Tweet
Re: Where are all the global warming fueled hurricanes
I still think this is all because of what the Sun is up to.
I still think this is all because of what the Sun is up to.
The Rules of Pacers Digest
Hello everyone,
Whether your are a long standing forum member or whether you have just registered today, it's a good idea to read and review the rules below so that you have a very good idea of what to expect when you come to Pacers Digest.
A quick note to new members: Your posts will not immediately show up when you make them. An administrator has to approve at least your first post before the forum software will later upgrade your account to the status of a fully-registered member. This usually happens within a couple of hours or so after your post(s) is/are approved, so you may need to be a little patient at first.
Why do we do this? So that it's more difficult for spammers (be they human or robot) to post, and so users who are banned cannot immediately re-register and start dousing people with verbal flames.
Below are the rules of Pacers Digest. After you have read them, you will have a very good sense of where we are coming from, what we expect, what we don't want to see, and how we react to things.
Rule #1
Pacers Digest is intended to be a place to discuss basketball without having to deal with the kinds of behaviors or attitudes that distract people from sticking with the discussion of the topics at hand. These unwanted distractions can come in many forms, and admittedly it can sometimes be tricky to pin down each and every kind that can rear its ugly head, but we feel that the following examples and explanations cover at least a good portion of that ground and should at least give people a pretty good idea of the kinds of things we actively discourage:
"Anyone who __________ is a liar / a fool / an idiot / a blind homer / has their head buried in the sand / a blind hater / doesn't know basketball / doesn't watch the games"
"People with intelligence will agree with me when I say that __________"
"Only stupid people think / believe / do ___________"
"I can't wait to hear something from PosterX when he/she sees that **insert a given incident or current event that will have probably upset or disappointed PosterX here**"
"He/she is just delusional"
"This thread is stupid / worthless / embarrassing"
"I'm going to take a moment to point and
/ laugh at PosterX / GroupOfPeopleY who thought / believed *insert though/belief here*"
"Remember when PosterX said OldCommentY that no longer looks good?"
In general, if a comment goes from purely on topic to something 'ad hominem' (personal jabs, personal shots, attacks, flames, however you want to call it, towards a person, or a group of people, or a given city/state/country of people), those are most likely going to be found intolerable.
We also dissuade passive aggressive behavior. This can be various things, but common examples include statements that are basically meant to imply someone is either stupid or otherwise incapable of holding a rational conversation. This can include (but is not limited to) laughing at someone's conclusions rather than offering an honest rebuttal, asking people what game they were watching, or another common problem is Poster X will say "that player isn't that bad" and then Poster Y will say something akin to "LOL you think that player is good". We're not going to tolerate those kinds of comments out of respect for the community at large and for the sake of trying to just have an honest conversation.
Now, does the above cover absolutely every single kind of distraction that is unwanted? Probably not, but you should by now have a good idea of the general types of things we will be discouraging. The above examples are meant to give you a good feel for / idea of what we're looking for. If something new or different than the above happens to come along and results in the same problem (that being, any other attitude or behavior that ultimately distracts from actually just discussing the topic at hand, or that is otherwise disrespectful to other posters), we can and we will take action to curb this as well, so please don't take this to mean that if you managed to technically avoid saying something exactly like one of the above examples that you are then somehow off the hook.
That all having been said, our goal is to do so in a generally kind and respectful way, and that doesn't mean the moment we see something we don't like that somebody is going to be suspended or banned, either. It just means that at the very least we will probably say something about it, quite possibly snipping out the distracting parts of the post in question while leaving alone the parts that are actually just discussing the topics, and in the event of a repeating or excessive problem, then we will start issuing infractions to try to further discourage further repeat problems, and if it just never seems to improve, then finally suspensions or bans will come into play. We would prefer it never went that far, and most of the time for most of our posters, it won't ever have to.
A slip up every once and a while is pretty normal, but, again, when it becomes repetitive or excessive, something will be done. Something occasional is probably going to be let go (within reason), but when it starts to become habitual or otherwise a pattern, odds are very good that we will step in.
There's always a small minority that like to push people's buttons and/or test their own boundaries with regards to the administrators, and in the case of someone acting like that, please be aware that this is not a court of law, but a private website run by people who are simply trying to do the right thing as they see it. If we feel that you are a special case that needs to be dealt with in an exceptional way because your behavior isn't explicitly mirroring one of our above examples of what we generally discourage, we can and we will take atypical action to prevent this from continuing if you are not cooperative with us.
