up to 10 dead from tornadoes in Kentuck,missouri, and arkansas

[High Plains Drifter 10970]

11 hours ago, Biff Tannen said:

Oh they can. And they will. 

 

admitting that global warming had anything to do with this would be admitting they've been wrong for the last 40 years. We'll be living in hell on earth before that happens.

 

[Fudge Nuggets 19118]

11 hours ago, Gidnik said:

didnt know where else to put it.  

Lulz?

[C-Man 26992]

17 hours ago, Lobo said:

That it happened that far North and in mid-December?  It can’t be possible.  If this happened in June in Oklahoma or Alabama, it’s still be terrible but we could wrap our science around it. 
 

this literally couldn’t have Happened.  Not like this.  But It did and so many are dead or injured.  My heart just broke.  Dear God.  
 

Red Cross has what they need for now but they’ll deplete that wit in 36hrs.  So we need to help stock for the next thing I guess.  

 

15 hours ago, Beau Vine said:

Whatever.  Find a local organization.  Every dollar going to Red Cross is a dollar wasted.

Have always heard that about $0.90 of every dollar raised by the Red Cross never leaves the organization.

[Bama Chick 28596]

Perhaps Rep Massie could sell off some of his firearms and donate the earnings for good use?

Cannot WAIT to watch Rand Paul and Mitch McConnell beg for federal relief.

Socialism for me but not for thee.

[Bullneck 18976]

10 hours ago, Hate said:

When was the last time this occurred?  If they are more frequent why are there so many people on this very site talking about how it's never happened?  Goddam.  What happened was the weather.  It's happened before and it will happen again.  One can recognize a weather event while also recognizing that we should do all in our power to make the Earth cleaner.  The last recorded EF5 in the US was in 2013...eight years ago.  That's the longest period of time without an EF5 since 1953.  Weird. There were fewer tornadoes in the 2010's than in previous years despite advanced radar capable of picking them up wherever and whenever they occur.  Weird. 

I thought you liked facts and science? 

 

What exactly do you intend to prove?  Do you just want people to think you're smart?  Or are you mad because everyone with a brain recognizes climate change for what it is?

[Guest]

4 hours ago, Bama Chick said:

Cannot WAIT to watch Rand Paul and Mitch McConnell beg for federal relief.

Socialism for me but not for thee.

Disaster relief is an aspect of socialism that most agree is beneficial; therefore all of our socialist bullshit should be accepted.

Amirite?

[Bateshorn 9882]

4 minutes ago, slorch said:

Disaster relief is an aspect of socialism that most agree is beneficial; therefore all of our socialist bullshit should be accepted.

Amirite?

It’s more like when Red States have natural disasters and gladly receive disaster resistance, but when it happens to Blue States (wildfires in California, Super Storm Sandy in NYC/NJ, Hurricane Maria) the GOP blocks legislation or demands things in exchange.

[Beau Vine 53965]

5 hours ago, Bama Chick said:

Cannot WAIT to watch Rand Paul and Mitch McConnell beg for federal relief.

Socialism for me but not for thee.

[Guest Lobo]

What the fuck happened to that guy besides a shitty perm?  

[Hate 20102]

2 hours ago, Bullneck said:

What exactly do you intend to prove?  Do you just want people to think you're smart?  Or are you mad because everyone with a brain recognizes climate change for what it is?

I was trying to prove to myself that I shouldn’t post in the CR with the usual closed and single minded turds, but this was the only thread on the weather event at the time. Point proven. Good day. 

[Bullneck 18976]

19 minutes ago, Beau Vine said:

Like clockwork.

[Bullneck 18976]

1 hour ago, slorch said:

Disaster relief is an aspect of socialism that most agree is beneficial; therefore all of our socialist bullshit should be accepted.

Amirite?

So you agree some socialism is OK?  

[Guest]

3 minutes ago, Bullneck said:

So you agree some socialism is OK?  

Absolutely.  I'm not a "all capitalism is good" type of person either.

There are good and bad/ effective and ineffective policies.  Let's evaluate them as such.

[Biff Tannen 45477]

25 minutes ago, Hate said:

I was trying to prove to myself that I shouldn’t post in the CR with the usual closed and single minded turds, but this was the only thread on the weather event at the time. Point proven. Good day. 

Yes, people who deny climate change are open minded. Truly a dizzying intellect. 

[tigol 2383]

47 minutes ago, Hate said:

I was trying to prove to myself that I shouldn’t post in the CR with the usual closed and single minded turds, but this was the only thread on the weather event at the time. Point proven. Good day. 

