Hurricane Rita Now a Category 5

[monsoon]

It appears the spectre of global warming has created the second monster storm headed unfortunately, to the Gulf coast. Hurricane Rita has surprised the experts and has quickly grown to a Cat 5 storm.

[Viper]

Thanks for the update but can you infom me of how the supposed global warming is the cause of the increase in frequency and intensity of hurricanes?

Perhaps a different thread.

That was rather quick though. It wasn't that strong last I looked at it on NOAA.gov but it's sustained winds are hitting 165 mph. At least New Orleans is out of its path.

[RiversideGator]

Top hurricane experts have stated that global warming is not causing stronger storms.

[monsoon]

Top hurricane experts have stated that global warming is not causing stronger storms.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Experts say global warming is causing stronger hurricanes

I'll overlook the agenda slander that you made.

[peaceloveunderstanding]

wow, I wonder what the 'rebuilding effort' will rise up to now... we are going into a hole of which we won't be able to get out of.

Two CAT 5s in a row in the Gulf of Mexico alone is quite amazing, some experts say that we are in the midst of what hurricane seasons will be in the future, this is what will become normal. If that is true I don't see this area growing much more.

[ironchapman]

Of course, Galveston and the area are much better fit for survivng a hurricane because the are actually above sea level. The worst that could happen to them (by guessing from the 1900 hurricane) is temporary flooding and destruction of property. At least we took a good bit of action beforehand this time, such as evacuating the city.

[RiversideGator]

I said Hurricane Experts do not believe that global warming is increasing the severity of storms. Dr. William Gray, the top hurricane expert in America, has stated this.

Dr Gray states as follows in his interview:

Glassman: You

[Ruso]

This is terrible. I hope they learned from Katrina and wont do the same mistakes. Regardless of global warming or not. What is so hard about accepting that changes have to be made in order to protect our world?

[monsoon]

Of course, Galveston and the area are much better fit for survivng a hurricane because the are actually above sea level. The worst that could happen to them (by guessing from the 1900 hurricane) is temporary flooding and destruction of property. At least we took a good bit of action beforehand this time, such as evacuating the city.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The 1900 Hurricane completly leveled the city and ended its march towards being the most important city in Texas. The entire place had to be rebuilt. And because they were not warned due to the limited technology, 8000 died. I don't think much more could be done to it.

Unfortunately global warming has caused ocean levels to be a bit higher than 100 years ago which will worsen the situation there this time if Rita does indeed hit the place. At least we have the benefit of knowing the danger that a storm like Rita represents and we have time to evacuate people.

[Spartan]

The latest update is that the pressure has continued to drop. It is at 898mb, making it the 3rd most powerful storm on record. They say it will likely continue to strengthen for 12 more hours.

[NCB]

This thing is a monster, I know exactly how these people feel.

Friday night before Katrina hit I went to bed and Katrina was a cat 2-3. I woke up the next morning horrified to see that it was now a cat. 5, and it was headed strait for me....it was a feeling I hope I never get again.

If anyone is reading this who may be in the Houston Area, I strongly encourage you to leave.

After going through Katrina, I never want to ride out a major hurricane again...never

So please evacuate to safety, in the end you'l know it was the right decision.

I will keep everyone along the Texas coast in my prayers!

[MR-2]

We have a vengeful God that's sending another hurricane to torment the NOLA evacuees in Houston, apparently.

Let's establish one thing: this thread is not about whether global warming is happening or not. It is. There is no debate left in the scientific community about it. Humans are also probably causing it. There's almost no debate about that either. With each respective summer, the surface cover of ice in at the poles becomes a new record low around this time of year. This has gone on several consecutive years. We now have something along the lines of 83% the polar ice we had in 1960. It's difficult to say exactly if it's causing more hurricanes. We'll need to see a few more years of this type of weather to establish a pattern. Certainly the last two years have been particularly bad for the gulf.

This is the classic hockey stick graph, where temperatures deduced from chemical measurements in polar ice are set against global recorded temperatures from recorded history. It's a fairly accurate model, and at this point it's quite clear that even if the global average temperatures are not their highest ever, the trend at which they're increasing is completely abnormal with natural weather cycles.

One of hundreds (and one of the least accurate really) of CO2 to global average temperature plots. If someone's seen the geological scale one over thousands of years that'd be good. It's far more incriminating.

It's a bit unclear what this'll do to our weather though.

[RiversideGator]

I recommend Michael Crichton's new book, State Of Fear, which debunks the global warming hysteria:

Deleted: No Commerical Advertizing!

[peaceloveunderstanding]

and you get a nice little referral with that click (if anyone wants to buy)... lol.

ref=ase_thewwwcapitalsit

[RiversideGator]

Moonshield: That isnt my referral. That is from another website. They would get the referral. I have no monetary interest in this.

