Biblical in Boulder. Apocalyptic in Italy. (Sardinia, actually)
17 inches in 24 hours. That sounds normal.
The island, which draws royals, entrepreneurs and ordinary tourists alike during the dry, peak summer months, received more than 44 centimeters (17.3 inches) of rain in 24 hours Monday — half the amount it normally receives in a year, officials said.
Redskylite says of O-Log “…..it seems that you are very impatient for proof. Pity we cannot invent time travel for you”. I second that and ask where I can make donations to the “Send O-Log Back to the Future” fund. I will take out a (small) second mortgage if necessary.
I also second the thought that “Meanwhile we would be wise to accept the projections and warnings, and by all means highlight when extraordinary events take place”.
I repeat the question (that was evaded with an inanity about “October snow and ice ages” by O-Log) “O-Log, how many times has Sardinia seen 44 cm in 24 hours? Just curious”. I’m curious too. Half a year’s rain in 24 hours?
O-log states “I am not impatient for proof at all”. Of course he’s not impatient, because his incessant demands for such proof are designed to gain attention, obfuscate, confuse, and delay rather than illuminate. That’s where his impatience shows through—-he is so eager in his desire for attention that he throws much horsepucky against the wall in the hopes that some will stick, and he fails to make good arguments (or refute good arguments made by others).
smettere di essere un narcisista, O-Log!
Dumboldguy – yet another comment by you that contributes zero to the discussion
Anotheralionel – if the ipcc couldn’t attribute two months ago there is no need to waste time trying to attribute now. As you said, it’s another data point, and we cannot attribute it any more than we can attribute the dearth of atlantic hurricanes in 2013 to agw.
Lacking confidence in your reasoning abilities and much of the facts you post here, O-Log, I will leave it to the others to decide whether your comments or mine contribute more “zero” to the discussion.
Actually, many others have made good contributions to this thread, and I have felt little need to add more to what they say. You have probably not noticed because of your narcissism, but many of them have been ripping you new anal orifices along the way, and perhaps my greatest contribution here will be to say the things to you that they are thinking but don’t want to waste the time to say.
Although it is like trying to teach a pig to whistle, I have directed my efforts towards YOU more than the science of knee-deep rain in 24 hours in Sardinia (and that seems more incredible every time I look at it).
So, why have you just been dismissive of my comments rather than answer the specific questions and allegations in my comment? It is a tactic of narcissists to first attack and name call with their detractors (you’ve done that weeks ago), then attempt to be dismissive (as you’re doing here). Next will be just ignoring and not responding to my comments, to which I say GOOD—I (and others) will continue to point out your “logic fails”—if you don’t reply, that will save us much “delete” time.
Since you didn’t respond to “Smettere di essere un narcisista, O-Log!, I will try some other languages.
Verhindern, dass ein Narzisst, O-Log!
Cesser d’être un narcissique, O-Log!
Here you are omno’ some information produced using many other data points, where the dots are being connected.
But of course you will dismiss this with more buffoon quality rhetoric.
Do my tired old eyes deceive me? Looking at the map, is not Northwest Africa under a huge red blob of “record warm temperatures”? And is Sardinia not at the northeast tip of that red blob? Looks like “connected dots” to me.
Hmmmmmmmmmmmmm…………….O-Log?
Anotheralionel -no matter how many times I state that in my opinion the world has been warming and the pause/slowdown will stop soon, you are still stuck at showing me that…the world has been warming.
Let’s assume you’re a prisoner of a solipsism that prevents you from fruitful communication with human beings. That’s ok for me.
As expected. Omo’ slaloms around the main point,
Increased warming peps up the hydrological cycle and disturbs weather patterns producing deluges of an intensity and frequency not previously recorded in some parts whilst drying out others.
I am a victim of a solipsism.
What is it with such as omo’ – its always projection, like many who drop in at that site run by a weather school drop out. You are becoming downright tedious.
What escapes me is why people who profess certainty in climate projections decades hence, waste their time running after each and every weather disaster of the now.
