I Will Never Understand Wind

The chemistry is pretty straightforward (I'm told) and it is a near
certaintly that humans are contributing to global warming through greenhouse
gasses as well as deforesting. The real issue, as you point out, is that we
don't know what would be happening if humans were not contributing. We
could be a small part of the problem or a large one, there is no way to
know. Climate data is so chaotic that it is difficult to filter the signal
from the noise.

Of course, there are other good reasons to be more efficient with fossil
fuels besides global warming.

Mike
MU-2


"Denny" wrote in message
oups.com...
We have been in "global warming" some 20,000 - 30,000 years now and the
"warming" continues apace and on schedule... Being that there was no
industrial activity, CFC spray cans, or SUV's, around some 20,000 -
30,000 years ago when the latest ice age reversed itself, global
warming replaced global cooling, the glaciers began retreating, and the
sea began rising, I doubt that a science based connection between
modern activity and global warming can be established with any degree
of verifiability or certainty... Of course, those who are emotionally
invested in the Kyoto Treaty, etc. and/or have an agenda will totally
ignore the scientific fact that we have been in a state of massive
global warming for more than 20,000 years, not just the last 150 years
since the industrial revolution...

Another pertinent point is that the ice age (our ice age with a glacial
moraine just a half dozen miles from where I sit) just past is simply
the most recent one in a sequence of some 30 to 50 ice ages covering a
span in excess of one quarter of a billion years.... Which company or
government do we blame for the previous 30-50 global warmings?

cheers ... denny

On Fri, 06 May 2005 01:57:31 GMT, "Mike Rapoport"
wrote:



Of course, there are other good reasons to be more efficient with fossil
fuels besides global warming.

Mike
MU-2


Yes. Running the lawn mowers around a nuclear plant to charge
electrical cars. Someone will complain about that.

Mike Weller
"Denny" wrote in message
roups.com...
We have been in "global warming" some 20,000 - 30,000 years now and the
"warming" continues apace and on schedule... Being that there was no
industrial activity, CFC spray cans, or SUV's, around some 20,000 -
30,000 years ago when the latest ice age reversed itself, global
warming replaced global cooling, the glaciers began retreating, and the
sea began rising, I doubt that a science based connection between
modern activity and global warming can be established with any degree
of verifiability or certainty... Of course, those who are emotionally
invested in the Kyoto Treaty, etc. and/or have an agenda will totally
ignore the scientific fact that we have been in a state of massive
global warming for more than 20,000 years, not just the last 150 years
since the industrial revolution...

Another pertinent point is that the ice age (our ice age with a glacial
moraine just a half dozen miles from where I sit) just past is simply
the most recent one in a sequence of some 30 to 50 ice ages covering a
span in excess of one quarter of a billion years.... Which company or
government do we blame for the previous 30-50 global warmings?

cheers ... denny

Of course, there are other good reasons to be more efficient with
fossil
fuels besides global warming.


Mike
MU-2

************************************************** ******************************

YES, absolutely - the more efficient we are with conserving fossil
fuels the MORE fuel we have left to put through an airplane engine...
Now I see the light oh rapture

Now, having been facetious, I'll get serious... Your points are valid,
we simply don't know what the contribution of CO2 by our activities is
doing to the rate of warming... As you point out, it is a tiny signal
buried in a very noisy bandwidth... And I have little, to no, patience
with the hyper emotional who substitute endorphin stimulation for
critical thought... They have to be aware that one good volcano fart
equals total human production of CO2, CO, sulphur, etc., for a
considerable time period...

BTW, the image of a volcano fart came from John Galban's post... kudos,
John, you had me chuckling with that one....

I will correct one item I rattled off on the spur of the moment and
that is CFC's... The data is there to support the theory that CFC
emanations do injure the ozone layers, and therefore reduction of CFC's
being loosed into the atmosphere is necessary...

denny

Jay Honeck wrote:

Today, for the first time in weeks, dawned clear, cool, and calm. After
a VERY early spring (with temps in the 80s for over a week), we have
experienced extremely high winds and record COLD temps.

snip

I poked a hole in the sky for about an hour on Wednesday evening. Took off
on 28 with information Hotel, on return they were using 10 and information
was Juliet.

--
Frank....H

I poked a hole in the sky for about an hour on Wednesday evening. Took off
on 28 with information Hotel, on return they were using 10 and information
was Juliet.

Ah, yes -- back to the wind!

The very next day after my original post (yesterday, Thursday) Mary and I
took off for Ft. Dodge, Iowa -- about 130 nm due west.

When we departed Iowa City, winds were light and variable, and conditions
were smooth en route at 3500 feet.

About half way there, we had to climb to 5500 feet to stay out of the bumps.
Another 15 minutes, and we went up to 7500 feet, and it was still unstable
air.

Interestingly, the winds aloft were light -- we had, at most, a 10 knot
headwind. However, as we approached Ft. Dodge, I listened to their AWOS,
and was amazed to hear surface winds were 190 at 20, gusts to 27!

Since they didn't have a north/south runway -- and we were just out screwing
around -- we looked for an airport with a runway more aligned with the wind.
Finding "Eagle Grove" on the moving map nearby, I landed on their turf Rwy
19 -- into an absolutely gale-force wind! It was so strong, I had some
difficulty standing on the wing, and Mary opted to let me fly the return leg
home. (But not until after we spent an enjoyable hour shooting the breeze
with the new FBO/A&P on the field -- a guy who was obviously very lonely and
starved for company!)

Much to Mary's chagrin, we had an uneventful flight back to Iowa City --
just 130 nm East, mind you -- and landed with the winds once again light and
variable.

That was the biggest wind gradient I've ever seen in such a short distance
without crossing any discernible weather boundary. There was no front, no
storm, no low pressure nearby -- NOTHING to explain such a huge difference
in wind in such a short distance.

Bizarre winds in springtime, for sure.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"
"Frank" wrote in message ...
Jay Honeck wrote:


--
Frank....H