San Diego R
NWS San Diego
Meant to start this thread a couple of days ago. The REMNANTS of Hurricane Hillary will be dumping heavy rains in the West.
Eric gives an excellent discussion here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u0Y2CJKpWcE
+++++++++++++++++++++
Central Pacific Hurricane Center
https://www.nhc.noaa.gov/?epac
Discussion at this link
https://www.nhc.noaa.gov/text/refresh/MIATCDEP4+shtml/181451.shtml
Forecast graphic
https://www.nhc.noaa.gov/refresh/graphics_ep4+shtml/175024.shtml?cone#contents
Forecast for the remnants of Hillary the next 7 days below.
1. Weather map now.
2. In 24 hours and
3. In 48 hours.
https://www.wpc.ncep.noaa.gov/#
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Surface Weather maps for days 3-7 below:
https://www.wpc.ncep.noaa.gov/medr/medr.shtml
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The latest 7 day precip forecasts are below.
Day 1 below:
http://www.wpc.ncep.noaa.gov/qpf/fill_94qwbg.gif?1526306199054
Day 2 below:
http://www.wpc.ncep.noaa.gov/qpf/fill_98qwbg.gif?1528293750112
Day 3 below:
http://www.wpc.ncep.noaa.gov/qpf/fill_99qwbg.gif?1528293842764
Days 4-5 below:
http://www.wpc.ncep.noaa.gov/qpf/95ep48iwbg_fill.gif?1526306162
Days 6-7 below:
http://www.wpc.ncep.noaa.gov/qpf/97ep48iwbg_fill.gif?1526306162
7 Day Total precipitation below:
http://www.wpc.ncep.noaa.govcdx /qpf/p168i.gif?1530796126
++++++++++++++++++
Excessive rain threat.
https://www.wpc.ncep.noaa.gov/qpf/excess_rain.shtml
Current Day 1 Forecast
Day 1 Threat Area in Text Format
Current Day 2 Forecast |
This is why Hillary will NOT be a hurricane when it hits the Southwest.
Ocean temps, generally need to be 80+ to be favorable for hurricanes.
80 deg. F = 26.67 deg. C.
That temperature corresponds to the yellowish-green colors below, along the central/southern Baja peninsula of Mexico.
North of that, the cooler water and land will quickly kill the actual hurricane intensity. However, the remnants will STILL HAVE the moisture associated with it, so excessive rains in some places are unavoidable.
Main page for SST contours:
https://www.ospo.noaa.gov/Products/ocean/sst/contour/
East Pacific SST contour:
https://www.ospo.noaa.gov/data/sst/contour/uspacifi.cf.gif
+++++++++++++
I note that the media has gone into their "blind to the past" mode and verbiage to ascribe unprecedented or in this case “almost” unprecedented characteristics to current day weather systems. I get that warmer oceans increase rains and potential for stronger hurricanes but I also get when they are cherry picking and misleading.
1858 was at the end of the Little Ice Age. When ocean temperatures were 2 deg c cooler than this.
if a system stronger than this hit California in those cooler days, what does this tell you?
answer: that this is the result of natural variation.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1858_San_Diego_hurricane
The 1858 San Diego hurricane was a very rare hurricane that impacted Southern California. It is the only known tropical cyclone to directly impact California as a hurricane, although other systems have impacted California as tropical storms. The storm caused considerable damage to many homes and other structures in southern California, mainly around San Diego.[2] A later estimate indicated that if a similar storm happened in 2004, it would have caused $500 million (2004 USD) in damage.
+++++++++++++++
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hurricane_Nora_(1997)
Hurricane Nora-1997 was the first tropical cyclone to enter the Continental United States from the Pacific Ocean since Hurricane Lester in 1992. Nora was the fourteenth named tropical cyclone and the seventh hurricane of the 1997 Pacific hurricane season. The September storm formed off the Pacific coast of Mexico, and aided by waters warmed by the 1997–98 El Niño event, eventually peaked at Category 4 intensity on the Saffir–Simpson hurricane scale.
