TheCatSite.com › Forums › General Forums › IMO: In My Opinion › Storm Alpha
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Storm Alpha

post #1 of 25
Thread Starter 
The busy Atlantic hurricane season has resulted in the using up of all the names for hurricanes. Wilma was the last and 21st storm name for 2005. Therefore for the new storm forming in the Caribbean, it is going to be named after Greek Alphabets.
post #2 of 25
Just as an aside, why can't they use the last three letters?

Xavier
Yolande
Zelda
post #3 of 25
There's a different list of names every year. There aren't that many names starting with those letters. So if they had to come up with different names using those letters every year, pretty soon they'd run out of names. That's my theory, anyway.
post #4 of 25
its a cycle or revelations your pick
post #5 of 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by sharky
its a cycle or revelations your pick

I was going to remark same. Should 'Biblical' be a poll option? You can't help but wonder after tsunami, earthquake, Katrina, countless other storms......
post #6 of 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by Deb25
I was going to remark same. Should 'Biblical' be a poll option? You can't help but wonder after tsunami, earthquake, Katrina, countless other storms......


I would have voted for biblical too.........
post #7 of 25
I, too, believe this is completely Biblical. Things will only get worse, but I plan to not be here to see it all. Hope you'll be with me.
post #8 of 25
It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that the rate at which we are completely destroying our earth has a lot to do with this.

Mother Nature always, always, always wins. If she has to obliterate all life on this planet in order to fix the mess we've made, then that's what it will come to.
post #9 of 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by rapunzel47
Just as an aside, why can't they use the last three letters?

Xavier
Yolande
Zelda
My memory isn't what it used to be, but I heard on our local radio station last week that it was because the hurricane names had to be able to be translated and the language of translation didn't recognize X, Y and Z and that any further hurricanes this year would be named starting with the greek alphabet.
post #10 of 25
I don't think there has ever been a Hurrican "Hope", has there?
post #11 of 25
I think it's just a natural cycle. I also think it's rather egotistical to think that we small humans can make that much of an impact on the global ecosystem in such a relatively small amount of time.

I mean, I'm no scientist, but if it's all because of human beings and SUVs and industrial waste, how did the world warm up enough to end the Ice Age without our intervention?
post #12 of 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by valanhb
I also think it's rather egotistical to think that we small humans can make that much of an impact on the global ecosystem in such a relatively small amount of time.
You mean the billions of us? That adds up.

On the right day I can look outside and see a nice layer of smog blanket the area. I can't imagine we have no affect on things.
post #13 of 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by eatrawfish
You mean the billions of us? That adds up.

On the right day I can look outside and see a nice layer of smog blanket the area. I can't imagine we have no affect on things.
But that layer of smog is in one small area of the earth. Yes, California has pretty much hosed up their air, but I can tell you that over 98% of Colorado the air is quite clean - 100% compared to many parts of California. Also, not all of the billions of people drive cars and use all of those products that "destroy" the earth - there's a lot of non-industrialized parts of the world. There are a lot of areas on this Earth that don't have the same problems as California.
post #14 of 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by valanhb
But that layer of smog is in one small area of the earth. Yes, California has pretty much hosed up their air, but I can tell you that over 98% of Colorado the air is quite clean - 100% compared to many parts of California. Also, not all of the billions of people drive cars and use all of those products that "destroy" the earth - there's a lot of non-industrialized parts of the world. There are a lot of areas on this Earth that don't have the same problems as California.
A lot of the area's that have trouble now (CA not being the only one - Los Angeles lost smog capital title a few years ago) didn't have any of these problems a hundred years ago. To my mind it stands to reason that in the next hundred years if we keep this up more areas will start showing similar signs.

Furthermore, a lot of places that get affected by things like global warming will be the poor areas with limited resources. So the US won't be in as bad shape as other poorer regions.