Try defending your point.  I've seen you whine on other areas of this website about CR folks, but I've also seen you fail to be specific.  I'll admit that I haven't read all of your posts, but the general sense I have is that you are butt hurt about something CR related, but fail to articulate it.  Please.  Spell it out.  For the turds.

Edited December 12, 2021 by tigol
Spelling

[Bateshorn 9882]

46 minutes ago, slorch said:

Absolutely.  I'm not a "all capitalism is good" type of person either.

There are good and bad/ effective and ineffective policies.  Let's evaluate them as such.

The problem is that they aren’t being evaluated by the right on a policy basis, they are being evaluated on a partisan basis. The equivalent would be if Biden did a disaster approval for KY on the basis of a Democratic governor, but denied Tennessee and Arkansas. If he wanted to be Trumpian, he would then say the quiet part out loud and tell those states to start voting blue.  The GOP has happily engaged in this exact partisan behavior multiple times in the last decade. 
 

Look, anyone with half a brain now understands that the modern conservative movement is hypocritical in its application of policy and politics, arguing for things that benefit it, while denying similar relief to the rest of society on a fairly arbitrary basis. It’s still enraging from an intellectual standpoint. 
 

Nobody on this thread is arguing that socialized disaster response means broad socialization of society.  You’re building strawmen. 

[Pato del Muerto 52322]

55 minutes ago, slorch said:

Absolutely.  I'm not a "all capitalism is good" type of person either.

There are good and bad/ effective and ineffective policies.  Let's evaluate them as such.

Do you also agree that if you are a congressperson or senator that votes against federal disaster aid in other regions, you should not be asking for it when there is a disaster in your region?  It’s either worth doing all the time or not ever worth doing?

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, Pato del Muerto said:

Do you also agree that if you are a congressperson or senator that votes against federal disaster aid in other regions, you should not be asking for it when there is a disaster in your region?  It’s either worth doing all the time or not ever worth doing?

 Let's evaluate them as such.

I do find the "man-made" disaster qualifying mental gymnastics slightly entertaining.

Edited December 12, 2021 by slorch

[Pato del Muerto 52322]

3 minutes ago, slorch said:

 Let's evaluate them as such.

No. If such a person says that we shouldn’t be spending federal money we don’t have on disaster relief, in absolute terms like that, then they should have the courage of conviction to not ask for federal money for disaster relief that happens to fall in their district. 
 

this also assumes nobody tries to tie in some bullshit unrelated item to the bill, which probably happens on every single one but should be illegal. 

Edited December 12, 2021 by Pato del Muerto

[Bateshorn 9882]

11 minutes ago, Pato del Muerto said:

No. If such a person says that we shouldn’t be spending federal money we don’t have on disaster relief, in absolute terms like that, then they should have the courage of conviction to not ask for federal money for disaster relief that happens to fall in their district. 
 

this also assumes nobody tries to tie in some bullshit unrelated item to the bill, which probably happens on every single one but should be illegal. 

 

[Hate 20102]

1 hour ago, tigol said:

Try defending your point.  I've seen you whine on other areas of this website about CR folks, but I've also seen you fail to be specific.  I'll admit that I haven't read all of your posts, but the general sense I have is that you are butt hurt about something CR related, but fail to articulate it.  Please.  Spell it out.  For the turds.

The point being that every time there is a significant weather event the CR people start screaming "climate change".  They claim said event has never happened before when there is plenty of evidence that it has happened before and will happen again.  Then they insult the people that provide actual facts that show their claims aren't necessarily true.  The tornado outbreak Friday was rare, but it has happened before.  It happened when the Earth was cooler by 1 degree or so.  They then claim these events are more frequent and more powerful, which can be quickly debunked with just a few minutes of research.  This was a weather event and when "climate change" gets thrown out as the cause of every storm, skeptics tune out.  I believe we should do everything we can to clean our atmosphere and oceans, and I support initiatives to do so.  Pointing out the difference between weather and climate by using facts somehow makes me the moron...that's why this place sucks.

[Incredulity 11532]

4 minutes ago, Bravo said:

there is a little nuance between all out socialism and full blown libertarianism. I think disaster relief may fall somewhere in the middle there.