[RiversideGator]

By the way, scientists were convinced about climate change in 1975 too: http://www.globalclimate.org/Newsweek.htm

Yes, global cooling was coming and we were all going to starve. This was just 30 years ago. Does this provide any doubt to some of you?

[MR-2]

Crichton very obviously has political motives with his book. And his arguments aren't supported by decade-spanning international scientific studies or common sense.

It is very simple to deduce that global warming is happening.

Global average temperatures are increasing. They've begun increasing rapidly since the advent of the industrial revolution.

As flawed as the environmental movement is at times, and as much as Crichton might tear its strawmen apart, I'd like to see what his alternative proposal is for what's causing global warming, instead of just a "oh it can't possibly be us."

Also, the leading science of 1975 actually predicted global warming. Just because it was cooler then, and it had been getting cooler for a while, doesn't mean people drew a pattern from it. "Global Cooling" was a myth.

http://www.wmconnolley.org.uk/sci/iceage/

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php?p=94

[RiversideGator]

MR-2: I think the short answer is nobody knows. I suspect it is naturally occurring fluctuations in the temperature unrelated to man. A .8 degree increase over 150 years doesnt exactly keep me up at night. I also think people are very conceited to imagine that our behavior is changing the climate. There just isnt enough proof to base public policy on. And, the meterogolists cant even tell you with 100% certainty if it will rain tomorrow. Why would you believe them when some of them are forecasting a far fetched disaster far off in the future. It just doesnt add up.

And, I would follow the money. Who benefits from "global warming" being believed by the public? Well, I think the scientists arguing in favor of it will receive additional funding from the feds if they can just convince the public things are really bad. Dont fall for it.

Here is a good article that debunks most of the green movement: http://www.globalclimate.org/climscience/01-0802-Lomborg.htm

[Ruso]

By the way, scientists were convinced about climate change in 1975 too:  http://www.globalclimate.org/Newsweek.htm

Yes, global cooling was coming and we were all going to starve.  This was just 30 years ago.  Does this provide any doubt to some of you?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

So, do you propose to just keep misstreating the environment, until Global Warming really begins? You say we can take the risk of leaving the disaster to our descendants?

[PghUSA]

What are we all doing about this?

There are some suggesting not to buy gas on saturdays and sundays, to drive less, use less power.

I'm working on a home generator and haven't bought a gallon of gas since November 30th 2004. Almost one year now of being Petroleum free, kicking the habit one day at a time.

[MR-2]

MR-2:  I think the short answer is nobody knows.  I suspect it is naturally occurring fluctuations in the temperature unrelated to man.  A .8 degree increase over 150 years doesnt exactly keep me up at night.  I also think people are very conceited to imagine that our behavior is changing the climate.  There just isnt enough proof to base public policy on.  And, the meterogolists cant even tell you with 100% certainty if it will rain tomorrow.  Why would you believe them when some of them are forecasting a far fetched disaster far off in the future.  It just doesnt add up.

The naturally occurring temperature changes take place over millions of years, not hundreds. .8 K in 100 years don't sound scary on its own, but when you consider that the temperature had been practically level for millions of years before that, that's significant. That the temperature change only occurs after the industrial revolution, and accelerates in proportion to population growth, kinda implies something.

There's no need for an environmental argument for cleaner technology. Depletion of resources (we'll never run out of oil, it'll just continue gaining price because its efficiency doesn't suite a population of 6+ billion, and our remaining sources are continually more expensive to extract from. Coal is completely inefficient for the health hazards it generates. etc.)

And, I would follow the money.  Who benefits from "global warming" being believed by the public?  Well, I think the scientists arguing in favor of it will receive additional funding from the feds if they can just convince the public things are really bad.  Dont fall for it.

Yes, it is all those evil profit-seeking scientists who wish to abuse the benevolent fossil fuel industries--who have always been looking out for the general welfare of the public, and are certainly not concerned with the profit losses of compensating for environmental effects.

Also all of these non-profit websites stand to make a huge profit from perpetuating the global warming myth I'm sure.

Here is a good article that debunks most of the green movement:  http://www.globalclimate.org/climscience/01-0802-Lomborg.htm

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The "green" movement is practically a strawman in itself. The arguments for environmental preservation can be made entirely on an economic basis, not just a "be nice to animals and plants and things" basis. Just because some of the loonies agree with a few scientific studies doesn't mean the entire basis for those studies must be off.

Don't make line by line rebuttals here. Read the rules please

[DigitalSky]

Rita = scary.

[SOCOM]

cantnot = correct

[Viper]

I'm proposing a new thread for the global warming = hurricane theory. I would appreciate it if we could carry this conversation to it and leave this thread for Rita.

[SOCOM]

^sounds like a good plan.

Rita is so beautiful in a weird kind of way.