Also please be aware that you will not be given a pass simply by claiming that you were 'only joking,' because quite honestly, when someone really is just joking, for one thing most people tend to pick up on the joke, including the person or group that is the target of the joke, and for another thing, in the event where an honest joke gets taken seriously and it upsets or angers someone, the person who is truly 'only joking' will quite commonly go out of his / her way to apologize and will try to mend fences. People who are dishonest about their statements being 'jokes' do not do so, and in turn that becomes a clear sign of what is really going on. It's nothing new.
In any case, quite frankly, the overall quality and health of the entire forum's community is more important than any one troublesome user will ever be, regardless of exactly how a problem is exhibiting itself, and if it comes down to us having to make a choice between you versus the greater health and happiness of the entire community, the community of this forum will win every time.
Lastly, there are also some posters, who are generally great contributors and do not otherwise cause any problems, who sometimes feel it's their place to provoke or to otherwise 'mess with' that small minority of people described in the last paragraph, and while we possibly might understand why you might feel you WANT to do something like that, the truth is we can't actually tolerate that kind of behavior from you any more than we can tolerate the behavior from them. So if we feel that you are trying to provoke those other posters into doing or saying something that will get themselves into trouble, then we will start to view you as a problem as well, because of the same reason as before: The overall health of the forum comes first, and trying to stir the pot with someone like that doesn't help, it just makes it worse. Some will simply disagree with this philosophy, but if so, then so be it because ultimately we have to do what we think is best so long as it's up to us.
If you see a problem that we haven't addressed, the best and most appropriate course for a forum member to take here is to look over to the left of the post in question. See underneath that poster's name, avatar, and other info, down where there's a little triangle with an exclamation point (!) in it? Click that. That allows you to report the post to the admins so we can definitely notice it and give it a look to see what we feel we should do about it. Beyond that, obviously it's human nature sometimes to want to speak up to the poster in question who has bothered you, but we would ask that you try to refrain from doing so because quite often what happens is two or more posters all start going back and forth about the original offending post, and suddenly the entire thread is off topic or otherwise derailed. So while the urge to police it yourself is understandable, it's best to just report it to us and let us handle it. Thank you!
All of the above is going to be subject to a case by case basis, but generally and broadly speaking, this should give everyone a pretty good idea of how things will typically / most often be handled.
Rule #2
If the actions of an administrator inspire you to make a comment, criticism, or express a concern about it, there is a wrong place and a couple of right places to do so.
The wrong place is to do so in the original thread in which the administrator took action. For example, if a post gets an infraction, or a post gets deleted, or a comment within a larger post gets clipped out, in a thread discussing Paul George, the wrong thing to do is to distract from the discussion of Paul George by adding your off topic thoughts on what the administrator did.
The right places to do so are:
A) Start a thread about the specific incident you want to talk about on the Feedback board. This way you are able to express yourself in an area that doesn't throw another thread off topic, and this way others can add their two cents as well if they wish, and additionally if there's something that needs to be said by the administrators, that is where they will respond to it.
B) Send a private message to the administrators, and they can respond to you that way.
If this is done the wrong way, those comments will be deleted, and if it's a repeating problem then it may also receive an infraction as well.
Rule #3
If a poster is bothering you, and an administrator has not or will not deal with that poster to the extent that you would prefer, you have a powerful tool at your disposal, one that has recently been upgraded and is now better than ever: The ability to ignore a user.
When you ignore a user, you will unfortunately still see some hints of their existence (nothing we can do about that), however, it does the following key things:
A) Any post they make will be completely invisible as you scroll through a thread.
B) The new addition to this feature: If someone QUOTES a user you are ignoring, you do not have to read who it was, or what that poster said, unless you go out of your way to click on a link to find out who it is and what they said.
To utilize this feature, from any page on Pacers Digest, scroll to the top of the page, look to the top right where it says 'Settings' and click that. From the settings page, look to the left side of the page where it says 'My Settings', and look down from there until you see 'Edit Ignore List' and click that. From here, it will say 'Add a Member to Your List...' Beneath that, click in the text box to the right of 'User Name', type in or copy & paste the username of the poster you are ignoring, and once their name is in the box, look over to the far right and click the 'Okay' button. All done!
Rule #4
Regarding infractions, currently they carry a value of one point each, and that point will expire in 31 days. If at any point a poster is carrying three points at the same time, that poster will be suspended until the oldest of the three points expires.
Rule #5
When you share or paste content or articles from another website, you must include the URL/link back to where you found it, who wrote it, and what website it's from. Said content will be removed if this doesn't happen.
