What Can Be Done To Stop Destructive Tornados ?

but not fires.

 

We should spend billions on more enviro junk science. That will stop the tornadoes. We need to go past storm preparedness, we need to stop the source, which is of course climate change.

 

Yes, I saw them...awful. Which new government agency should I send the check? Department of Undeniably Horrendously Horrible, yet Absolutely Correctable Weather Disasters?...(affectionately referred to as DUHH! for brevity)

and I just tore up my Independent voter registration card....straight ticket Democrat from here on....because they "care" more, and will see to it that my money and vote stops all this awful AGW inspired weather silliness.....regardless of what those evil, obstructionist, dirty air and dirty water advocating right-wingers try to do.

I've seen the light.....and been delivered to the path of righteous enlightenment.



Hey....I'm a little thirsty....are you going to drink the rest of your Kool-aid? dude, are those your bongos?

 

In other words eliminate weather.

Weather is basically the distribution of heat and water throughout the earth. A tornado occurs where a thunderstorm is formed, primarily where hot, moist air, meets cold air.

From my knowledge of the earth, there is no way to do this. It's foolish to try. The best bet is to buld underground shelters.

 

The fact you have to change what I said so you can fuel your rage is very telling. I did not say global warming causes tornadoes. I said we will see an increase in frequency and intensity. But please before you make yourself look any more ridiculous please go and read up on what causes a tornado. That way if you stick to your story I know you are just being dishonest rather than ignorant

 

Good. Maybe we can get God to turn down the thermostat on the sun.

 

Indeed. An f5 is basically a moving nuclear bomb blast. The Area I live in was one that was directly hit by the Tri-state tornado. Destroyed the whole town, and killed a whole school full of kids. The thing was so big everyone thought it was just a nasty storm cloud coming through (covered the whole horizon).

 

I thought you were from Versailles, Arizona.

 

So an increasing frequency in tornadoes caused by global warming is not the same as global warming causing tornadoes. Because that makes sense. Got it.

Do you ever read what you post before hitting the "submit" button? You might want to look to that. It could avoid future gaffes and embarrassment.

You still have no way to explain how global warming magically affects only the months of April (and now May), and that the November data that I posted that shows no increase in frequency and intensity is completely unrelated. Keep dancing.

 

I blame Bush. Seems he has expanded his hurricane making machine to now include tornadoes.....


but wait, there aren't that many blacks in OK (compared to New Orleans) This doesn't make sense at all.....

 

Well, my area has tornadoes, too, but they don't routinely destroy homes and infrastructure. Worst thing that ever happened, I believe, was that school roof got torn off or something.

 

sometimes you get lucky. last year, Henryville, IN was destroyed 15 minutes after i drove thru it on the highway.

 

You maverick, you.

 

i was just driving back north. i never knew it happened until i got to the truck stop in Seymour.

 

Pay Gaia her due, that seems to be the liberal answer for anything involving nature...

 

I'm beginning to suspect you're not one us. You aren't really a true believer, are you? You haven't seen the carbon arc light. More like a chimp in wolf's clothing! Baahhh... eee eee. I know The Truth, and the Truth ain't free.

 

Yes it does make sense. I am glad you finally realize how it works

Sure because that is the only graph that matters because it supports your position. Why don't you post graphs from April and May? You cherry picked that graph from a period of low frequency that did not include 80% of tornadoes as data points. Why dont you post a graph from November that at least includes all reported tornadoes?

 

Don't be modest. You were storm-chasing, trying to impress the women hitch-hikers you picked up earlier...

 

dude, i was driving a 9 y/o freighliner, i'd be too embarassed to pick up a hitchhiker...but i'd deal with it if it was Kate Upton. <3

 

Stop sinning. Will reduce punishment. For the RW answer to anything involving nature.

 

How does that make sense? If tornadoes are increasing in frequency because of global warming, then that means global warming is causing additional tornadoes. Your semantic game backfired on you.

Because I don't believe that those months are the only ones that matter. But, since you insisted:



Again, I see no significant increase over the time period. Your argument that they are increasing in frequency has been called out.

Because I would think, since your argument claims that they are increasing in intensity, we would see an increase in "significant tornadoes", which this graph focuses on. We would be seeing more of these size tornadoes if global warming really was causing an increase in the intensity of tornadoes. No such increase in intensity has been seen.

So both parts of your argument are defeated, and you have still not shown anything that substantiates your argument. What a shock. How lazy.

 

Chicks love nine-year-old freight-liners, and Kate Upton likes a man with a little hair on his chest, but none on his back.

[video=youtube;lad68Squw5w]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lad68Squw5w[/video]

 

Anytime someone on the left makes a claim, there is a 99% probability that it's completely false.

 

Oh no...I'm all in....barring any bureaucratic snags with background investigations or audits for purity and worthiness
by noon tomorrow, I'll be a card carrying, devout follower of the sacred teachings prescribed by the esteemed High Church of Progressive Dogma.

My shameful days as a heretic are over....
not to mention...as we see with all the recent intimidation of dissenters....
getting just a bit too dangerous for my tastes

 

No I said will, not had. Try to keep up

Still playing fast and furious with the truth. Why are you selecting graphs that preclude 80% of the data?

And I know you have not really looked. Because there is a very significant development in tornado numbers that occurred in 1970 that you are oblivious too