Nope, the government builds freeways. Therefore we are already socialists and my college debt should be forgiven.-Surly Leftist 

[Bullneck 18976]

13 minutes ago, Hate said:

The point being that every time there is a significant weather event the CR people start screaming "climate change".  They claim said event has never happened before when there is plenty of evidence that it has happened before and will happen again.  Then they insult the people that provide actual facts that show their claims aren't necessarily true.  The tornado outbreak Friday was rare, but it has happened before.  It happened when the Earth was cooler by 1 degree or so.  They then claim these events are more frequent and more powerful, which can be quickly debunked with just a few minutes of research.  This was a weather event and when "climate change" gets thrown out as the cause of every storm, skeptics tune out.  I believe we should do everything we can to clean our atmosphere and oceans, and I support initiatives to do so.  Pointing out the difference between weather and climate by using facts somehow makes me the moron...that's why this place sucks.

So, do you believe in man-made climate change?

[ ] yes

[ ] no

Do you believe we should take action to mitigate man-made climate change?

[ ] yes

[ ] no

[Bullneck 18976]

10 minutes ago, Incredulity said:

Nope, the government builds freeways. Therefore we are already socialists and my college debt should be forgiven.-Surly Leftist 

Student loan forgiveness thread is --------->

[Hate 20102]

So, do you believe in man-made climate change?
[ ] yes
[ ] no
Do you believe we should take action to mitigate man-made climate change?
[ ] yes
[ ] no

I believe man has contributed to a warming climate.

I believe we should take steps to not contribute any longer.

[Biff Tannen 45477]

32 minutes ago, Hate said:

The point being that every time there is a significant weather event the CR people start screaming "climate change".  They claim said event has never happened before when there is plenty of evidence that it has happened before and will happen again.  Then they insult the people that provide actual facts that show their claims aren't necessarily true.  The tornado outbreak Friday was rare, but it has happened before.  It happened when the Earth was cooler by 1 degree or so.  They then claim these events are more frequent and more powerful, which can be quickly debunked with just a few minutes of research.  This was a weather event and when "climate change" gets thrown out as the cause of every storm, skeptics tune out.  I believe we should do everything we can to clean our atmosphere and oceans, and I support initiatives to do so.  Pointing out the difference between weather and climate by using facts somehow makes me the moron...that's why this place sucks.

 

11 minutes ago, Hate said:

I believe man has contributed to a warming climate.

I believe we should take steps to not contribute any longer.

See this was well done and this is what will get you reasoned debate in here. CR isn’t a scary place if you aren’t a partisan hack that argues in bad faith. 

[MissingInAction 24765]

4 hours ago, slorch said:

Disaster relief is an aspect of socialism that most agree is beneficial; therefore all of our socialist bullshit should be accepted.

Amirite?

How can you be so obtuse? 

The problem is that the turtle blows the socialism dog whistle every time we try to strengthen social programs. It's called hypocrisy mmmkay.

[DDD Dad 14167]

1 hour ago, Bravo said:

there is a little nuance between all out socialism and full blown libertarianism. I think disaster relief may fall somewhere in the middle there.

Yes. Full blown libertarianism is based on selfishness. And it is generally hypocritical. 

[Francisco 2.0 32290]

Amazon and its treatment of employees probably deserves a thread:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited December 13, 2021 by Francisco 2.0

[High Plains Drifter 10970]

On 12/12/2021 at 11:43 AM, Hate said:

The point being that every time there is a significant weather event the CR people start screaming "climate change".  They claim said event has never happened before when there is plenty of evidence that it has happened before and will happen again.  Then they insult the people that provide actual facts that show their claims aren't necessarily true.  The tornado outbreak Friday was rare, but it has happened before.  It happened when the Earth was cooler by 1 degree or so.  They then claim these events are more frequent and more powerful, which can be quickly debunked with just a few minutes of research.  This was a weather event and when "climate change" gets thrown out as the cause of every storm, skeptics tune out.  I believe we should do everything we can to clean our atmosphere and oceans, and I support initiatives to do so.  Pointing out the difference between weather and climate by using facts somehow makes me the moron...that's why this place sucks.

This is my serious response. No snark or assholishness intended.

With respect to "proving" climate change, it doesn't matter if super killer tornadoes in winter have ever occurred before in Kentucky. Or, if they have occurred before, it doesn't matter if these are bigger/worse/more powerful/more whatever. It really even doesn't matter if super tornadoes in winter in that part of the country are becoming more frequent.

What does matter is that when taken in the context of the extreme drought in west coupled with the wildfires, the floods in the midwest, the record breaking heat this past summer in the northwest, extreme hurricanes (see Sandy, et al), on and on all over the entire world, these weather events in total are getting more common and worse.

Pointing out that extreme F5 record breaking tornadoes in winter have occurred before does nothing to disprove climate change theory.