Nora took an unusual path, making landfall twice as a hurricane in the Baja California Peninsula. Weakening quickly after landfall, its remnants lashed the Southwestern United States with tropical storm-force winds, torrential rain, and flooding. The storm was blamed for two direct casualties in Mexico, as well as substantial beach erosion on the Mexican coast, flash flooding in Baja California, and record precipitation in Arizona. It persisted far inland and eventually dissipated near the Arizona–Nevada border.
Nora took an unusual path, making landfall twice as a hurricane in the Baja California Peninsula. Weakening quickly after landfall, its remnants lashed the Southwestern United States with tropical storm-force winds, torrential rain, and flooding. The storm was blamed for two direct casualties in Mexico, as well as substantial beach erosion on the Mexican coast, flash flooding in Baja California, and record precipitation in Arizona. It persisted far inland and eventually dissipated near the Arizona–Nevada border.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hurricane_Lester_(1992)
Hurricane Lester was the first Pacific tropical cyclone to enter the United States as a tropical storm since 1967. The fourteenth named storm and eighth hurricane of the 1992 Pacific hurricane season, Lester formed on August 20 from a tropical wave southwest of Mexico. The tropical storm moved generally northwestward while steadily intensifying. After turning to the north, approaching the Mexican coast, Lester attained hurricane status. The hurricane reached peak winds of 85 mph (137 km/h) before making landfall on west-central Baja California. The system weakened while moving across the peninsula and then over northwestern Mexico. Not long after entering Arizona, Lester weakened to a tropical depression, and degenerated into an extratropical low on August 24, 1992, over New Mexico. The storm's remnants later merged with the remnants of Hurricane Andrew and another frontal system on August 29.
++++++++++++
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1939_California_tropical_storm
Why hurricanes are so rare on the U.S. West Coast
The U.S. West Coast has cold ocean waters not supportive of hurricanes and the wind carries hurricanes away from the West Coast.
This is a big reason hurricanes don't impact the West Coast. The only region of the U.S. West Coast that sees ocean temperatures even crack the 70s is the immediate coastal areas of southern California. Farther north along the coast from central California to Washington, water temperatures are significantly colder in the 60s and 50s.
Another reason hurricanes do not hit the West Coast is because of the wind steering patterns. The trade winds located from around latitude 5 degrees north to 30 degrees north help steer hurricanes toward the East Coast and away from the West Coast, so hurricanes that form in the eastern Pacific, typically off the central Mexico coast, tend to move west-northwest away from the U.S. West Coast. While hurricanes do tend to move poleward eventually, by the time hurricanes in the eastern Pacific start to make that northward jump, they're far away from the U.S. West Coast, quickly encountering colder water and then weakening.
As (one of) the forum resident Californian(s), I can already see the headlines coming in the wake of this TROPICAL STORM and how this was caused by CO2 and climate change. Next thing will be our Governor Gavin Newsome demanding more action.
I live up around Sacramento and the forecast for my area only has a good chance of rain on Monday next week. This will bring some much needed rain to help with the dry summer conditions (which are PERFECTLY NORMAL for this time of year in California). It will also give us a bit of a temperature reprieve, albeit only for a day or two. We just had another 4 day hot streak of temps over 100. I refuse to call it a heat wave, it's just "summer in the Sacramento valley" as I like to put it. Monday is forecasted to be around 89-90, but will then go right back up to mid-high 90s through the rest of the month (most likely).
Thanks, MM!
Stay safe because Hillary the unprecedented, historic, once in a lifetime storm, will cause life threatening, catastrophic flooding.
At least that’s what the news says (-:
Am I allowed to ask these news outlets when history started so I have a frame of reference when they say "historic" and "unprecedented"?
Sounds to me just like the common media trope of "hottest on record" with the sub-text being something like "records starting in 1970s".
In this case, history started in 1940. Let me prove it to you below!
https://abcnews.go.com/US/hilary-become-1st-tropical-storm-hit-california-84/story?id=102337852
First-ever Tropical Storm Watch issued for Southern California
++++++++++++++++++++++++
When did the last tropical storm hit?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1939_California_tropical_storm
When did the NWS establish an office in Southern California so this area would be better prepared for future tropical systems?
