Yes, you are confused...

You initially commented that the "Upper" river levels had no bearing on New Orleans...

Hence, I responded that the "Lower" river levels were normal as of November 19th...

Then, you pivoted to say it's not about "River Levels", but "Water Flow"...

So, your confusion is causing more confusion, since it's hard to figure out what you're actually arguing about.

Then let me try to clear it up…

The flooding was in the April/May timeframe up in Wisconsin and Minnesota. It is hard to imagine how a flooding event six months ago is affecting an area today, thousands of miles away.

Water levels do appear to be low in the Tennessee area which is affecting shipping. I did not see the location of the satay collected to generate the graph showing water levels in the lower Mississippi were normal. All I can assume is the satay was NOT collected near Tennessee.

The water levels in the New Orleans area are not lower than normal and they likely never are. The level of the Gulf controls those levels and I haven’t seen any reports that the Gulf is lower.

However, with lower water levels upstream, the volume of water flow is diminished which allows the Gulf to push up the river towards New Orleans. Recently, this salt incursion was found to be 63 miles upstream, close to New Orleans. This salt incursion is affecting the fresh water supply in the area.

It is a very long river. Different areas of the river are affected in different ways by the same drought conditions. Yes, there was Spring flooding in the far north but apparently that flooding six months ago was not enough to keep the river level high or the flow rate up today.

But there is flooding/high water levels upstream, even. now... That would cause an increased water flow, no?

And the chart I gave the link to included Memphis, and it stated the water levels were normal. T=hat would lead one to beleieve the "water flow" was normal, as well...

Then I guess those reading the water levels in Memphis and observing the shipping problems last month were letting their lying eyes deceive them. I’m not planning to make a trip to Tenn. to see for myself.

NOAA also shows no current flooding in parts of Illinois and Missouri.

If there is flooding upstream then eventually the water will make its way downstream. The page I found earlier measuring the salt incursion showed it had moved two miles south in the last week. So yeah, things may be changing.

The upper part of the river is controlled by locks and dams.The lower part of the river is not. An update, written 4 days ago, states prolonged drought has caused shipping problems because the river is narrow and shallow. I googled the words Mississippi River Drought since this is what is being questioned. From what I read and saw on videos, the Mississippi is at historic low levels.

I would assume if they opened the dams, there is not enough water to fill the river. This would cause complications along the entire river. The puzzling question for scientists is which will win? The upward flow of the ocean or the downward flow of the river.

Maybe we can contract the Chinese to fix the river. After all, they widened the Panama canal not too long ago. Man may not be able to train the weather but man can fix the side effects of weather. Probably cheaper than the fools errand of attempting to control the weather. ;) :popcorn:

Then I guess the link I posted, dated 11/19, showing normal river levels, was wrong as well...

Perhaps not wrong, just misleading.

Note that every line says either Normal or Not Defined but with no definition of what Normal means.

Every line also shows no flooding.

Some measurements for height in the northern section are 600+ feet. How can the river be running at 600ft above its typical level without that being a flood level?

Note that the Memphis height is -9ft which matches the NOAA chart.

To me, "Normal" is not informative. The heights *might* be useful but the 600+ measurements call those into question as well.

But your link is accurate and not misleading? If you say so...

Point out the inconsistencies in the NOAA data if you don't trust it.

Heck, I pointed out that where the two data sets can be easily compared, they match. They both show the river 9 feet below normal in Memphis. They both say there is no flooding along the river.

Are you really arguing that the river is over 600 feet above typical at several points but that is not a flood level and is just Normal?

Has not been called GLOBAL WARMING in almost ten years now. CLIMATE CHANGE is the wording now. It's easy to tell where you fall on this by using such a old outdated phrase.

I think you’re confused between global warming and climate changes.

So when sun don’t shine why does my solar light in back yard go dime or won’t come at night when day was cloudy???

Change
 

Yes, the term was changed so it fit the best look to still collect funds for politicians and scientists. Global warming wasn’t working out well. Climate change has more support because the term encompasses more ideas.

Climate change encompasses global warming. They are two different things. One is not a substitute for the other.

Global Warming: the warming of the planet (self explanatory) usually due to the greenhouse effect.