 

Lobo or someone said that an event like these tornadoes have never happened before. You said they have, and gave evidence. Fine, he was factually wrong on that point, you were correct. But you are factually wrong when you say these tornadoes are not related to climate change. The theory of climate change cannot point to a single event and say that event was caused by climate change. What climate change theory can do is predict that these types of events, in general and on average, will become more frequent. And that prediction has been and continues to be shown correct. And climate scientists have been making these predictions for over 40 years (despite what one cover of Time magazine said back in the 70s).

 

 

[Guest Lobo]

I didn’t say they had never happened.  I said that multiple tornado supercells have never been that massive, covering that much ground, that far north, so far removed from peak tornado system, with that much intensity, doing that much damage.  And it happened in a few hours, the only comps to this thing took days to unfold.  
 

I accept they’ve happened before, but not at this scale in that area at this time of year.  It’s way too bizarre a culmination of events.  It would be like having three Cat 5 hurricanes hit the Gulf on the same day, then move inland for hundreds of miles.  In March.  

[StassneyHorn 6534]

19 hours ago, Francisco 2.0 said:

Amazon and its treatment of employees probably deserves a thread:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Employee Resource Center will have it corrected within a day. It almost always does, and had similar actions taken during the Ice Storm in Texas last year.

[hobbes2702 12771]

On 12/12/2021 at 8:31 AM, slorch said:

Disaster relief is an aspect of socialism that most agree is beneficial; therefore all of our socialist bullshit should be accepted.

Amirite?

They voted against relief for Texas after Harvey. Keep carrying their water though.

[StassneyHorn 6534]

Dp

Edited December 13, 2021 by StassneyHorn

[Hate 20102]

1 hour ago, High Plains Drifter said:

This is my serious response. No snark or assholishness intended.

With respect to "proving" climate change, it doesn't matter if super killer tornadoes in winter have ever occurred before in Kentucky. Or, if they have occurred before, it doesn't matter if these are bigger/worse/more powerful/more whatever. It really even doesn't matter if super tornadoes in winter in that part of the country are becoming more frequent.

What does matter is that when taken in the context of the extreme drought in west coupled with the wildfires, the floods in the midwest, the record breaking heat this past summer in the northwest, extreme hurricanes (see Sandy, et al), on and on all over the entire world, these weather events in total are getting more common and worse.

Pointing out that extreme F5 record breaking tornadoes in winter have occurred before does nothing to disprove climate change theory.

 

Lobo or someone said that an event like these tornadoes have never happened before. You said they have, and gave evidence. Fine, he was factually wrong on that point, you were correct. But you are factually wrong when you say these tornadoes are not related to climate change. The theory of climate change cannot point to a single event and say that event was caused by climate change. What climate change theory can do is predict that these types of events, in general and on average, will become more frequent. And that prediction has been and continues to be shown correct. And climate scientists have been making these predictions for over 40 years (despite what one cover of Time magazine said back in the 70s).

 

 

Except that they haven't.  Did you miss the chart I posted earlier that showed a downward trend in the number of tornadoes over the last 3 decades.  Or the post that we just went the longest period of time without an EF5 tornado since those types of records have been kept?  The Earth is warmer now than it was 30 years ago, so according to the theory there should have been more frequent and powerful tornadoes in the last several years than there were when the Earth was cooler.  But that doesn't seem to have happened.  And how many tornadoes were there really in the 1950's before radar technology matured?  For the last few decades, every tornado that occurred was documented and recorded whether it damaged property or not.  In the 1950's?? I'm sure there were many tornadoes that weren't recorded because there weren't radar stations looking for them 24x7 like now.  The same argument could be made for hurricanes and tropical storms.  Now every single tropical system that meet the requirements gets a name because we can see them on radar.  How many hurricanes were "fish storms" before anyone knew they existed before radar? 

What happened was weather and I think that pointing the finger at climate change every time there is a storm does us all a disservice.  Climate change is the delay of the cyclical ice age that should have started already but hasn't because the Earth is warmer.  One could argue that postponing an ice age is a good thing, but I don't really see an upside to continuously polluting the planet.  I would rather there be calls to "clean" the oceans and atmosphere than screaming climate change after every storm impact. 

 

Edit:  I just saw the Carpe Diem tag on the tornado chart and saw it is a "right leaning" site.  I've never heard of them or been to their site until now to find out what they do, so if they have some Q-anon or whatever tendencies I want it known that I do not support them.  The chart itself is from the NOAA. 