Answer: February 1940. That's when history began (-:
++++++++++++++
Here's an honest media source that tells us the TRUE history:
If Hurricane Hilary makes landfall as a tropical storm in California, it would be the first to do so since 1939.
A tropical storm informally known as “El Cordonazo,” or “The Lash of St. Francis,” hit California in late September of 1939.
This is the last known tropical storm to make landfall in the state, Eric Boldt, a warning coordination meteorologist with the National Weather Service (NWS) Los Angeles/Oxnard, and a spokesperson for the National Hurricane Center (NHC) told VERIFY.
On Sept. 25, 1939, the tropical storm made landfall in San Pedro, California, which is located about 7 miles from Long Beach.
According to historical records from the National Weather Service, the storm brought anywhere from 5 inches to nearly a foot of rain to areas throughout southern California. The heavy rainfall led to flooding that killed up to 45 people and another 48 people died at sea, records show.
The 1939 tropical storm also caused $2 million in property damage, mostly to shipping, shore structures, power and communication lines and crops, according to a 2004 research article published in the Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society (AMS).
Residents were “generally unprepared” for the storm, which led the weather bureau to establish a forecast office in southern California. That office began operations in February 1940, NWS records show.
At least three more tropical storms impacted the southwestern United States during the 20th century but, unlike the 1939 storm, they first made landfall in Mexico before crossing over the border, the AMS article’s authors wrote.
More recently, in 2022, Hurricane Kay made landfall as a strong tropical storm in the Mexican state of Baja California Sur, bringing flooding rains and mudslides to Mexico and the southwestern United States.
But the 1939 storm isn’t the only tropical system to directly hit California in the state’s history.
The only known hurricane to strike the U.S. West Coast hit San Diego in early October 1858. According to NWS records, the hurricane brought 75-mph winds to the area and caused extensive property damage.
++++++++++++
https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/98364/#98377
Tracking Hillary/remnants.
https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/98364/
Current Hazards at the link below.
Go to the link below, hit hazards box in the top right hand corner(it will also define all the color codes), if its not already in the hazards mode when you load the link.
Then you can hit any spot on the map, including where you live and it will go to that NWS with all the comprehensive local weather information for that/your county.
New radar product below
Go to: "Select View" then "Local Radar"
Hit the purple circle to see that local radar site
+++++++++++++++++++++++
This link below provides some great data. After going to the link, hit "Mesoanalysis" then, the center of any box for the area that you want, then go to observation on the far left, then surface observations to get constantly updated surface observations or hit another of the dozens of choices.
 Found a great new link/site that shows us how much precip fell(from 1 hr to 72 hours) for different periods to share with you. https://www.iweathernet.com/total-rainfall-map-24-hours-to-72-hour |
Keep in mind that when they say first TS watch/warning ever for S Cal, the first TS watches/warnings for anywhere weren't issued by the NHC til 1987. That's because they used to issue gale warnings (and watches) instead. That being said, the historic nature of the potential rainfall from this in parts of CA regardless of possible influence from CC as well as the rarity of a TS in S CA shouldn't be trivialized. For example, check out how much rain Palm Springs has had.
Places further east like Las Vegas look to be dodging the proverbial bullet.
I agree 100% on that, Larry!
This is very significant tropical storm as a stand alone entity that doesn't need the embellishment and sensationalizing that intentionally amplify and distort the realities to put it into a "never before" league when that's not true.
We just need climate science to tell the truth using objective realities and stop constantly bending over backwards to use distorted perspectives and faulty reasoning, like with the horrible fire disaster in Hawaii.
Using this tragic event to push the fake climate crisis narratives.
I'm sick of them doing this and its a big part of why I stay here............to expose it because 99.9% of people have no idea of the extent to which they have hijacked climate science and how counterproductive this has become to the planet and humans, especially poor humans.