Climate Change: change in the weather over a long period of time (Again, self explanatory)

If you are talking about this year, which had record breaking, scorching heat, the cause is most likely global warming. It may sound counterintuitive but global warming includes snowstorms.

Climate change is change in weather for an extended period of time. You can say because of the same conditions happening in certain areas over the last few years, there has been a change in climate.

Yes, changing the name really means so much...

Not exactly.

Climate change: the change in the climate due to natural and anthropogenic causes.

Exactly! Completely different than the warming of the earth due to the greenhouse effect, isn't it? Which is the definition of global warming. Global Warming aids in Climate Change. It doesn't matter if you believe in global warming. They are still two DIFFERENT things.

Cloud and contrails are not the same.
Modern solar panels work on light.
Sunny will give best power output.
Cloudy lower power output, but still work.
Solar panels work in UK, and we have a public holiday if sun shines!

As for cheap Chinese garden lights, it's a wonder they work at all.:shrug:

A physical gas has no "greenhouse" properties...Cuz it's a gas.
Where do people get this crap? Their Idiot Box? Study Physics!

I guess scientists all over the world go to their idiot box because they have nothing better to do.

The political psychopaths are test-driving their latest climate scam in the Netherlands - Nitrogen as a "Greenhouse Gas" - in order to end fertilizer production and close farms. I don't think the Dutch people are that stupid.

Which ones? Can you at least try to be more specific/scientific?

I do not have to be specific. Look up the term greenhouse effect and educate yourself. With or without humans burning fossil fuels, the effect exists- Science 101. Without it, earth would be frozen.

Gases in our atmosphere trap the radiation of the sun. This is called the green house effect. This effect makes the earth warm and liveable. Humans burning fuels send more gases into the atmosphere. More gases in the atmosphere results in a warmer earth. Scientists believe human interference is causing global warming.

For those who should really experience what one is posting. There are a number of volunteer groups who travel to the glaciers every summer, to assist with testing. You spend 2 months traveling by foot, with pull sleds, (no dogs), so not to do harm.

One must be able to carry your backpack, experiencing the wonders of what this post is truly about. Age isn’t a factor, with some in their late 80s. Has to be more fun than googling.

No. CO2 absorbs strongly in the 15 micrometer window (and therefore absorbs terrestrial radiation). It is transparent to other portions of the electromagnetic spectrum. The net result is the lower troposphere warms and the stratosphere cools with increasing CO2 levels. Manabe published a paper about the impact in the 70’s but the effect has been realized for a much longer period of time. I have omitted many of the radiative transfer details that cause this effect because it is inappropriate for this forum (i.e. a discussion of the radiative transfer details will cause most people’s eyes to glaze over and I have learned with time not to bore people with technical details). To suggest that increasing CO2 does not have an impact on temperatures is really silly. Discussions about the magnitude of the impact to date, the impact in the future, whether it is really a problem, and what can be done if it is really a problem is more appropriate.

Where do you think the solar panels come from that are on homes today?

Same place, but they ain't cheap, and they are built to the tech/spec we have stupidly given away in pursuit of cheap labor and higher profit.

That’s because New Orleans below sea level.

Past time to make sure the dikes are in good shape or New Orleans is gonna be in deep sh ..... Too late!

:faint: Above or below sea level does not matter how the water is moving up the river. New Orleans could be 1000 feet above sea level and the low flow of the water would still allow ocean water to come up the river if the flow is low enough.

???

What anthropogenic cause?

OMG! Not again with the wilful ignorance of reality.

Let's talk about reality. How much did "man-made" CO2 warm the earth last year?

Let's not waste "our" time with rehashing all that has gone before in this and other threads. Let the REAL scientists deal with it and you won't have to worry about it.

Have a Joyous Holiday Season!

Another words, no one knows, so there is no "proof" man-made CO2 causes anything except a green planet.

It's Johns hobby let him ramble on.

LOL! I only know most on here by their post names. I used to have a great friend that I argued with about all sorts of things. Great mental exercise and great fun when the drinks were flowing. No minds were changed and no one was injured (physically or emotionally). I really miss him.

Enjoy the Holiday Season!

NASA has launched a spectrometer into space to measure manmade CO2 and methane emissions. The proof you are seeking will soon be available.