An example:
If I copy and paste an article from the Indianapolis Star website, I would post something like this:
http://www.linktothearticlegoeshere.com/article
Title of the Article
Author's Name
Indianapolis Star
Rule #6
We cannot tolerate illegal videos on Pacers Digest. This means do not share any links to them, do not mention any websites that host them or link to them, do not describe how to find them in any way, and do not ask about them. Posts doing anything of the sort will be removed, the offenders will be contacted privately, and if the problem becomes habitual, you will be suspended, and if it still persists, you will probably be banned.
The legal means of watching or listening to NBA games are NBA League Pass Broadband (for US, or for International; both cost money) and NBA Audio League Pass (which is free). Look for them on NBA.com.
Rule #7
Provocative statements in a signature, or as an avatar, or as the 'tagline' beneath a poster's username (where it says 'Member' or 'Administrator' by default, if it is not altered) are an unwanted distraction that will more than likely be removed on sight. There can be shades of gray to this, but in general this could be something political or religious that is likely going to provoke or upset people, or otherwise something that is mean-spirited at the expense of a poster, a group of people, or a population.
It may or may not go without saying, but this goes for threads and posts as well, particularly when it's not made on the off-topic board (Market Square).
We do make exceptions if we feel the content is both innocuous and unlikely to cause social problems on the forum (such as wishing someone a Merry Christmas or a Happy Easter), and we also also make exceptions if such topics come up with regards to a sports figure (such as the Lance Stephenson situation bringing up discussions of domestic abuse and the law, or when Jason Collins came out as gay and how that lead to some discussion about gay rights).
However, once the discussion seems to be more/mostly about the political issues instead of the sports figure or his specific situation, the thread is usually closed.
Rule #8
We prefer self-restraint and/or modesty when making jokes or off topic comments in a sports discussion thread. They can be fun, but sometimes they derail or distract from a topic, and we don't want to see that happen. If we feel it is a problem, we will either delete or move those posts from the thread.
Rule #9
Generally speaking, we try to be a "PG-13" rated board, and we don't want to see sexual content or similarly suggestive content. Vulgarity is a more muddled issue, though again we prefer things to lean more towards "PG-13" than "R". If we feel things have gone too far, we will step in.
Rule #10
We like small signatures, not big signatures. The bigger the signature, the more likely it is an annoying or distracting signature.
Rule #11
Do not advertise anything without talking about it with the administrators first. This includes advertising with your signature, with your avatar, through private messaging, and/or by making a thread or post.
Whether your are a long standing forum member or whether you have just registered today, it's a good idea to read and review the rules below so that you have a very good idea of what to expect when you come to Pacers Digest.
A quick note to new members: Your posts will not immediately show up when you make them. An administrator has to approve at least your first post before the forum software will later upgrade your account to the status of a fully-registered member. This usually happens within a couple of hours or so after your post(s) is/are approved, so you may need to be a little patient at first.
Why do we do this? So that it's more difficult for spammers (be they human or robot) to post, and so users who are banned cannot immediately re-register and start dousing people with verbal flames.
Below are the rules of Pacers Digest. After you have read them, you will have a very good sense of where we are coming from, what we expect, what we don't want to see, and how we react to things.
Rule #1
Pacers Digest is intended to be a place to discuss basketball without having to deal with the kinds of behaviors or attitudes that distract people from sticking with the discussion of the topics at hand. These unwanted distractions can come in many forms, and admittedly it can sometimes be tricky to pin down each and every kind that can rear its ugly head, but we feel that the following examples and explanations cover at least a good portion of that ground and should at least give people a pretty good idea of the kinds of things we actively discourage:
"Anyone who __________ is a liar / a fool / an idiot / a blind homer / has their head buried in the sand / a blind hater / doesn't know basketball / doesn't watch the games"
"People with intelligence will agree with me when I say that __________"
"Only stupid people think / believe / do ___________"
"I can't wait to hear something from PosterX when he/she sees that **insert a given incident or current event that will have probably upset or disappointed PosterX here**"
"He/she is just delusional"
"This thread is stupid / worthless / embarrassing"
"I'm going to take a moment to point and
/ laugh at PosterX / GroupOfPeopleY who thought / believed *insert though/belief here*""Remember when PosterX said OldCommentY that no longer looks good?
"In general, if a comment goes from purely on topic to something 'ad hominem' (personal jabs, personal shots, attacks, flames, however you want to call it, towards a person, or a group of people, or a given city/state/country of people), those are most likely going to be found intolerable.