The fake green energy scam was much more at fault for what happened in Maui than anything else.
https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/98328/#98334
https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/98328/#98401
This is exactly the nonsense that I'm talking about:
By Tony Briscoe,
Hayley Smith, Alex Wigglesworth
"For as long as meteorologists can recall, California has been protected from the wrath of hurricanes by three robust natural defenders"
"This year, however, an unusual set of weather patterns and warm Pacific Ocean waters have short-circuited these normally reliable safeguards and allowed Hurricane Hilary to make its hell-for-leather dash for Southern California."
"But the possible arrival of a hurricane or tropical storm in California is yet another marker of how unprecedented climate conditions have reshaped what residents can expect, in an astonishingly short period of time"
++++++++++++++++
Mainstream climate scientists have convinced themselves to believe that their (incredibly flawed) global climate models can forecast yesterday's and last year's and last decade's weather better than the instruments that actually measured that weather.
Then, they use those busted models to predict the next 80 years. It's ANTI scientific absurdity.
Global drought is NOT increasing for instance by every authentic scientific measure but climate scientists continue to believe it is.........because climate models tell them that.
The biggest difference between their believing in the fake climate crisis religion and those that are convinced Trump won the election is that climate scientists are highly educated and should know better if they just diligently practiced the scientific method.
an example that just because you're really, really smart doesn't mean you don't suffer from the same cognitive bias, tribalism and believing in things you want to be true because you predicted them.
Their dire predictions did NOT come true!
The media & climate alarmists are wrong. The frequency of climate disasters is slightly down 2000 - 2022. There will never come a time when there is no severe weather. The power of the Sun & the creation of powerful storms, lightning, floods & droughts. https://cowboystatedaily.com/2023/08/10/media-has-it-wrong-frequency-of-climate-disasters-down/?utm_source=Klaviyo&utm_medium=campaign&_kx=sI2IblWhBsoAM5UtVR5oHQ65t09TO0MLarcxWJVwdZQ%3D.UXPtrV
Extreme rain records/most dire flooding(U.S. and world)
https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/97060/
Years with hottest state temperature
Greatest climate crisis in history 1876-1878. 50 million died, 3% of the global population.
1876-1878 was shortly after the Little Ice Age ended with the global temperature 1 deg. C cooler than this and CO2 at 130 parts per million less than this.
Climate and the Global Famine of 1876–78
https://journals.ametsoc.org/view/journals/clim/31/23/jcli-d-18-0159.1.xml
During the late nineteenth century, a series of famines affected vast parts of Asia, causing mortality on a scale that would be unthinkable today (Davis 2001). Of these, the so-called Global Famine lasting from 1876 to 1878 was the most severe and widespread in at least the past 150 years (Hasell and Roser 2018; Gráda 2009; Davis 2001). The Global Famine inflicted acute distress upon populations in diverse parts of South and East Asia, Brazil, and Africa, with total human fatalities likely exceeding 50 million. These famines were associated with prolonged droughts in India, China, Egypt, Morocco, Ethiopia, southern Africa, Brazil, Colombia, and Venezuela (Davis 2001; Clarke 1878; Hunter 1877). Historical documentation indicates famine-related mortality between 12.2 and 29.3 million in India, between 19.5 and 30 million in China, and ~2 million in Brazil (Davis 2001), amounting to ~3% of the global population at the time. It was arguably the worst environmental disaster to ever befall humanity
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The biggest impact on this planet from the increase of CO2 by an extremely wide margin is this:
DeathbyGreening:
https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/69258/
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/worlds-leading-physicist-dismisses-climate-emergency-pseudoscience
++++++++++
John F. Clauser, winner of the 2022 Nobel Prize in Physics for his work on quantum mechanics, has decided to sign the World Climate Declaration of Clintel with its central message “there is no climate emergency”. Clauser is the second Nobel Laureate to sign the declaration, Dr. Ivar Giaever was the first. The number of scientists and experts signing the World Climate Declaration is growing rapidly and now approaching 1600 people.