Here is a link to the NOAA page where the data can be found https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/societal-impacts/tornadoes/

I'm sure some are already attacking the source.

Edited December 13, 2021 by Hate

[High Plains Drifter 10970]

14 minutes ago, Hate said:

Except that they haven't.  Did you miss the chart I posted earlier that showed a downward trend in the number of tornadoes over the last 3 decades.  Or the post that we just went the longest period of time without an EF5 tornado since those types of records have been kept?  The Earth is warmer now than it was 30 years ago, so according to the theory there should have been more frequent and powerful tornadoes in the last several years than there were when the Earth was cooler.  But that doesn't seem to have happened.  And how many tornadoes were there really in the 1950's before radar technology matured?  For the last few decades, every tornado that occurred was documented and recorded whether it damaged property or not.  In the 1950's?? I'm sure there were many tornadoes that weren't recorded because there weren't radar stations looking for them 24x7 like now.  The same argument could be made for hurricanes and tropical storms.  Now every single tropical system that meet the requirements gets a name because we can see them on radar.  How many hurricanes were "fish storms" before anyone knew they existed before radar? 

What happened was weather and I think that pointing the finger at climate change every time there is a storm does us all a disservice.  Climate change is the delay of the cyclical ice age that should have started already but hasn't because the Earth is warmer.  One could argue that postponing an ice age is a good thing, but I don't really see an upside to continuously polluting the planet.  I would rather there be calls to "clean" the oceans and atmosphere than screaming climate change after every storm impact. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

1. Its not about the tornadoes. Its about all the weather events. But even if you are correct and tornadoes are decreasing, then why are climate scientists still concerned about global warming?

2. First paragraph- bolded part: there are statistical analyses that are done to account for those "uncounted" storms before radar. So those numbers are included in the data that climate scientists use in their models and predictions.

3. There are calls for cleaner air and water. Those things are accomplished through regulations and money spending-- both of which your side (I assume you are R)* is against.

4. Temperature changes due to cyclic ice age trends are much much slower than the temp change we are seeing due to global warming. The rate of temp increase is just as alarming as the amount of temp increase.

 

*This is a safe assumption, I think, considering how partisan science has become.

 

 

 

Edited December 13, 2021 by High Plains Drifter

[wildcat09 29187]

What year is it right now?

[Hate 20102]

6 minutes ago, High Plains Drifter said:

 

1. Its not about the tornadoes. Its about all the weather events. But even if you are correct and tornadoes are decreasing, then why are climate scientists still concerned about global warming?

2. First paragraph- bolded part: there are statistical analyses that are done to account for those "uncounted" storms before radar. So those numbers are included in the data that climate scientists use in their models and predictions.

3. There are calls for cleaner air and water. Those things are accomplished through regulations and money spending-- both of which your side (I assume you are R)* is against.

4. Temperature changes due to cyclic ice age trends are much much slower than the temp change we are seeing due to global warming. The rate of temp increase is just as alarming as the amount of temp increase.

 

*This is a safe assumption, I think, considering how partisan science has become.

 

 

 

1.  They are concerned because of the potential impacts of the seas rising a few to several feet.  The impacts globally to the cities and property built along the coastline are obviously going to be great...and devastating to those communities.

2.  None of the data I provided were from a climate scientist's model.  They were the known facts as of the moment.  I have not seen any of the data on what the models have been predicting, but if they are along the lines of what everyone screams that these storms are going to be more frequent and stronger, than the models have not been correct so far. 

3.  I don't really have a team.  There are things that I like and dislike about both (I know...both sides).  I support cleaning our air and oceans is all I can tell you.  How do we go about doing that in the real world?  I don't think telling people to eat fewer steaks and not travel so much are going to do it.  I'm not really sure what the answer is, but I support solar and wind initiatives that serve as a bridge until that breakthrough happens that solves the issue.  Of course, there is a cost to the climate to those enterprises as well...but I am not a do nothing type of person. We should keep trying until that breakthrough occurs.

4.  I agree??

 

I think the doom and gloom predictions by politicians after severe weather events do more harm than good because they can be quickly and easily be proven false. 

[Biff Tannen 45477]

World Central Kitchen doing work. 
 

Quote

Last Friday, deadly tornadoes devastated cities and towns across the central and southern US – a candle factory and entire communities were left in rubble in Kentucky, and in southern Illinois, an Amazon distribution center partially collapsed, tragically killing employees inside. As communities work to deal with the devastation, WCK's Relief Team is spread throughout the impacted areas to provide thousands of comforting mealsto families and rescue teams searching for survivors.