We also dissuade passive aggressive behavior. This can be various things, but common examples include statements that are basically meant to imply someone is either stupid or otherwise incapable of holding a rational conversation. This can include (but is not limited to) laughing at someone's conclusions rather than offering an honest rebuttal, asking people what game they were watching, or another common problem is Poster X will say "that player isn't that bad" and then Poster Y will say something akin to "LOL you think that player is good". We're not going to tolerate those kinds of comments out of respect for the community at large and for the sake of trying to just have an honest conversation.
Now, does the above cover absolutely every single kind of distraction that is unwanted? Probably not, but you should by now have a good idea of the general types of things we will be discouraging. The above examples are meant to give you a good feel for / idea of what we're looking for. If something new or different than the above happens to come along and results in the same problem (that being, any other attitude or behavior that ultimately distracts from actually just discussing the topic at hand, or that is otherwise disrespectful to other posters), we can and we will take action to curb this as well, so please don't take this to mean that if you managed to technically avoid saying something exactly like one of the above examples that you are then somehow off the hook.
That all having been said, our goal is to do so in a generally kind and respectful way, and that doesn't mean the moment we see something we don't like that somebody is going to be suspended or banned, either. It just means that at the very least we will probably say something about it, quite possibly snipping out the distracting parts of the post in question while leaving alone the parts that are actually just discussing the topics, and in the event of a repeating or excessive problem, then we will start issuing infractions to try to further discourage further repeat problems, and if it just never seems to improve, then finally suspensions or bans will come into play. We would prefer it never went that far, and most of the time for most of our posters, it won't ever have to.
A slip up every once and a while is pretty normal, but, again, when it becomes repetitive or excessive, something will be done. Something occasional is probably going to be let go (within reason), but when it starts to become habitual or otherwise a pattern, odds are very good that we will step in.
There's always a small minority that like to push people's buttons and/or test their own boundaries with regards to the administrators, and in the case of someone acting like that, please be aware that this is not a court of law, but a private website run by people who are simply trying to do the right thing as they see it. If we feel that you are a special case that needs to be dealt with in an exceptional way because your behavior isn't explicitly mirroring one of our above examples of what we generally discourage, we can and we will take atypical action to prevent this from continuing if you are not cooperative with us.
Also please be aware that you will not be given a pass simply by claiming that you were 'only joking,' because quite honestly, when someone really is just joking, for one thing most people tend to pick up on the joke, including the person or group that is the target of the joke, and for another thing, in the event where an honest joke gets taken seriously and it upsets or angers someone, the person who is truly 'only joking' will quite commonly go out of his / her way to apologize and will try to mend fences. People who are dishonest about their statements being 'jokes' do not do so, and in turn that becomes a clear sign of what is really going on. It's nothing new.
In any case, quite frankly, the overall quality and health of the entire forum's community is more important than any one troublesome user will ever be, regardless of exactly how a problem is exhibiting itself, and if it comes down to us having to make a choice between you versus the greater health and happiness of the entire community, the community of this forum will win every time.
Lastly, there are also some posters, who are generally great contributors and do not otherwise cause any problems, who sometimes feel it's their place to provoke or to otherwise 'mess with' that small minority of people described in the last paragraph, and while we possibly might understand why you might feel you WANT to do something like that, the truth is we can't actually tolerate that kind of behavior from you any more than we can tolerate the behavior from them. So if we feel that you are trying to provoke those other posters into doing or saying something that will get themselves into trouble, then we will start to view you as a problem as well, because of the same reason as before: The overall health of the forum comes first, and trying to stir the pot with someone like that doesn't help, it just makes it worse. Some will simply disagree with this philosophy, but if so, then so be it because ultimately we have to do what we think is best so long as it's up to us.
If you see a problem that we haven't addressed, the best and most appropriate course for a forum member to take here is to look over to the left of the post in question. See underneath that poster's name, avatar, and other info, down where there's a little triangle with an exclamation point (!) in it? Click that. That allows you to report the post to the admins so we can definitely notice it and give it a look to see what we feel we should do about it. Beyond that, obviously it's human nature sometimes to want to speak up to the poster in question who has bothered you, but we would ask that you try to refrain from doing so because quite often what happens is two or more posters all start going back and forth about the original offending post, and suddenly the entire thread is off topic or otherwise derailed. So while the urge to police it yourself is understandable, it's best to just report it to us and let us handle it. Thank you!
All of the above is going to be subject to a case by case basis, but generally and broadly speaking, this should give everyone a pretty good idea of how things will typically / most often be handled.