+++++++++++++++++++
So what happens to scientists that speak the truth about the fake climate crisis?
Here's how they trick/mislead people to think the thousands of scientists that don't believe in the climate CRISIS are outliers and deniers.
From a dataset of 88125 climate-related papers published since 2012, when this question was last addressed comprehensively, we examine a randomized subset of 3000 such publications.
++++++++++++++++
Greater than 99% consensus on human caused
climate change in the peer-reviewed scientific
literature
https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/ac2966/pdf
+++++++++++
able 3. Results of rating and categorization of 3000 abstracts.
| Rating/categorization | # of abstracts |
|---|---|
| 1—Explicit endorsement with quantification | 19 |
| Impacts | 7 |
| Methods | 9 |
| Mitigation | 3 |
| 2—Explicit endorsement without quantification | 413 |
| Impacts | 204 |
| Methods | 78 |
| Mitigation | 124 |
| Not climate-related | 4 |
| Opinion | 1 |
| Paleoclimate | 2 |
| 3—Implicit endorsement | 460 |
| Impacts | 95 |
| Methods | 119 |
| Mitigation | 199 |
| Not climate-related | 43 |
| Paleoclimate | 4 |
| 4a—No position | 2104 |
| Impacts | 915 |
| Methods | 790 |
| Mitigation | 60 |
| Not climate-related | 235 |
| Opinion | 3 |
| Paleoclimate | 101 |
| 5—Implicit rejection | 2 |
| Methods | 2 |
| 6—Explicit rejection without quantification | 1 |
| Paleoclimate | 1 |
| 7—Explicit rejection with quantification | 1 |
| Methods | 1 |
| Grand Total | 3000 |
1. If you are an atmospheric scientist like metmike , who's certain humans are mostly behind the current climate Optimum(not crisis). Or Judy Curry or Roy Spncer or many other THOUSANDS of other scientists that feel we are NOT having a climate CRISIS. We all show up as "explicit endorsement" using the criteria established in this and similar studies to give a FAKE high number of endorsing scientists. We all believe in the physics of greenhouse gas warming from increasing CO2. NOT in it being a major problem, which is what they want you to think 99% of scientists believe.
2. Even despite that. The vast MAJORITY of studies/scientists had NO POSITION. 2,104 out of 3,000 which is 70% had no position.
3. 892 had explicit or implicit endorsement which is 30%. That's NOT 99% and that 30% includes me and others that agree with the physics of CO2, greenhouse gas warming but do NOT view it as a crisis.
4. How many actually think we have a crisis? A small minority but thanks to the UN, that created the IPCC, which issues their regular climate bibles for all climate scientists to follow(many that work for governments) they have taken complete control of this field. Hijacked climate science. They're even positioned on peer review boards and committees to control what gets out.
Acting in cahoots with governments, crony capitalists, dishonest, ratings seeking media and misled environmentalists, climate science as we know it today, is just a massive special interest entity consisting of those groups colluding to scare people in order to accomplish their completely counterproductive agenda(for the planet/humans) which serves only to enrich their special interests.
5. The people that do studies like this one are statistical charlatans! Their objective from the get go was to MISlead people using manipulated statistics, into thinking that 99% of scientists agree on something that only a small minority of scientists agree on.
6. How they even found 4 retarded scientists that claim there is no global warming is a mystery (-: but those are the only ones that they want you to think disagree with the climate crisis!!
There have been several other studies, similar to this one, using the same devious tricks to mislead people into thinking almost all scientists believe there is a climate crisis. Just the fact that they do this, tells us they must either KNOW it's a lie or their brains are so caught up in the climate religion that they do it to serve the cause of the religion which justifies the means to accomplish it.
Aug 21, 2023
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m79guIwbWsA
Forecasters warn of "life-threatening flooding" as the storm begins to bring rain to the southwestern U.S.