Now, I will say that I am no scientist and have no researched extensively on how the storms may be related to global warming etc., but you also said you were no scientist either.
post #15 of 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by eatrawfish
A lot of the area's that have trouble now (CA not being the only one - Los Angeles lost smog capital title a few years ago) didn't have any of these problems a hundred years ago. To my mind it stands to reason that in the next hundred years if we keep this up more areas will start showing similar signs.

Furthermore, a lot of places that get affected by things like global warming will be the poor areas with limited resources. So the US won't be in as bad shape as other poorer regions.

Now, I will say that I am no scientist and have no researched extensively on how the storms may be related to global warming etc., but you also said you were no scientist either.
You're right Sara. Neither one of us can say anything other than what we understand to be scientific data and our own logic. From what I understand, the real scientists can't come to any kind of agreement on this subject. For every study supporting global warming, there is one refuting it.
post #16 of 25
What people don't seem to remember is that climate is always changing. The earth cycles between cold and hot, wet and dry. The Sahara hasn't always been a desert. It may be or it may not be that mankind has an effect on the rate of climate change. That hasn't been proved yet. But one thing that climate change means is more volatile weather -- more severe storms, wetter, dryer, hotter, colder -- as the transition is taking place. This happens over thousands of years, so with our short time horizon, we don't see the big picture.
post #17 of 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by coaster
What people don't seem to remember is that climate is always changing. The earth cycles between cold and hot, wet and dry. The Sahara hasn't always been a desert. It may be or it may not be that mankind has an effect on the rate of climate change. That hasn't been proved yet. But one thing that climate change means is more volatile weather -- more severe storms, wetter, dryer, hotter, colder -- as the transition is taking place. This happens over thousands of years, so with our short time horizon, we don't see the big picture.
Coaster is correct, as far as the research I've seen. Scientists don't dispute that global warming is a natural and cylclical phenomenon, as-is global cooling. The issue is, that there is evidence to suggest that the rate at which it is happening this time around has been accelerated due to human influences. The acceleration component is trouble, because even during "normal" such events many species die out because they can't adapt. If the rate is accelerated, the species extinction rate will climb as well, possibly to such an extent that the breaks in the food web jeopardize our own existence.

Bottom line is, you'll have trouble finding a reputable scientist who will state that global warming is not happening. Where you get disagreement is on how much human activities are contributing to it, and how much of a risk it poses.
post #18 of 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by Obi
Coaster is correct, as far as the research I've seen. Scientists don't dispute that global warming is a natural and cylclical phenomenon, as-is global cooling. The issue is, that there is evidence to suggest that the rate at which it is happening this time around has been accelerated due to human influences. The acceleration component is trouble, because even during "normal" such events many species die out because they can't adapt. If the rate is accelerated, the species extinction rate will climb as well, possibly to such an extent that the breaks in the food web jeopardize our own existence.

Bottom line is, you'll have trouble finding a reputable scientist who will state that global warming is not happening. Where you get disagreement is on how much human activities are contributing to it, and how much of a risk it poses.
But then you have to think along the lines of, ok, so the climate is changing, which may or may not be a bad thing, but what about the inner city kids who are getting asthma from all the fumes...
post #19 of 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by valanhb
I think it's just a natural cycle. I also think it's rather egotistical to think that we small humans can make that much of an impact on the global ecosystem in such a relatively small amount of time.

I mean, I'm no scientist, but if it's all because of human beings and SUVs and industrial waste, how did the world warm up enough to end the Ice Age without our intervention?
While I understand this sentiment, similar sentiments have been expressed about any number of resources, such as "over-fishing? Surely we can't possibly denude all of these fish, because the ocean is so large and we're so small". And yet, there are certain fish populations that we've driven nearly to extinction from overfishing. Remember, there are 6 billion of us on the planet. Also, many developing countries have only rudimentary industrialization, which means they are using the oldest, most pollutant-producing machinery and equipment. Ye gads, the level of air pollution in some developing nations is horrifying! You know, there are some countries that have had times when they've had to declare a state of emergency because of the condition of the air. Also, remember that the production of greenhouse gases and particulate matter is a problem that started back when humans started building large cities and using coal to heat homes (mid-1800's or earlier, I think); it isn't just the advent of the SUV.