Rule #2
If the actions of an administrator inspire you to make a comment, criticism, or express a concern about it, there is a wrong place and a couple of right places to do so.
The wrong place is to do so in the original thread in which the administrator took action. For example, if a post gets an infraction, or a post gets deleted, or a comment within a larger post gets clipped out, in a thread discussing Paul George, the wrong thing to do is to distract from the discussion of Paul George by adding your off topic thoughts on what the administrator did.
The right places to do so are:
A) Start a thread about the specific incident you want to talk about on the Feedback board. This way you are able to express yourself in an area that doesn't throw another thread off topic, and this way others can add their two cents as well if they wish, and additionally if there's something that needs to be said by the administrators, that is where they will respond to it.
B) Send a private message to the administrators, and they can respond to you that way.
If this is done the wrong way, those comments will be deleted, and if it's a repeating problem then it may also receive an infraction as well.
Rule #3
If a poster is bothering you, and an administrator has not or will not deal with that poster to the extent that you would prefer, you have a powerful tool at your disposal, one that has recently been upgraded and is now better than ever: The ability to ignore a user.
When you ignore a user, you will unfortunately still see some hints of their existence (nothing we can do about that), however, it does the following key things:
A) Any post they make will be completely invisible as you scroll through a thread.
B) The new addition to this feature: If someone QUOTES a user you are ignoring, you do not have to read who it was, or what that poster said, unless you go out of your way to click on a link to find out who it is and what they said.
To utilize this feature, from any page on Pacers Digest, scroll to the top of the page, look to the top right where it says 'Settings' and click that. From the settings page, look to the left side of the page where it says 'My Settings', and look down from there until you see 'Edit Ignore List' and click that. From here, it will say 'Add a Member to Your List...' Beneath that, click in the text box to the right of 'User Name', type in or copy & paste the username of the poster you are ignoring, and once their name is in the box, look over to the far right and click the 'Okay' button. All done!
Rule #4
Regarding infractions, currently they carry a value of one point each, and that point will expire in 31 days. If at any point a poster is carrying three points at the same time, that poster will be suspended until the oldest of the three points expires.
Rule #5
When you share or paste content or articles from another website, you must include the URL/link back to where you found it, who wrote it, and what website it's from. Said content will be removed if this doesn't happen.
An example:
If I copy and paste an article from the Indianapolis Star website, I would post something like this:
http://www.linktothearticlegoeshere.com/article
Title of the Article
Author's Name
Indianapolis Star
Rule #6
We cannot tolerate illegal videos on Pacers Digest. This means do not share any links to them, do not mention any websites that host them or link to them, do not describe how to find them in any way, and do not ask about them. Posts doing anything of the sort will be removed, the offenders will be contacted privately, and if the problem becomes habitual, you will be suspended, and if it still persists, you will probably be banned.
The legal means of watching or listening to NBA games are NBA League Pass Broadband (for US, or for International; both cost money) and NBA Audio League Pass (which is free). Look for them on NBA.com.
Rule #7
Provocative statements in a signature, or as an avatar, or as the 'tagline' beneath a poster's username (where it says 'Member' or 'Administrator' by default, if it is not altered) are an unwanted distraction that will more than likely be removed on sight. There can be shades of gray to this, but in general this could be something political or religious that is likely going to provoke or upset people, or otherwise something that is mean-spirited at the expense of a poster, a group of people, or a population.
It may or may not go without saying, but this goes for threads and posts as well, particularly when it's not made on the off-topic board (Market Square).
We do make exceptions if we feel the content is both innocuous and unlikely to cause social problems on the forum (such as wishing someone a Merry Christmas or a Happy Easter), and we also also make exceptions if such topics come up with regards to a sports figure (such as the Lance Stephenson situation bringing up discussions of domestic abuse and the law, or when Jason Collins came out as gay and how that lead to some discussion about gay rights).
However, once the discussion seems to be more/mostly about the political issues instead of the sports figure or his specific situation, the thread is usually closed.
Rule #8
We prefer self-restraint and/or modesty when making jokes or off topic comments in a sports discussion thread. They can be fun, but sometimes they derail or distract from a topic, and we don't want to see that happen. If we feel it is a problem, we will either delete or move those posts from the thread.
Rule #9
Generally speaking, we try to be a "PG-13" rated board, and we don't want to see sexual content or similarly suggestive content. Vulgarity is a more muddled issue, though again we prefer things to lean more towards "PG-13" than "R". If we feel things have gone too far, we will step in.
Rule #10
We like small signatures, not big signatures. The bigger the signature, the more likely it is an annoying or distracting signature.