Help us serve meals to people in need

Shortly after the storm hit, WCK mobilized local restaurants and food trucks to provide immediate food relief. We now have over 25 local partners, including a collaboration with Chef Ed Lee and the Lee Initiative, and the WCK Relief team is cooking hot, nourishing meals from our own food truck for communities in need.

WCK is distributing meals throughout towns across Kentucky including Mayfield, Dawson Springs, Benton, Cayce, and Bowling Green. Buildings have been flattened and entire neighborhoods have a long, hard road to recovery, so WCK is making sure to provide round-the-clock meals for emergency crews as well as families who have lost their homes.

In Edwardsville, Illinois, WCK provided meals to emergency crews working tirelessly at the warehouse destroyed by the tornadoes. Our restaurant partner Old Herald prepared pulled pork sandwiches, pub chips, and fresh salad—responders told us it was the first hot meal they’d had in the cold temperatures since the beginning of their efforts. Additionally, our Relief Team is providing meals and assessing for additional support in impacted areas of Arkansas and Tennessee.

A total of six states were hit by the series of tornadoes—an event of this magnitude is incredibly rare and was fueled by unseasonably warm and higher-than-average temperatures combined with high humidity. It is too early to determine the full impact but there are predictions that the series of tornadoes will be one of the worst in history to affect the region. WCK is committed to supporting communities impacted by climate disasters around the world, and through our Climate Disaster Fund, we will continue to search for and meet any needs for fresh meals in Kentucky, Illinois, and beyond, as long as we are needed. For the latest on our response efforts, follow WCK on Twitter, Instagram, and Facebook.

 

[Guest Lobo]

^

that's fucking awesome.  Brings a smile to my face.  My brother is not too  far from Edwardsville and was helping out this weekend.  

Meanwhile, Amazon is still trying to figure out if tornadoes are actually a thing or if their employees who didn't show for work were lying.  If only they had access to the largest library of related books and almanacs and atlases in the history of mankind.  

[WhatTheBuck 28700]

4 hours ago, High Plains Drifter said:

This is my serious response. No snark or assholishness intended.

With respect to "proving" climate change, it doesn't matter if super killer tornadoes in winter have ever occurred before in Kentucky. Or, if they have occurred before, it doesn't matter if these are bigger/worse/more powerful/more whatever. It really even doesn't matter if super tornadoes in winter in that part of the country are becoming more frequent.

What does matter is that when taken in the context of the extreme drought in west coupled with the wildfires, the floods in the midwest, the record breaking heat this past summer in the northwest, extreme hurricanes (see Sandy, et al), on and on all over the entire world, these weather events in total are getting more common and worse.

Pointing out that extreme F5 record breaking tornadoes in winter have occurred before does nothing to disprove climate change theory.

Lobo or someone said that an event like these tornadoes have never happened before. You said they have, and gave evidence. Fine, he was factually wrong on that point, you were correct. But you are factually wrong when you say these tornadoes are not related to climate change. The theory of climate change cannot point to a single event and say that event was caused by climate change. What climate change theory can do is predict that these types of events, in general and on average, will become more frequent. And that prediction has been and continues to be shown correct. And climate scientists have been making these predictions for over 40 years (despite what one cover of Time magazine said back in the 70s).

And glaciers are disappearing, polar ice is melting, oceans are warming and rising and becoming more acidic, coral reefs are dying, algae blooms are more common and more severe and threatening other marine life, wildlife habitats are shifting, even the maple syrup harvest has been impacted. The list goes on and on and it’s only going to get worse. You think human migration is a problem now? Climate-induced migration is going to become a much more severe problem in the coming decades, particularly from poorer nations close to the equator. And for peoples who get all their drinking water from a melting glacier it’s going to get dicey when that glacier is gone.

When the ice melts it can’t reflect the sunlight anymore so the earth gets warmer while those on the right cry “Drill baby drill!” and rush to claim the oil that lies beneath. As the permafrost melts it releases methane into the atmosphere and the earth gets warmer. They’re slashing and burning the rainforests to raise cattle and to produce palm oil for fuel. Meanwhile we just lived through four years with a President who insisted that global warming is a hoax and he’s going to do everything he can to become President again by hook or by crook. We’re talking about a man so stupid he thinks windmills cause cancer and nuclear weapons can be used to stop hurricanes. Btw, the 2020 Atlantic Hurricane Season set a record for the most storms, passing the previous record-holder 2005.

https://www.noaa.gov/news/2020-atlantic-hurricane-season-takes-infamous-top-spot-for-busiest-on-record

I’ve known about the scientific consensus on AGW for over 30 years. I’ve followed the denial machine for over 15 years. I know how they operate. The fact is that extreme weather events are on the rise in frequency and severity and at this point you’ve got to be willfully ignorant to continue to claim the problem isn’t real.