EDIT: vis-a-vis the fumes, that is a separate issue from global warming, though there are areas of overlap. There are all sorts of nasty pollutants that don't contribute to global warming but do cause human respiratory disfunction. Any changes made to address that problem must encompass more than just greenhouse gases.
post #20 of 25
I completely agree. I believe humankind has had a HUGE impact on the nature of the environment and our planet. We upset the balance of nature with our development. We introduce species where they do not belong. We are growing in leaps and bounds, far faster than nature's cleansing process can keep up with.
post #21 of 25
Well, Bird Flu is coming around now and that should make short change of us - Its just another bubonic plague around the corner - About time we had some planet cleansing (And yes, I know this means me too)

And if you think humans have not had an impact on the planet because we are so small - Have a look at the changes in the carbon dioxide in the atmosphere since the industrial revolution - It has gone up exponentuially - And this can only be attributed to humans and this has increased greenhouse gases which has reduced the ozone layer (especially over Australia and Antarctica) which leads to increased UV light getting into the atmosphere which leads to warming.

Maybe cats can take over the planet??
post #22 of 25
jane_vernon has a point about cleansing. Whenever there are excesses, whether it occurs naturally (e.g. species overpopulation), or man-made (e.g. carbon dioxide build-up), nature has a way of dealing with it, one way or another. Maybe nature's way this time is to reduce the human population with a series of natural disasters or a world-wide epidemic.
post #23 of 25
And I would just like to make absolutely clear - That I meant NATURE cleansing the planet - NOT humans!!
post #24 of 25
Yup. That's what I understood you to say, and what I meant to say, also.
post #25 of 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by jane_vernon
And if you think humans have not had an impact on the planet because we are so small - Have a look at the changes in the carbon dioxide in the atmosphere since the industrial revolution - It has gone up exponentuially - And this can only be attributed to humans and this has increased greenhouse gases which has reduced the ozone layer (especially over Australia and Antarctica) which leads to increased UV light getting into the atmosphere which leads to warming.

Maybe cats can take over the planet??
I just have to add something here. Green house gases do not damage the ozone layer. Other chemicals, such as refrigerants and aerosol propellants are the cause of this. Also, UV rays do not cause global warming or heating. Yes, UV rays can burn you, but they do not produce heat. Infrared light is what causes heat and carbon dioxide gases help hold this heat in, instead of letting it escape back out into space. With that said I am not so sure we have anything to do with the increase of hurricanes yet. There are many factors that influence a hurricanes formation, not just the warm water. Yes, a hurricane must have warm water and the warmer, the better. But, a hurricane will not form, just because there is warm water. There are other major factors that will increase the chances of the storms formation, none of which have anything to do with how warm the water is or global warming. The fact that we had so many storms this year means nothing, other than it has been a busy hurricane year. I can remember back in the 70's, when we had such cold temperatures during the winter, that people started thinking we may have been heading back to an ice age. I remember having no school for a week, because of the extreme cold and huge amounts of snow. The 70's also saw snow fall for the first time in Miami Florida!! Did we have another ice age? Of course not. Something to look for however, is not in how many hurricanes we get, but how many strong hurricanes we get. This year DID see an increase in the number of Cat 5 storms. Could this mean anything? It is to early to say. If the next couple years also show a continued increase in the number of cat 5 storms, then I would say yes, we may be causing this problem with global warming. Here is something else to think about. I have heard some scientists argue that with global warming, we would have an increase in the ocean temperatures. With this increase in water temperature, there would also be an increase in the amount of water vapor in the air, whcih would/could lead to an increase of cloud cover over the earth. This increase in cloud cover would actually reduce the amount of sunlight and also reduce the overall temperature of the planet. Something else to think about I do agree however, that we must start now, to put an end to such global destruction of our environment.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: IMO: In My Opinion
TheCatSite.com › Forums › General Forums › IMO: In My Opinion › Storm Alpha