Rule #11
Do not advertise anything without talking about it with the administrators first. This includes advertising with your signature, with your avatar, through private messaging, and/or by making a thread or post.
See more
See less
-
-
Re: Where are all the global warming fueled hurricanes
What kind of liberal are you? First you were against abortion, and now this?Originally posted by Mal View PostOriginally posted by Natston;n3510291Comment
-
Re: Where are all the global warming fueled hurricanes
He meant son (Dubya), not sun.Originally posted by naturallystoned View PostComment
-
Re: Where are all the global warming fueled hurricanes
I don't know about you guys, but I could use a little more global warming today.This space for rent.Comment
-
Re: Where are all the global warming fueled hurricanes
You think that's bad - take a look at S Florida!Originally posted by Anthem View Post
Always wanted to know what would get a wind chill warning in Florida - now I know.weather.gov
National Weather Service
Watches, Warnings & Advisories
Local weather forecast by "City, St" or zip code
4 products issued by NWS for: Gladeview FL
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wind Chill Warning
URGENT - WINTER WEATHER MESSAGE
NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE MIAMI FL
214 PM EST WED JAN 2 2008
...WIND CHILL WARNING NOW IN EFFECT FOR ALL OF SOUTH FLORIDA
EXCLUDING THE IMMEDIATE ATLANTIC COAST...
...WIND CHILL ADVISORY REMAINS IN EFFECT FOR THE IMMEDIATE
ATLANTIC COAST...
FLZ063-066>075-174-031000-
/O.UPG.KMFL.WC.Y.0002.080103T0200Z-080103T1400Z/
/O.NEW.KMFL.WC.W.0001.080103T0200Z-080103T1400Z/
GLADES-HENDRY-INLAND PALM BEACH-METRO PALM BEACH-COASTAL COLLIER-
INLAND COLLIER-INLAND BROWARD-METRO BROWARD-INLAND MIAMI DADE-
METRO MIAMI DADE-MAINLAND MONROE-FAR SOUTH MIAMI DADE-
INCLUDING THE CITIES OF...PALMDALE...MOORE HAVEN...CLEWISTON...
LA BELLE...BIG CYPRESS SEMINOLE RESERVATION...PAHOKEE...
SOUTH BAY...BELLE GLADE...WEST PALM BEACH...NAPLES...IMMOKALEE...
MICCOSUKEE INDIAN RESERVATION...COCONUT CREEK...FORT LAUDERDALE...
HOLLYWOOD...PEMBROKE PINES...SHARK VALLEY...MIAMI...FLAMINGO...
FLORIDA CITY...EVERGLADES NATIONAL PARK
214 PM EST WED JAN 2 2008
...WIND CHILL WARNING IN EFFECT FROM 9 PM THIS EVENING TO 9 AM
EST THURSDAY...
THE NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE IN MIAMI HAS ISSUED A WIND CHILL
WARNING...WHICH IS IN EFFECT FROM 9 PM THIS EVENING TO 9 AM EST
THURSDAY. THIS PRODUCT IS AN UPGRADE OF THE PREVIOUSLY ISSUED WIND
CHILL ADVISORY.
MINIMUM TEMPERATURES ON THURSDAY MORNING ARE EXPECTED TO RANGE
FROM THE MID 20S TO THE LOWER 30S ACROSS THE WARNING AREA...WITH
NORTHWEST WINDS IN THE 10 TO 15 MPH RANGE CONTINUING THROUGH THE
NIGHT. THIS COMBINATION OF TEMPERATURE AND WIND WILL CREATE
DANGEROUS WIND CHILL READINGS BETWEEN 15 AND 25 DEGREES FOR MUCH
OF THE NIGHT. THUS...A WIND CHILL WARNING HAS BEEN ISSUED FOR THE
AREA.
A WIND CHILL WARNING MEANS THE COMBINATION OF VERY COLD AIR AND
STRONG WINDS WILL CREATE DANGEROUSLY LOW WIND CHILL VALUES. THIS
WILL RESULT IN FROST BITE AND LEAD TO HYPOTHERMIA OR DEATH IF
PRECAUTIONS ARE NOT TAKEN. IF YOU MUST VENTURE OUTDOORS....MAKE
SURE YOU WEAR A HAT AND GLOVES.
$$The poster formerly known as RimfireComment
-
Re: Where are all the global warming fueled hurricanes
I bet if they were up on Uranus, you'd know where they were.Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
[~]) ... Cheers! Go Pacers!Comment
-
Re: Where are all the global warming fueled hurricanes
Glaciers everywhere have always had periods of recession and advancement. Glacier recession is geting more rapid and dramatic these days. Advancement is rare, except for quick "breakup" by meltwater accumulationg underneath of large sections of glacier.Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
I went to Alaska this past summer for two weeks and saw lots of glaciers and how they are changing. Exit Glacier near Seward had been in recession for at least hundreds of years. The rate of recession is greatly increasing though.
