a leftwing liberal ticket when it is a mainstream problem that will affect ALL of us (more so our children).

All the more reason for the US (one of the worlds largest producers of emissions) to attend the Kyoto summits and thrash out some guidelines for the future major polluters (China and Russia).

here is a Nasa article affirming that polution point of view

http://japan.usembassy.gov/e/p/tp-g098.html

Ofcr_Lawless
01-14-2005, 08:55 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by halmex:

In its simplest form, Kyoto is a treaty that will reduce the amount of Carbon Dioxide in the atmosphere. Carbon Dioxide is one gas that is found to stay in the atmosphere for long periods of time, slowly warming the earth. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I refuse to hold my breath. Especially for something that was supposrted by that sorry excuse for a president, Clinton. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif

Demon_Mustang
01-14-2005, 11:05 AM
Clinton also believed the military's main purpose is to go around building houses for everyone...

Anyway, do you ever question how we know what we know about Carbon Dioxide's effect on global climate? Let me tell you how, based on what happens to the planet when there is a lot of volcanic activity. Don't see the significance of this? Volcanic activity is probably THE number one contribution to the world's carbon dioxide. That doesn't mean we shouldn't try to be cleaner, but hey, a fact is a fact.

Anyway, it seems to me Japanese and American auto makers are two countries that are actively seeking a cleaner energy source for vehicles, not saying only countries, but at least America is among the countries that are trying. The new Ford Freestyle hybrid is supposed to be a really good one too.