Mathematical model says climate change will make storms worse

Convective vortices release energy convectively into space.

The researchers claim their proposed "theory not only explains the intensity, but also sheds light on other basic features of convective vortices such as their physical appearance." Very good of them.

Better theory means better modeling possibilities. Science marches on.

The next six years will tell...

Tiberius wrote:

The "global warming" is a lie. What we have now is a normal Sun Cycle time. The cycle comes into effect in an averge of every 10.000 years. So what is the big deal about it? It was Ice Age, now we have Warm Age, in fact we see global cooling NOT warming. But it wouldn't be the zionbolshevik politicians if they wouldn't use this opportunity for their power- and money-grabbing agenda.
Remember: "global warming" is a LIE!

Well, forget the scientists who say there is a problem. If YOU say it's a lie, it must be so.

Why would Mercury shrink?

yeah, storms are get worse. wait a minute, misspoke there cause i failed to realize that no major hurricane has hit the US since 05 and the "experts" have to downsize their dire predictions each year. btw, consensus is not proof. if it were concrete proof, how can anyone dispute it? these same "experts" claim that the sun is to blame for the warming of the planets around us but has even less effect here than man. for those who buy into the global warming hoax, as yourself how come gore has made millions on the scare and still jets around the world on these huge jets.

strut2k wrote:

<quoted text>
Well, forget the scientists who say there is a problem. If YOU say it's a lie, it must be so.

And what about the scientist that say those scientist are wrong. Are they telling a lie as well?

I swear the turbulence I am feeling while flying seems to be getting worse by the day !!

How can they predict what the weather is going to be like years from now when they can barely predict what it will be tomorrow?

Placid wrote:

How can they predict what the weather is going to be like years from now when they can barely predict what it will be tomorrow?

I think, through math modelling, it would be easier to predict general future trends than very current actual weather.

http://www.wunderground.com/tropical/

i like this one better

coward wrote:

<quoted text>
I think, through math modelling, it would be easier to predict general future trends than very current actual weather.

computer modelling is so bad that they cannot even make a good model of the past yet, even with the data available. You put in what you want to get the answer you want. This is no more than "IF" and "perhaps" science.

Hmmm? I wonder if this means the woolly worms will be lighter this fall. Or, hmmm maybe darker! Did anyone ask Al about all of this stuff?

A mathematical model about climate change?
Who selected this article as a featured story? Did they read the article?
If it was a paid employee, fire them at once. You're throwing good payroll money away on somebody who thinks mathematical models will attract readers.
If a volunteer thought this was a winner, send him off to see Jesse Jackson. He'll know what to cut off.

Floods...it's global warming. Drought...global warming. Hurricanes...global warming. No hurricanes...GW. Tornados...global warming. If a camel passes gas in Morocco...global warming.

There was no bad weather before Al Gore showed up.

I notice they are calling it "climate change" now instead of GW, does the article state this "climate change" is caused by humans?

Know anything about fluid mechanics?

Ever heard of the Navier Stokes equations?

If not, look it up.

Here, to make it easier, this is from wiki:

"They are one of the most useful sets of equations because they describe the physics of a large number of phenomena of academic and economic interest. They may be used to model weather, ocean currents, water flow in a pipe, flow around an airfoil (wing), and motion of stars inside a galaxy. "

Well they have already been proven wrong, wrong, wrong, when it comes to Hurricanes.

For some strange and unknown mysterious reason that is beyond scientific understanding of the global climatologist environmental global warming green think tank, the Hurricanes over the last three years have become fewer and fewer?

But they were supposed to get bigger and more frequent?

We were supposed to be under water here in FL, but somehow we are in a drought?

And there are glaciers in certain parts of the world that are becoming bigger and bigger!

How can this be?

How can these scientists be constantly wrong?

Over and over again?

Truth wrote:

I notice they are calling it "climate change" now instead of GW, does the article state this "climate change" is caused by humans?

I love this one!

Yes sir, now-a-days we don't refer to the poor urban areas as ghettos or da-hood, no sir, we call them "socio-economically deprived neighborhoods".

Now they don't call it Global Warming anymore. Now its "Climate Change". As if this is something new.

Look, the climate, its changing? Weird. Ever since
Al Gore lost his run for the US Presidency, the climate began to change.

Since the big bang, the climate has been changing.
Its almost like saying, were not aging, we are "human changing".

My God man, the universe and everything in it is basically a mass of perpetual change.

I call Bull Hawkie!!!!!

Remember when chaos theory was all the rage?(Mandelbot sets, etc.) One of the conclusions was that it was impossible to predict weather very far into the future with a mathematical model.

Of course, Al Gore never heard of chaos theory (although he might have a pretty good claim to inventing it) so he happily makes lots of conflicting predictions into the future.

In 1980 he predicted a seal level rise of 20-50 feet by the year 2000. In 2000 he attended a campaign fund raiser in a Hamptons mansion on the beach.

No one informed Al that he was at least 20 feet underwater. Gives new meaning to "money laundering" and being "all wet". Oh well, that's what happens when there is "no controlling scientific authority".