You leave the parking lot and you start seeing signs depicting where the edge of the Glacier used to be. Over a half mile away from the current edge you see "1870" then go ahead 100 yards and see "1910" then another 100 yards you see "1940" then another 200 yards you see "1970" then another full quarter mile you see "1990" and then another full quarter mile you see the edge where it is today.
In the 1970s the park service built a visitors center near the edge of the Portage Glacier. They knew it was in recession, but models of the time suggested that it would still be only a few hundred yards away by 2030. Now it is a mile away.
All of this was anecdotal, but Alaskans are convinced that their local climate has changed radically. The tree line is advancing due to warmth and milder winters-- photos of tundra in 1940 side by side with the same shot in 2007 show the drastic changes.
Ice breakup dates occur later and later. Ocean pack ice is thinner and further north. Animal migration routes have changed, with cold air and cold water farther north and warmth not so far south.
It's admittedly not hard science, but it is a huge collection of related observations that seem to be consistent with rapid changes, particularly in the northern latitudes including Alaska.The poster "pacertom" since this forum began (and before!). I changed my name here to "Slick Pinkham" in honor of the imaginary player That Bobby "Slick" Leonard picked late in the 1971 ABA draft (true story!).Comment
-
Re: Where are all the global warming fueled hurricanes
How often should I repeat this?
I have no problem with anyone saying there's global warming going on - it's getting warmer and IMO temps show it.
I have problems with people saying it must be doe to people and Human activity because, quite frankly, I think the science behind it sucks.
We had a Medieval warm period and a Roman Warm Period. Both were warmer than we are today, both were characterized by a sharp initial temperature spike followed by a leveling off - for a couple hundred years.
I'm not convinced that we're not going through a cyclical global warm period we experience every 800 years or so.
Not convinced we are either - I just need more evidence than what I've seen so far to call Human activity the cause.The poster formerly known as RimfireComment
-
Re: Where are all the global warming fueled hurricanes
Yeah, DK, I am also skeptical about identifying the causes.
But some people (not you) take their reasonable amount of skepticism about the unknown causative effect and expand it to deny even the existence of the phenomenon, by whatever cause.The poster "pacertom" since this forum began (and before!). I changed my name here to "Slick Pinkham" in honor of the imaginary player That Bobby "Slick" Leonard picked late in the 1971 ABA draft (true story!).Comment
-
Re: Where are all the global warming fueled hurricanes
Do we wait...what? A couple of hundred years to be sure? Or do we take measures to reduce human factors that may be contributing?Originally posted by DisplacedKnick View Post
[~]) ... Cheers! Go Pacers!Comment
-
Re: Where are all the global warming fueled hurricanes
That still doesn't answer my question why glaciers were receding well before the industrial revolution.Originally posted by pacertom View Post
But more important, this natural warming trend that started well before the industrial revolution naturally causes more rapid recession over time. It has not only resulted in hundreds of miles of recession (not just yards) of the glaciers notwithstanding advancements...it has also warmed the earth and its oceans. Therefore, in the face of a warming planet, basic science tells us that the rate of melt of the glaciers must necessarily increase over time resulting in more rapid recession until all the ice is gone.
A simple example may be helpful. How fast does an ice cube melt in a cup of water at 33 versus a boiling pot? Yes, that's an exaggeration, but the general idea applies. The warmer the earth gets *naturally*, the faster the glaciers will melt. Since it's not disputed that the earth was warming anyway, no one should be surprised the ice is now melting more rapidly.
...and that all assumes that other natural forces are not at play causing the earth to warm further.Comment
-
Re: Where are all the global warming fueled hurricanes
I'm not a climatologist, but I have a lot of scientific training (chemistry, biology, physics, etc.) and I read up on glaciers for the heck of it when I was headed for Alaska.Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
A glacier recedes or advances due to an local imbalance of melting and new snowfall. Lots of factors, local or global, besides atmospheric CO2 can affect this.
Locally you could have a random run of mild winters. You can have 10 feet of snow for ten years in a row and 1 foot of snow for ten years in a row, just like you can flip a coin and sometimes get ten heads in a row. Same with warm summers.
