[Miekies]

Originally Posted by jojo

I had screen damage from Nicole and called the insurance company because I need to replace a large birdcage screen. Parts could be repaired but it was old and we were considering replacing it. I assumed the wind deductible on our policy would apply which is $1000. They said no the hurricane deductible applied which is 2% of home value. I said it was a tropical storm. They said it was a hurricane when it made landfall therefore hurricane deductible applied. Ugh! We have never made a claim for home insurance ever and I guess that continues.

Pretty sure if it's a named storm, regardless of TS or hurricane status the deductible is higher.

[ThirdOfFive]

Originally Posted by sounding

The Weather Club does not do narrative, agenda, belief, consensus, rumor, or discounts -- only data. If you have data other than what is presented or discussed please provide -- for that is how science moves forward. For example, if you have evidence that Nicole hit Florida as a hurricane, please provide a sample Florida wind report. Also, if you have data showing that hurricanes are increasing, please provide that. If you can show that the earth has warmed for the last 7 years then please provide that data. If you know why the EPA refuses to make public the logic they used to claim CO2 is causing climate harm, please so provide.

Data is one thing. HOW that data is described, can be quite another.

Back in the day, living as a lad and young adult in the wilds of Northern Minnesota, we experienced a weather phenomenon called a “Canadian High”. Canadian highs usually followed a blizzard or a period of heavy snow. They were characterized by clear, bright blue skies, falling temperatures, and intermittent wind. Canadian highs were welcome; there was always cleanup after a heavy snow; plowing, shoveling, sometimes chainsaw work because of fallen trees and limbs, etc. Plus, the falling temps made icy roads better to drive on: anyone who has experienced a northern Minnesota winter can vouch firsthand for the fact that ice-covered roads at -30 degrees have MUCH better traction than those at, say, +30.

Then, one day, we no longer had “Canadian Highs”. They were instead called “Polar Vortexes”, with all the sinister connotations one could derive from the name. Meteorologists from Duluth to International Falls solemnly warned mothers of young children that the approaching polar vortex could contain GAWDawfully dangerous cold temps, to keep the tykes bundled up, don’t let ‘em outside alone, etc. etc., as well as depending on the depth of cold and velocity of expected wind, warnings about EXPOSED FLESH CAN FREEZE IN _____ MINUTES!!! Gone we’re the days of the welcome Canadian highs, being replaced instead by the apocalyptic warnings and admonishments regarding the upcoming polar vortex.

Some years after the name change, one of the meteorologists up there admitted that the name change was to make the event “more newsworthy”. Says a lot, perhaps too much, not about WHAT we are being told but WHY. Is panic more newsworthy? Apparently so.

So…yeah. Present the data. But keep the unnecessary flourishes out of it.

[Worldseries27]

Originally Posted by sounding

this will be the opening discussion at thursday's (nov 17) weather club meeting at 1:30 pm at laurel manor. There is no data showing hurricane force winds came with nicole -- only tropical storm force winds. This is why the weather channel stopped reporting winds as nicole hit the coast.

so no response to post # 17

[sounding]

Originally Posted by Worldseries27

so no response to post # 17

The Weather Club is about data. What data are you talking about?

[jimjamuser]

Originally Posted by Taltarzac725

Florida county puts damage from Nicole at $522 million | AP News

Nicole hit Florida very hard however you want to describe it.

Well, that link says that Nicole was a Category 1 HURRICANE when it hit. To me, the important thing was the link ALSO said that it was ONLY the 3 rd hurricane to hit Florida since 1853 when records started being kept. That fact coupled with the record Gulf summer temperatures leads ME to BELIEVE the predictions that the EARTH will keep having record heat for the next 30 years. Also, the FACT that worldwide the coral is dying and will be down to only 10% by 2090.

Global warming was mentioned, so I thought about the recent World Conference on the subject. The world considers it a GIANT problem even though perhaps our local weather club may think otherwise. Maybe they want to debate that out with Greta Thunberg. If they can get her here, then I WOULD attend that meeting.

[sounding]

Originally Posted by ThirdOfFive

Data is one thing. HOW that data is described, can be quite another.