 

[Bullneck 18976]

4 hours ago, Hate said:

Except that they haven't.  Did you miss the chart I posted earlier that showed a downward trend in the number of tornadoes over the last 3 decades.  Or the post that we just went the longest period of time without an EF5 tornado since those types of records have been kept?  The Earth is warmer now than it was 30 years ago, so according to the theory there should have been more frequent and powerful tornadoes in the last several years than there were when the Earth was cooler.  But that doesn't seem to have happened.  And how many tornadoes were there really in the 1950's before radar technology matured?  For the last few decades, every tornado that occurred was documented and recorded whether it damaged property or not.  In the 1950's?? I'm sure there were many tornadoes that weren't recorded because there weren't radar stations looking for them 24x7 like now.  The same argument could be made for hurricanes and tropical storms.  Now every single tropical system that meet the requirements gets a name because we can see them on radar.  How many hurricanes were "fish storms" before anyone knew they existed before radar? 

What happened was weather and I think that pointing the finger at climate change every time there is a storm does us all a disservice.  Climate change is the delay of the cyclical ice age that should have started already but hasn't because the Earth is warmer.  One could argue that postponing an ice age is a good thing, but I don't really see an upside to continuously polluting the planet.  I would rather there be calls to "clean" the oceans and atmosphere than screaming climate change after every storm impact. 

 

Edit:  I just saw the Carpe Diem tag on the tornado chart and saw it is a "right leaning" site.  I've never heard of them or been to their site until now to find out what they do, so if they have some Q-anon or whatever tendencies I want it known that I do not support them.  The chart itself is from the NOAA. 

Here is a link to the NOAA page where the data can be found https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/societal-impacts/tornadoes/

I'm sure some are already attacking the source.

You and your goddam stats.

 

[fattyflattie 4636]

3 hours ago, Bullneck said:

You and your goddam stats.

Troublesome huh. It feels like it’s getting worse. All that matter imo. 

[Satchel 6908]

From NBC News. Requiescat in pace:

“People had questioned if they could leave or go home,” said Emery, who preferred to stay at work and make extra money. Overtime pay was available, but it wasn’t clear whether those who stayed were offered additional pay.

Supervisors and team leaders told employees that leaving would probably jeopardize their jobs, the employees said.

“If you leave, you’re more than likely to be fired,” Emery said she overheard managers tell four workers standing near her who wanted to leave. “I heard that with my own ears.”

About 15 people asked to go home during the night shift shortly after the first emergency alarm sounded outside the facility, said another employee, Haley Conder, 29.

There was a three- to four-hour window between the first and second emergency alarms when workers should have been allowed to go home, she said.

Initially, Conder said, team leaders told her they wouldn’t let workers leave because of safety precautions, so they kept everyone in the hallways and the bathrooms. Once they mistakenly thought the tornado was no longer a danger, they sent everyone back to work, employees said.

Anyone who wanted to leave should have been allowed to, Conder said.

Elijah Johnson, 20, was working in the back of the building when several employees wanting to head home walked in to speak with supervisors. He joined in on the request.

“I asked to leave and they told me I’d be fired,” Johnson said. “Even with the weather like this, you’re still going to fire me?” he asked.

“Yes,” a manager responded, Johnson told NBC News.

Johnson said managers went so far as to take a roll call in hopes of finding out who had left work.

Company officials denied the allegations.

[Bullneck 18976]

6 hours ago, fattyflattie said:

Troublesome huh. It feels like it’s getting worse. All that matter imo. 

I think you missed a few things along the way.

Good to know you're a climate change denier, thought.

[burntorangebongos 10681]

On 12/12/2021 at 11:43 AM, Hate said:

The point being that every time there is a significant weather event the CR people start screaming "climate change".  They claim said event has never happened before when there is plenty of evidence that it has happened before and will happen again.  Then they insult the people that provide actual facts that show their claims aren't necessarily true.  The tornado outbreak Friday was rare, but it has happened before.  It happened when the Earth was cooler by 1 degree or so.  They then claim these events are more frequent and more powerful, which can be quickly debunked with just a few minutes of research.  This was a weather event and when "climate change" gets thrown out as the cause of every storm, skeptics tune out.  I believe we should do everything we can to clean our atmosphere and oceans, and I support initiatives to do so.  Pointing out the difference between weather and climate by using facts somehow makes me the moron...that's why this place sucks.

