[Keefelane66]

Originally Posted by tvbound

"Yes -- that is correct -- the summers are getting cooler. It is obvious to those who look at data. "


Umm, no, that is totally incorrect. Suggest more research with legitimate sources - not just from climate denier/conspiracy sites.

U.S. sweltered through third-hottest summer on record | National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

The answer you will get is thermometer was in wrong location to accurately record temperature.

[sounding]

Instead of believing the "narrative" just try plotting the "data" for yourself. There is no conspiracy with data. Here is the Florida Climate Center data ... Downloadable Data - Florida Climate Center And here is the national NOAA data site ... Index of /pub/data/ushcn/v2.5 Let me know what you find.

[KAM+6]

Originally Posted by KAM+6

What about the rainfall totals to an already saturated ground and are the retention ponds at near capacity? What say you.

Soundings, maybe you missed my question. The concern in TV is the rainfall amount projected to be 13 inches.

[sounding]

Sounds good to me. SE Florida is still in a drought. Don't forget to turn your lawn sprinkles off.

[Velvet]

I guess whoever was looking for more hurricanes in TV had their prayer answered. I just love that no matter what happens, we can always blame it on climate change. And then, of course, blame climate change on people.

[KAM+6]

Originally Posted by sounding

Sounds good to me. SE Florida is still in a drought. Don't forget to turn your lawn sprinkles off.

But but but!!This is not SE Florida. Hopefully we can accommodate 13" of water.

[oldtimes]

Originally Posted by Velvet

I guess whoever was looking for more hurricanes in TV had their prayer answered. I just love that no matter what happens, we can always blame it on climate change. And then, of course, blame climate change on people.

Exactly, they are trying to tell us that hurricanes have gotten worse because of climate change but if you google strongest hurricanes you will see this is not a new occurrence it is just hyped more.

Strongest U.S. Hurricanes

Labor Day Hurricane of 1935: 185-mph in Florida
Hurricane Camille (1969): 175-mph in Mississippi
Hurricane Andrew (1992): 165-mph in Florida
Hurricane Michael (2018): 155-mph in Florida
Hurricane Ida (2021): 150-mph in Louisiana;
Hurricane Laura (2020): 150-mph in Louisiana;
Hurricane Charley (2004): 150-mph in Florida;
1932 Freeport Hurricane: 150-mph in Texas;
1919 Florida Keys Hurricane: 150-mph in Florida

[tuccillo]

Numerical Weather Prediction models include subroutines to compute the heating (or cooling) rates from longwave and shortwave radiation. The longwave codes account for the effects of CO2 and the CO2 level in an input (along with specific humidity, temperature, modeled clouds, etc.). I don't recall what value I used when I was doing model development at NCEP. CO2 is an important part of the radiative transfer calculations that are performed in these codes. A previous post that suggesting some sinister element to the inclusion of CO2 in the radiative transfer calculations is comical, at best. The ECMWF IFS model (in it's many versions) has had a small performance advantage over the NCEP GFS code (in it's many versions) for the last 40 years as measured by the 500mb anomaly correlation coefficient. Both models have improved over the years at about the same rate. However, it is a little bit like comparing apples to oranges. The IFS has a later data dump and I believe they dedicate more computing resources to the simulation than NCEP because NCEP has many more modeling requirements.

Originally Posted by kkingston57

Agree the EURO Models out perform the GFS Models. Models are built/programmed based upon atmospheric condtions and sea water temperagture at the time of the storm with super computers. Never heard that these models has anything which would link direct affect of CO2 on present condions.

Original post now ironic. Florida is now facing 155 mph storm and if track stayed at or near Tampa, people in TV would be facing possible catastrophic damages.

[oldtimes]

Originally Posted by tuccillo

Numerical Weather Prediction models include subroutines to compute the heating (or cooling) rates from longwave and shortwave radiation. The longwave codes account for the effects of CO2 and the CO2 level in an input (along with specific humidity, temperature, modeled clouds, etc.). I don't recall what value I used when I was doing model development at NCEP. CO2 is an important part of the radiative transfer calculations that are performed in these codes. A previous post that suggesting some sinister element to the inclusion of CO2 in the radiative transfer calculations is comical, at best. The ECMWF IFS model (in it's many versions) has had a small performance advantage over the NCEP GFS code (in it's many versions) for the last 40 years as measured by the 500mb anomaly correlation coefficient. Both models have improved over the years at about the same rate. However, it is a little bit like comparing apples to oranges. The IFS has a later data dump and I believe they dedicate more computing resources to the simulation than NCEP because NCEP has many more modeling requirements.

So nice to see you posting. I always appreciate your insights as well as Mike’s Weather Page when we have a hurricane.

[Velvet]

Originally Posted by tuccillo

Numerical Weather Prediction models include subroutines to compute the heating (or cooling) rates from longwave and shortwave radiation. The longwave codes account for the effects of CO2 and the CO2 level in an input (along with specific humidity, temperature, modeled clouds, etc.). I don't recall what value I used when I was doing model development at NCEP. CO2 is an important part of the radiative transfer calculations that are performed in these codes. A previous post that suggesting some sinister element to the inclusion of CO2 in the radiative transfer calculations is comical, at best. The ECMWF IFS model (in it's many versions) has had a small performance advantage over the NCEP GFS code (in it's many versions) for the last 40 years as measured by the 500mb anomaly correlation coefficient. Both models have improved over the years at about the same rate. However, it is a little bit like comparing apples to oranges. The IFS has a later data dump and I believe they dedicate more computing resources to the simulation than NCEP because NCEP has many more modeling requirements.

Just when you’re needed most, you’re back!

[kkingston57]

Originally Posted by oldtimes

Exactly, they are trying to tell us that hurricanes have gotten worse because of climate change but if you google strongest hurricanes you will see this is not a new occurrence it is just hyped more.

Strongest U.S. Hurricanes

Labor Day Hurricane of 1935: 185-mph in Florida
Hurricane Camille (1969): 175-mph in Mississippi
Hurricane Andrew (1992): 165-mph in Florida
Hurricane Michael (2018): 155-mph in Florida
Hurricane Ida (2021): 150-mph in Louisiana;
Hurricane Laura (2020): 150-mph in Louisiana;
Hurricane Charley (2004): 150-mph in Florida;
1932 Freeport Hurricane: 150-mph in Texas;
1919 Florida Keys Hurricane: 150-mph in Florida

Noted Charlie and Andew. Both were fast moving small storms. Ian just hit with 155 mph and affected much larger area of Florida and was in SW Florida for hours. No matter what happens, $ amounts of damages will increase exponentially due to more and more people moving into Florida.