Back in the day, living as a lad and young adult in the wilds of Northern Minnesota, we experienced a weather phenomenon called a “Canadian High”. Canadian highs usually followed a blizzard or a period of heavy snow. They were characterized by clear, bright blue skies, falling temperatures, and intermittent wind. Canadian highs were welcome; there was always cleanup after a heavy snow; plowing, shoveling, sometimes chainsaw work because of fallen trees and limbs, etc. Plus, the falling temps made icy roads better to drive on: anyone who has experienced a northern Minnesota winter can vouch firsthand for the fact that ice-covered roads at -30 degrees have MUCH better traction than those at, say, +30.

Then, one day, we no longer had “Canadian Highs”. They were instead called “Polar Vortexes”, with all the sinister connotations one could derive from the name. Meteorologists from Duluth to International Falls solemnly warned mothers of young children that the approaching polar vortex could contain GAWDawfully dangerous cold temps, to keep the tykes bundled up, don’t let ‘em outside alone, etc. etc., as well as depending on the depth of cold and velocity of expected wind, warnings about EXPOSED FLESH CAN FREEZE IN _____ MINUTES!!! Gone we’re the days of the welcome Canadian highs, being replaced instead by the apocalyptic warnings and admonishments regarding the upcoming polar vortex.

Some years after the name change, one of the meteorologists up there admitted that the name change was to make the event “more newsworthy”. Says a lot, perhaps too much, not about WHAT we are being told but WHY. Is panic more newsworthy? Apparently so.

So…yeah. Present the data. But keep the unnecessary flourishes out of it.

Ditto. With the media, it's all about sensationalism -- because it sells. All this verbiage about Polar Vortex, Atmospheric Rivers ... and no doubt more to come ... are nothing new -- just flowery labels for atmospheric characteristics that have been going on for millions of years. But in the Weather Club, hype and consensus are replaced by data.

[jimjamuser]

Originally Posted by Worldseries27

see above. Anyway, i'll repeat, " to what end?"

Personally and for what it is worth, I don't use OP. I prefer to say thread starter.

[sounding]

Originally Posted by jimjamuser

Well, that link says that Nicole was a Category 1 HURRICANE when it hit. To me, the important thing was the link ALSO said that it was ONLY the 3 rd hurricane to hit Florida since 1853 when records started being kept. That fact coupled with the record Gulf summer temperatures leads ME to BELIEVE the predictions that the EARTH will keep having record heat for the next 30 years. Also, the FACT that worldwide the coral is dying and will be down to only 10% by 2090.

Global warming was mentioned, so I thought about the recent World Conference on the subject. The world considers it a GIANT problem even though perhaps our local weather club may think otherwise. Maybe they want to debate that out with Greta Thunberg. If they can get her here, then I WOULD attend that meeting.

The AP is a great source of climate misinformation #1. For example, over 100 hurricanes have hit Florida since 1853 ... Why Does Florida Have So Many Hurricanes? - AZ Animals

[sounding]

Originally Posted by jimjamuser

Well, that link says that Nicole was a Category 1 HURRICANE when it hit. To me, the important thing was the link ALSO said that it was ONLY the 3 rd hurricane to hit Florida since 1853 when records started being kept. That fact coupled with the record Gulf summer temperatures leads ME to BELIEVE the predictions that the EARTH will keep having record heat for the next 30 years. Also, the FACT that worldwide the coral is dying and will be down to only 10% by 2090.

Global warming was mentioned, so I thought about the recent World Conference on the subject. The world considers it a GIANT problem even though perhaps our local weather club may think otherwise. Maybe they want to debate that out with Greta Thunberg. If they can get her here, then I WOULD attend that meeting.

The AP is a great source of misinformation #2. How can they say Florida was hit by a hurricane if there is no data to support the claim? It's kinda like saying DDT causes cancer -- but it does not.

[jimjamuser]

Originally Posted by sounding

Nothingcane Nicole is only the beginning of the meeting, because it is current events. All weather club meetings start with current events -- which is what many are interested in. After Nicole is a discussion of EPA's failure to use government weather data when creating their Endangerment Finding -- which is the legal basis of the Green New Deal. It's a minor issue, but important to some.