It was good information. I think that the change in climate is causing the traditional region of Tornado Alley to shift more eastward. I found this wiki page about it and it discusses a region coined "Dixie Alley" back in 1971. This doesn't alter the facts that you mention about frequency, etc. but I disagree with your statement that climate is not altering the weather events because how can it not, they are related.  Even if you don't want to get all hyperbolic like Lobo and freak out over a rare event, it is still related to the climate of our planet. Which I don't think we fully understand at all...we are still studying it and recorded history is just but a tiny fraction of this planet's existence.

Here is the thing I think we both agree on, the climate is going to alter no matter what people do, we are just hastening the change that will likely not support us anymore in the manner we are accustomed and then, not at all.  Is this inevitable? Yes Can we slow it down? I believe so, but the earth's orbital changes, solar variations and internal variability are gonna do what they do and I don't know that we will ever have the ability to control that at all.  

 

 

 

[fattyflattie 4636]

4 hours ago, Bullneck said:

Good to know you're a climate change denier, thought.

LOL.  Not a denier.  Also don't believe we have 12 years to correct it or we waste away.  

2 hours ago, burntorangebongos said:

Which I don't think we fully understand at all...we are still studying it and recorded history is just but a tiny fraction of this planet's existence.

Correct.

[wildcat09 29187]

11 hours ago, fattyflattie said:

Troublesome huh. It feels like it’s getting worse. All that matter imo. 

Here's the latest tornado chart (no idea why Hate posted a chart only showing tornado activity through 2010):

Looks a bit different, huh? Almost like there's a marked increase from the 1950s and 1960s?

As for the North Atlantic basin hurricane chart, well that stops at 2018. I wonder what things have been like in the North Atlantic basin the past few seasons? Oh, 2020 set the record for most named storms? Well it wasn't all bad, at least it gave us sports gambling in Louisiana. And as for AEI's strong tornado chart, they literally changed the methodology for measuring tornados in 2007 so it's extremely misleading to compare pre-2007 to post-2007. 

Maybe don't start your debunking research on right wing sites, guys.

[bluto 4873]

35 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

Here's the latest tornado chart (no idea why Hate posted a chart only showing tornado activity through 2010):

Looks a bit different, huh? Almost like there's a marked increase from the 1950s and 1960s?

As for the North Atlantic basin hurricane chart, well that stops at 2018. I wonder what things have been like in the North Atlantic basin the past few seasons? Oh, 2020 set the record for most named storms? Well it wasn't all bad, at least it gave us sports gambling in Louisiana. And as for AEI's strong tornado chart, they literally changed the methodology for measuring tornados in 2007 so it's extremely misleading to compare pre-2007 to post-2007. 

Maybe don't start your debunking research on right wing sites, guys.

Have to wonder just how good weather tech was at capturing official tornadoes, throw on the population differences between then and modern times as well in tornado prone areas in terms of just witnessing/reporting events. 

[High Plains Drifter 10970]

2 hours ago, burntorangebongos said:

It was good information. I think that the change in climate is causing the traditional region of Tornado Alley to shift more eastward. I found this wiki page about it and it discusses a region coined "Dixie Alley" back in 1971. This doesn't alter the facts that you mention about frequency, etc. but I disagree with your statement that climate is not altering the weather events because how can it not, they are related.  Even if you don't want to get all hyperbolic like Lobo and freak out over a rare event, it is still related to the climate of our planet. Which I don't think we fully understand at all...we are still studying it and recorded history is just but a tiny fraction of this planet's existence.

Here is the thing I think we both agree on, the climate is going to alter no matter what people do, we are just hastening the change that will likely not support us anymore in the manner we are accustomed and then, not at all.  Is this inevitable? Yes Can we slow it down? I believe so, but the earth's orbital changes, solar variations and internal variability are gonna do what they do and I don't know that we will ever have the ability to control that at all.  

 

 

 

 

These factors have close to no effect on the climate change we are experiencing over the span of the last few hundred years. These factors influence the climate over time spans much greater than the rate of changes we are experiencing now. The human effects on climate change completely override any changes caused by these factors.

 

You are repeating denialism talking points.

 

Please understand, I am not attacking you, I am pointing out common misconceptions about climate science and climate change. Misconceptions which are often deliberately exploited by deniers.