Aug 21, 2023
https://www.cnn.com/2023/08/18/weather/hurricane-hilary-rain-flooding-forecast-friday/index.html
+++++++++++++++++++
Watch our real-time weather live stream tracking Hurricane Hilary in the video player.
https://abc7news.com/track-hurricane-hilary-tropical-storm-california-impact-path/13663226/
The first tropical storm to hit Southern California in 84 years, Hilary dropped more than half an average year's worth of rain on some areas, including Palm Springs, which saw nearly 3.18 inches (8 centimeters) of rain by Sunday evening.
Forecasters warned of dangerous flash floods across Los Angeles and Ventura Counties, and fire officials rescued 13 people from knee-deep water in a homeless encampment along the rising San Diego River. Meanwhile, rain and debris washed out some roadways and people left their cars stranded in standing water. Crews pumped floodwaters out of the emergency room at Eisenhower Medical Center in Rancho Mirage.
NWS San DiegoNot only was the 1.82 inches of rainfall that San Diego received yesterday the most of any day this year, it was also the wettest day for San Diego since 2.34 inches fell on February 27th, 2017. #cawx
LA Lewis@angelenolewis·It also set the record for the most hot air hype ever emitted from liberal politicians (at least since COVID).
Laura Stephens@LauraSt92658243·Isn't this your previous post? I'm confused. I think you have a typo in one of the other. I look to you all for real data. Can you clarify what you mean? Is it the wettest day since 2017 or 1977?
E@E57040553·In other words, a day of rain 2017 was more rain than this hurricane.
@HappyDoodleLife·most rain in 5 years!!
Tee-Payne Golf@Pingusa1872·Rain is bad?
Dennis Yard N1TEN@DN1ten·Measured 2.70 inches storm total in Serra Mesa.
Brian Thompson@BrianForNJ·Sounds like wildfires ahead
@KatKenn48·so?
Curmudgeonly@IndoTweet1·WOW. Catastrophic. Monumental. Colossal. Oh...78% of what fell 15 years ago. So... not so bad. Maybe a good thing because of the drought? Oh yeah, too bad in 100 years you haven't built reservoirs to contain the overflow instead of letting it go straight to the ocean.
Rusty@crustyshaklefrd·Wait…. So you’re saying this “hurricane” dropped less water than a strong winter storm?
@GypsyDawne·It was nice though. And always needed.#WalksInTheRain #HurricaneHilary
Commandante Chipotle@ChiChiChipotle·1.9 inches of rain Our record round here is close to 11 inches. And over 2 inches falling within an hour.
+++++++++++++++
metmike: Gee, I wonder why everybody is so ticked off. Life threatening Storm of the Century = Beneficial rain event
I thought this would automatically update on the earlier page )-:
It's over for the Southwest. Almost nothing really bad happened. The most sensationalized forecasts all busted badly.
This is what I was squawking about earlier in the thread!
This hyping, exaggerating and sensationalizing of every weather event has become the norm in this age of the fake climate crisis. Turning rains that aren't even a record for that location into 1 in 1,000 year rains
And heat waves/droughts that pale compared the the decade, 1930's with record heat/drought into unprecedented.
Hottest in 125,000 years! When we were this warm 1,000 years ago during the Medieval WARM Period and 2,000 years ago during the Roman WARM Period. And 3,500 years ago during the Minoan WARM Period.
And warmer than this by 2 deg C in the higher latitudes, with less Arctic ice during the Holocene climate OPTIMUM.
+++++++++++++++
They scan the globe for all the hottest and wettest and stormiest places, then cherry pick them and use those spots to report extreme weather. and pretend it represents the planet. ............which supposedly never had extreme weather like this before.
That's the sad reality of the fake climate crisis in 2023.
https://www.spc.noaa.gov/exper/mesoanalysis/new/viewsector.php?sector=12
|
The underlying map with the state border will not copy but these were the total rains from the entire event from our "Storm of the Century".
I get that this is the Desert Southwest, which rarely gets rainfall events like this.
That's why it's a desert!
The impacts of this were far less than several of the Winter storms earlier this year from the atmospheric rivers.
A location farther south/southeast this time but still..........MUCH LESS IMPACT!
https://www.iweathernet.com/total-rainfall-map-24-hours-to-72-hours
32.77795 : -122.50795
Hah! I just realized that I've been spelling Hilary with an extra l that doesn't belong!