So, I am guessing that the 2nd part of the meeting is to "throw shade" on the Green New Deal and say that WIND generators lower property value, make people sterile, and are the work of the devil. Then the meeting finishes up with a rousing chorus of " the Flat Earth Society's Theme Song"

[jimjamuser]

Originally Posted by sounding

The Weather Club does not do narrative, agenda, belief, consensus, rumor, or discounts -- only data. If you have data other than what is presented or discussed please provide -- for that is how science moves forward. For example, if you have evidence that Nicole hit Florida as a hurricane, please provide a sample Florida wind report. Also, if you have data showing that hurricanes are increasing, please provide that. If you can show that the earth has warmed for the last 7 years then please provide that data. If you know why the EPA refuses to make public the logic they used to claim CO2 is causing climate harm, please so provide.

Increased ocean CO2 has already caused worldwide reef coral to DIE. That is an established FACT. Just like worldwide glaciers are retreating. And large areas of Arctic peat-covered lands are burning adding more CO2. Just more FACTS.

[sounding]

Originally Posted by jimjamuser

So, I am guessing that the 2nd part of the meeting is to "throw shade" on the Green New Deal and say that WIND generators lower property value, make people sterile, and are the work of the devil. Then the meeting finishes up with a rousing chorus of " the Flat Earth Society's Theme Song"

The Weather Club does not throw anything, but instead examines data. In this case the EPA Endangerment Finding gives Congress the legal basis to implement the Green New Deal, because it "claims" CO2 and other greenhouse gases are harming the climate -- and that Finding lists specific claims -- which are easily checked against the government's own official data. Anyone who looks at the "data" as compared to the "claims" can see a problem. Would like the URL to see the EPA IG Report?

[sounding]

Originally Posted by jimjamuser

Increased ocean CO2 has already caused worldwide reef coral to DIE. That is an established FACT. Just like worldwide glaciers are retreating. And large areas of Arctic peat-covered lands are burning adding more CO2. Just more FACTS.

While facts can be fun, data trumps facts all the time. You know people are dying all the time -- everyday -- and yet the world population keeps growing. And corals, they die too, as they have been doing for millions of years. How do you think the coral foundations can be thousands of feet thick? Plus, the data shows coral are doing just fine because they love warm water -- which is why they grow in the world's warmest waters ... https://www.thegwpf.org/content/uplo...eid=2757d1864c

[sounding]

Originally Posted by jimjamuser

Increased ocean CO2 has already caused worldwide reef coral to DIE. That is an established FACT. Just like worldwide glaciers are retreating. And large areas of Arctic peat-covered lands are burning adding more CO2. Just more FACTS.

Why are you worried about more CO2? It is plant food, and it helps keep the earth warm. Each time over the past several thousand years, the climate has been warmer than today, and they are called the climatic optimums, because those were the times when civilizations thrived, while during the intermediate cooling periods, there was famine and depopulation -- like during the Little Ice Age.

[sounding]

Originally Posted by jimjamuser

Well, that link says that Nicole was a Category 1 HURRICANE when it hit. To me, the important thing was the link ALSO said that it was ONLY the 3 rd hurricane to hit Florida since 1853 when records started being kept. That fact coupled with the record Gulf summer temperatures leads ME to BELIEVE the predictions that the EARTH will keep having record heat for the next 30 years. Also, the FACT that worldwide the coral is dying and will be down to only 10% by 2090.

Global warming was mentioned, so I thought about the recent World Conference on the subject. The world considers it a GIANT problem even though perhaps our local weather club may think otherwise. Maybe they want to debate that out with Greta Thunberg. If they can get her here, then I WOULD attend that meeting.

The AP is a great source of climate misinformation #3. Regarding numbers of Florida hurricanes -- and those that attend the Weather Club already know this -- in 1947 (when CO2 levels were much lower) Florida was hit 6 times by 4 hurricanes! No one back then complained about climate change. Why didn't the AP story mention that?