If you’re certain of something act as if you were certain of it. It’s like Sherlock finding about Stapleton on page 330 and then Conan Doyle droning on for another thousand pages as Holmes looks for the culprit.
Well as yet the fat lady has not sung on that one, after all if the suppression of hurricanes is attributed to disturbed polar jet streams affecting wind-shear then maybe…
Besides, did you not notice the temperature anomalies? As I wrote – start joining the dots rather than focusing so as to obscure them.
Dumboldguy – you try talking about me, and I dismiss your comment. Seems the only reasonable option on my side. Rest assured if I were Mr Exxon or Gore’s lovechild, it’d rain the same in Sardinia and everywhere else.
And that’s it for the future -remember the rule when I’ll answer not a word.
No, O-Log, a “reasonable option”, (at least in the eyes of the rest of us), would be for you to stop being obstructive and destructive to the train of thought with your “it’s all about me” foolishness, and instead contribute some real science to the discussion.
You have succeeded in making another thread into “little or no fun”. Be sure to turn in a chit to your paymaster.
I am glad to hear that you are doing exactly what I predicted you would and will not respond to me in the future. (Narcissists are easy to figure—they live by certain “rules”). Thank you—it will save us all much time and wear and tear on our ‘delete” keys, particularly if you do that with all the others who point out your failings.
(And “Mr Exxon or Gore’s lovechild”? Lord love a duck, but that’s inane!)
Okay, let’s wrap this up.
Omnologos, I answered my question you myself here (to others: do you see how he uses the latter part of my comment to dodge main thrust of my comment pertaining to the topic of this blog post? I fed him that fodder myself, so no problem). You don’t have to thank me.
I repeat:
—
You can have the final word on this, omnologos. Perhaps, if you will, you can tell us how much extreme weather events on for instance Sardegna it takes for you to allow others to speculate on whether there’s an AGW influence? How much extreme weather events will it take for you to stop suggesting the influence is zero?
Oh, and last question: When do you plan on moving to Sardegna? 😉 😛
in 2013, there is no scientific argument for looking for attributable extreme events to global warming, anthropogenic or not. It’s all in AR5-WG1.
Maybe I haven’t made myself clear enough. My thinking is that this isn’t about the question “Was extreme weather event caused by AGW?”. It’s rather about “How much has AGW contributed to the extremeness of the extreme weather event?”
We all agree that the world has warmed and thus a lot of energy has been added to the coupled system of atmosphere and oceans. I don’t see how anyone can say the influence is zero, and I also don’t see how someone can maintain that this influence will remain zero in a world that continues to accumulate energy and warm up.
Just because we can’t measure it, doesn’t mean it isn’t there, and common sense tells us that when climate changes, (extreme) weather events also change.
NevenA: you don’t understand that a 1-in-X years event does not happen once every X years. Fundamental statistical misunderstanding on your part. I am not dodging your question, it’s simply that you do not appear to have the basis for an argument about it.
Don’t worry, I understand that. But if a 1-in-500 years event happens twice or thrice in a time span of 10-20 years, I don’t have to wait for statistic evidence (which takes time we might not have) to suspect there could be something going on there, given the fact that the globe is warming and thus the climate changing.
So we have warming and we have extreme record-breaking weather events. I think that’s a pretty good basis for the argument “the influence is not zero, and will not be in the foreseeable future”. I agree that it is not a good argument for “AGW caused extreme weather event X”, although this might change as well in the near future.
Okay, on to the next record-breaking weather event! Be safe, everyone! 😉
it took several days and a lot of clutter, but finally there is a well-reasoned response to my point. thank you. going off to work now, will reply later.
dude, this isn’t your job?
Calm down Peter…too many minds here are self-enfeebled by conspiracy theorisms already – now they’ll believe your hint. 😉
Actually, O-Log works very hard at his “job” as the the founder and CEO of a group titled LITOM (Legends In Their Own Mind), not to be confused with LITST (Legends In Their Spare Time), although there IS some overlap in membership between the two groups.