So lets have some fun and estimate the rainfall totals from Hilary, if the atmosphere was 1 deg. cooler like it was 100 years ago and assume all things were equal, except the atmosphere could hold around 7% less moisture then.
2023 1923 Difference
San Diego 1.82 inches 1.70 inches .12
Oceanside Harbor 2.38 2.21 .17
Vista 2.12 1.97 .15
Escondido 2.66 2.46 .20
Ramona 2.03 1.89 .14
El Cajon 1.86 1.73 .13
Cuyamaca 4.11 3.82 .29
Palm Springs 3.18 2.96 .22
With regards to the Hurricane in 1858, we have to assume that the water temperatures off the coast were at least 79 deg. F for it to be a hurricane, so the actual ocean temperature must have been WARMER than this in 1858 and the above comparison is not valid.
How can that possibly be 165 years ago, just after the end of the Little Ice Age and global cooling?
Easy..............if you just understand this:
"It really boils down to this, once again(Cliff Mass can be counted on as an elite source for using objective, authentic science)"
https://cliffmass.blogspot.com/2016/03/the-golden-rule-of-climate-extremes.html
The GoldenRule
Considering the substantial confusion in the media about this critical issue, let me provide the GOLDENRULE OF CLIMATE EXTREMES. Here it is:
The more extreme a climate or weather record is, the greater the contribution of natural variability.
Or to put it a different way, the larger or more unusual an extreme, the higher proportion of the extreme is due to natural variability.
Despite the fact that since 1850, eight tropical cyclones brought gale-force winds to Southwestern United States. But ClimateDopes are all over the news arguing the remnants of Hurricane Hilary is proof of a climate crisis. LOL
1. 1858 San Diego hurricane t
2. 1939 Long Beach tropical storm
3. Remnants of Tropical Storm Jennifer-Katherine in 1963,
4. Remnants of Hurricane Emily in 1965,
5. Remnants of Hurricane Joanne in 1972,
6. Remnants of Hurricane Kathleen in 1976,
7. Hurricane Nora in 1997 after it was downgraded to a tropical storm,
8. Hurricane Kay, which made landfall in the Baja California Sur as a Category 1 hurricane. Kay's remnants then passed offshore Southern California, which brought flooding and 100 mph (160 km/h) wind gusts to some areas in the region.
++++++++++++
Climate crisis? There is NO climate crisis reposted
Dr. Matthew M. Wielicki@MatthewWielicki
So Hilary dropped 2.5" on LA and about 3" on Palm Springs. About 1/2 to 1/4 of the rain fall amounts predicted by climate alramists. And as with most things there is no long term trend of precipitation for LA in the last 20 years. This isn't climate change. This is weather.
It’s important to prepare for disasters even if they don’t come around that often — especially as climate change raises the stakes.
+++++++++++++++++
Dead wrong sensationalizing, dishonest media source!
I spent 11 years on tv cutting into programming with warnings and 30 years after that continuing to alert people of legit weather threats so they can be prepared.
What you DON'T want to do is, exactly what you all did this time on a massive scale in the Southwest to most of those people.
Continuing to give these people exaggerated, scary scenario's of what's coming which causes them to take actions that, in many cases cost them time and in some cases money and in every case, unnecessary worry over a nothing-burger and they just wasted the effort/stress.
If this saved lives, I'm all for it but it does the OPPOSITE in the long run.
After awhile, it turns into the "Boy that cried wolf syndrome". The sources lose their credibility and the people getting the messages stop believing them.
I can tell you from experience, that the thing which causes people to respond quickest to watches, warnings, safety advice and to stay closest to their source of weather information is to have a strong tornado or severe storm outbreak in the last month hit in that area.
The REALITY of seeing and or experiencing the actual severe event is a crystal clear demonstration/wake up call that is more powerful than any words.
This lesson will often wear off with time.