You can have plate tectonics affect the height of mountains and depth of oceans, affecting wind currents and directionality of glacier flow. There is significant and measureable mountain uplift in real time, even inches per year.
Globally full blown ice ages seem to occur about every 100,000 years for resaons not entirely clear but perhaps linked to long-term variations in solar output. Of course most of the world's fjords and mountain valleys along with all sorts of planetary features were formed by gigantic glacier recession following emergence from ice ages.
Glacier recession in the past 700 years or so, though, seemed to be locally driven phenonmenon until the past 100-200 years, and especially the last 50 years. Glaciers in one area might be in retreat while in other areas might be in advance. That's not so different from the concept of you having lots of snow in your region for several years in a row while a neighboring region had a lot less snow, or a lot more sun, or a lot less fog, or a lot less ash from volcanic activity, or whatever fairly random occurance.
What's odd recently is that glaciers receding seems to be not a local phenomenon but a global one, with 99% of glaciers receding worldwide and more rapidly than in recent centuries.
There have always been ice ages. There have always been receding glaciers. Until lately, there were advancing glaciers except when emerging from a full-blown ice age. There seems to be little evidence as to how the current warming fits into any known cycle, at least to my knowledge.
I don't know the causation, but I believe the phenomenon is quite real and possibly geologically abnormal.
I've heard some explanations that say there has been a long-term global warming trend that had periodically been interrupted or masked by events such as the massive Tambora eruption in 1815 and the huge Krakatoa eruption in 1883, so it made our climate "seem" unsually steady, artifically, for 150 years or more. There's a lot of debate on this though.Last edited by Slick Pinkham; 01-04-2008, 10:02 PM.The poster "pacertom" since this forum began (and before!). I changed my name here to "Slick Pinkham" in honor of the imaginary player That Bobby "Slick" Leonard picked late in the 1971 ABA draft (true story!).Comment
-
Re: Where are all the global warming fueled hurricanes
So, you are saying that glaciers, *on the whole*, were not receding before the industrial revolution? (or prior to 100-200 years ago)
If you have data on that, please point me to it. I am ready to change my mind if that's the fact.
Otherwise, the fact glaciers used to cover much of North America and no longer do, leads me to believe that much larger forces have warmed our climate and continue to do so today. If that's true, there could be more significant localized advancements in the past as well due to a generally cooler climate...while today you simply don't see those peeks in advancement...but are instead seeing peeks in recession due to a global warming trend, which certainly is possible.
Again, not saying you are wrong, I just need something more convincing. Saying it "seemed to be locally driven phenomenon until the last 100-200 years" is not proof. If there is data showing that glaciers globally were in stable flux for centuries prior to 1850 would be convincing evidence, but until I see data on that, I'm moving about as slow as a glacier in your direction. ;<)Comment
-
Re: Where are all the global warming fueled hurricanes
Well, the reason why, whenever I'm doing an interview and this question comes up, I don't talk about the repetitively wrong models (and I mean WAY wrong - by their nature models will almost always be at least somewhat wrong which is why I don't consider them science but speculation) or about Mann's completely bogus "hockey stick" model, etc., is because I believe in cleaner air.Originally posted by kester99 View Post
I'm not wild about the concept that it takes Global Warming hysteria to actually get us to do somethings that may lead to cleaner air, reduce air quality warnings in large cities and the accompanying illness and death among the very old, very young, but if that's what it takes to actually get us as people to change our behavior, then so be it.
So a lot of what comes out of global warming bugs me but many of the accompanying results are good.
Besides, it's possible that the inordinate amount of construction we do in the northern hemisphere may create an imbalance in the mass of the Earth causing the planet's rotation to be thrown out of whack and some day, millions of years from now, hurling the planet into the sun. Does this mean we should put a freeze on all building N of the equator and concentrate all of it in S America?
Granted, it's a whacky theory - almost as whacky as the idea that people have some real command of what causes major climactic changes on a global scale, that they've judged the various feedback processes and loops correctly, that they have any kind of handle on the values to ascribe to various impacts and effects in modeling global climactic processes . . .
(And yes, the above 2 paragraphs are a bit ridiculous in order to make a point - please don't start a debate on whether the Earth actually IS in danger of leaving its orbit)The poster formerly known as RimfireComment
-
Re: Where are all the global warming fueled hurricanes
Yeah, it's weird. The Arctic is getting warmer, but the Antarctic is getting quite a bit cooler.Originally posted by pacertom View PostThis space for rent.Comment
Comment