Unfortunately. O-Log has been denied membership in LITST because he works way too hard at being a legend in his own mind, and has thereby alienated the members of LITST, just as he has so many of us here.
Hum!
And just what do you think I was pointing out with my reference to Mediterranean temperature anomalies and the hydrological cycle?
It seems that unless things are laid out on a plate for you to see you don’t
want tounderstand.Cue more bilious rhetoric from the master of such.
For the last time this thread is about weather extremes and not temperatures.
“for the last time”
promise?
it takes around 24h for anotheralionel to forget everything, so it will be the last time until tomorrow, promise
Now what causes weather extremes?
So of course temperatures are relevant.
As for me forgetting things, that is downright silly and offensive.
I see you got distracted again, omnologos, but I hope you haven’t forgotten me. 🙂
NevenA
I don’t see how anyone can say the influence is zero, and I also don’t see how someone can maintain that this influence will remain zero in a world that continues to accumulate energy and warm up.
I haven’t said either, either…but as you mention, the question is “how much”. The current mainstream climate science answer is “not much at all (yet)” (that is of course different from “none”).
BTW I think the “additional energy” argument is too simplistic. There are powerful frontal systems in the Arctic winter, where it’s cold. And the strongest weather in the solar system isn’t where there is more energy (Jupiter), rather on Saturn and Neptune.
when climate changes, (extreme) weather events also change
Exactly. So when climate will change away from natural variability (ETA: 2020s-2030s according to the IPCC), we will be able to spot a change in (extreme) weather events away from natural variability. That’s not expected to be already happening now. Whoever claims otherwise need explain where ad how the IPCC went so wrong.
if a 1-in-500 years event happens twice or thrice in a time span of 10-20 years, I don’t have to wait for statistic evidence (which takes time we might not have) to suspect there could be something going on there
We are again at a question of degree. How much of that “something” is going on? If there were “much” or “a lot”, we would have heard about it and not just from Quickfire Media Meteorologists like Jeff Masters.
An interesting piece on climateprogress. It states that the half a year’s rain fell in one and one-half hours, not over twenty-four hours. Can that be true? It also references floods in Saudi Arabia, if you didn’t think that happened there.
http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2013/11/20/2972831/sardinia-flooding/
I don’t think that is correct.
I didn’t think so either, but some googling turned this up:
Some world record rainfall rates.
–1 MINUTE: 1.50 inches at Barot, Guadeloupe (Nov 26, 1970); a rate of 90 inches per hour if it could have kept going at that pace!
–42 minutes: 12.00 inches at Holt, Missouri (June 22, 1947); 17.14 inches per hour rate. (a similar record for Hawaii)
–1 HOUR: 15.78 inches in China (July 3, 1975).
–24 hours: 71.85 inches at La Reunion Island (January 7-8, 1966).
The United States 24-hour record is 43 inches at Alvin, TX on July 25-26, 1979.
I also spotted a new potential 1 minute record for Leh, India of 1.9 inches.
So 17+ inches in 1-1/2 hours is not impossible. Can some all knowing-all seeing person find us a definitive source on Sardinia?
PS There is some question as to how “official” some of the records are, but different sources agree on many of them, so…………..
I was all-seeing last night but local amateur weather clubs were still relatively uncommittal about the records. I’ll try again.
Google translate of a page containing an interesting map of previous 24-h precipitation maximums (records) between 1922 and Nov 17, 2013 (the day before the apocalyptic rain)
http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=it&tl=en&js=n&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fsardegna-clima.it%2Findex.php%2Fpagine-di-esempio%2F1142-piogge-torrenziali-del-18-novembre-da-record
in the last paragraph, “sin of lightness” should actually be “guilt of thoughtlessness”.
Yes, interesting. but doesn’t answer the question of whether it could have all fallen in 1-1/2 hours. Since all the other records I spotted were for places far removed from Sardinia, I think we can safely assume that this was a typo on climateprogress’ part.