However, if you want people to do the complete opposite.........ignore the warnings and forecast for life threatening weather do this:
Every time there is a major storm, greatly exaggerate what it will do. Tell people it's "The Storm of the Century" or it's life threatening or historic or unprecedented.
Then have nothing big happen.
A few times like that and people become less responsive to the same intensity or threat level you give them because they remember the previous times when nothing happened to anybody.
Giving the damage control justification that this media source provides is lame.
Many in the media were using never used before verbiage to describe this storm......and it failed to match.
Now, there is no higher threat than the one they used. How can the verbiage be much stronger?
Historic, First ever, Life threatening, Extremely dangerous!
What's worse than that?
They just used up their most powerful warning verbiage for something that never had a chance to meet the expectations.
There are a lot of ticked off people in the Southwest based on the comments I've been reading on Facebook and Twitter.
Many of them have had their psyche,temporarily damaged with regards to trusting sources they MUST rely on for accurate, timely warnings.
+++++++++++++++
Sadly, for the ones controlling the theme of the climate crisis, this is part of the strategy.
Hammer into people heads that the weather is extreme/deadly and getting much worse every year and its from the climate crisis.
Our only chance is to defy the laws of physics, energy and economics and convert from efficient fossil fuels(greening the planet) to weak/unreliable sources that wreck the plant, like wind.
They WANT to create what's called eco-anxiety and it's been very effective.
Finally a real expert telling us the truth about Covid19: Greta on CNN. Scaring and converting children into the climate crisis cult. Eco-anxiety in children. Greta controlled as the United Nation's climate activist puppet. Failed predictions of the UN and past climate crisis religion high priests, like Al Gore. Showing the truth with actual data/observations vs telling people to listen to the fake science. May 2020. https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/52100/
Many of the people living in the over warned areas this time are ticked off but 10 times more people that don't live there will only remember the sensationalized news coverage of the unprecedented Hurricane Hilary. This is the same way that advertisers effectively sell their products on tv with commercials.
Most of us watching really dumb commercials on tv that we've seen 50 times that might not even show how superior their product is may wonder why an advertiser would waste millions to do this?
Because it works. Even dumb commercials, played over and over stamp into people's heads, subconsciously the name brand they are advertising. That's what they want people to remember.
That's similar to how they are selling the fake climate crisis to us. The crisis part is complete hogwash but if they keep repeating it over and over and over, people subconsciously connect all the extreme weather with the climate crisis as if its a fact.
It's already worked.
The fires in Maui. Historical Hurricane Hilary. The heat in TX or Phoenix. Those were all climate crisis advertisements in the Summer of 2023 that for most people, are stored in their subconsious mind to remember as additional events connected to the climate crisis.
They will look for the next extreme weather event(which probably happened before) and the media will flock to that location and all report, colluding with each other and cherry picking information as well as using extreme adjective verbiage about how bad it is to stamp in the next stored image in people's subconscious brain about the climate crisis.
Here's the rain totals with a map that shows the state outlines:.
This was alot of rain for California/Nevada for August, which is the normal dry season(and deserts are deserts because they rarely have this much rain).
However, this was 93% natural variation and NOT the storm of the century as advertised.
https://water.weather.gov/precip/
From NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hurricane_Kathleen
Hurricane Kathleen was a tropical cyclone that had a destructive impact in California. On September 7, 1976, a tropical depression formed; two days later it accelerated north towards the Baja California Peninsula. Kathleen brushed the Pacific coast of the peninsula as a hurricane on September 9 and made landfall as a fast-moving tropical storm the next day. With its circulation intact and still a tropical storm, Kathleen headed north into the United States and affected California and Arizona. Kathleen finally dissipated late on September 11.
Damage in the United States was considerable. California received record rainfall, with over a foot of rain falling in some areas. Flooding caused catastrophic destruction to Ocotillo, and six people drowned.[1] Flooding extended west; railway tracks were destroyed in Palm Desert and high winds and severe flooding were recorded in Arizona. Overall, the damage total was $160 million (1976 USD) and 12 deaths were attributed to the storm.
