Jump to content
Holidays
Local
Radar
Snow?
Sign in to follow this  
ZONE 51

Is The Worlds Weather Getting More Frequently Extreme? (Includes gallery)

Recommended Posts

Here is a selection of wild weather photos that I have collected from the web. 

 

The thread gallery here contains almost 70 incredible photos.

 

Apart from an amazing gallery of photos the question is are these severe weather events around the world becoming more extreme, not only this but are they becoming more frequent?

 

(Have placed each image onto a same size background to enable easy viewing without size changing)

 

 

Gallery:

post-11361-0-58093000-1393973023_thumb.j

post-11361-0-59774300-1393973030_thumb.j

post-11361-0-11877900-1393973035_thumb.j

post-11361-0-63679400-1393973041_thumb.j

post-11361-0-90653200-1393973050_thumb.j

post-11361-0-06678800-1393973160_thumb.j

post-11361-0-28983000-1393973164_thumb.j

post-11361-0-88218500-1393973170_thumb.j

post-11361-0-11763400-1393973179_thumb.j

post-11361-0-33939000-1393973259_thumb.j

===

post-11361-0-99577800-1393973354_thumb.j

post-11361-0-02990400-1393973365_thumb.j

post-11361-0-14755700-1393973376_thumb.j

post-11361-0-86480700-1393973380_thumb.j

post-11361-0-12311800-1393973392_thumb.j

post-11361-0-92729900-1393973400_thumb.j

post-11361-0-17559900-1393973408_thumb.j

post-11361-0-29588600-1393973414_thumb.j

post-11361-0-25738200-1393973420_thumb.j

post-11361-0-10206900-1393973428_thumb.j

===

post-11361-0-76012400-1393975058_thumb.j

post-11361-0-00319700-1393973601_thumb.j

post-11361-0-59958000-1393973610_thumb.j

post-11361-0-98070300-1393973615_thumb.j

post-11361-0-87115300-1393973623_thumb.j

post-11361-0-31233400-1393973631_thumb.j

post-11361-0-48645100-1393973707_thumb.j

post-11361-0-56528100-1393973715_thumb.j

post-11361-0-78837200-1393973726_thumb.j

post-11361-0-51191600-1393973752_thumb.j

===

post-11361-0-04684400-1393973813_thumb.j

post-11361-0-38999000-1393973820_thumb.j

post-11361-0-70428700-1393973825_thumb.j

post-11361-0-87115300-1393973623_thumb.j

post-11361-0-70328400-1393973839_thumb.j

post-11361-0-43934700-1393973845_thumb.j

post-11361-0-44683000-1393973855_thumb.j

post-11361-0-82755300-1393973863_thumb.j

post-11361-0-10961800-1393973869_thumb.j

post-11361-0-70547100-1393973873_thumb.j

===

post-11361-0-80512400-1393973998_thumb.j

post-11361-0-78755400-1393974004_thumb.j

post-11361-0-37800500-1393974010_thumb.j

post-11361-0-39010100-1393974017_thumb.j

post-11361-0-98867500-1393974024_thumb.j

post-11361-0-32849900-1393974032_thumb.j

post-11361-0-90450300-1393974038_thumb.j

post-11361-0-41109800-1393974047_thumb.j

post-11361-0-66434200-1393974050_thumb.j

post-11361-0-07536000-1393974059_thumb.j

===

post-11361-0-56494800-1393974179_thumb.j

post-11361-0-37645500-1393974187_thumb.j

post-11361-0-82333000-1393974190_thumb.j

post-11361-0-96898300-1393974194_thumb.j

post-11361-0-36269500-1393974198_thumb.j

post-11361-0-88904600-1393974203_thumb.j

post-11361-0-07317700-1393974210_thumb.j

post-11361-0-90645000-1393974213_thumb.j

post-11361-0-46255500-1393974218_thumb.j

post-11361-0-28409600-1393974318_thumb.j

post-11361-0-80783200-1393974322_thumb.j

post-11361-0-83323400-1393974426_thumb.j

post-11361-0-58331100-1393974434_thumb.j

post-11361-0-53447800-1393974440_thumb.j

post-11361-0-00774700-1393974463_thumb.j

post-11361-0-14478200-1393974467_thumb.j

post-11361-0-98698300-1393974470_thumb.j

------

post-11361-0-71439900-1393973056_thumb.j

post-11361-0-92617900-1393973067_thumb.j

post-11361-0-34982500-1393973110_thumb.j

post-11361-0-71803000-1393973566_thumb.j

post-11361-0-88917900-1393973831_thumb.j

post-11361-0-91539800-1393974329_thumb.j

Edited by Tobor
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some realy good pics , surtinly seems that way , with exception of where I live , where the weather is always constantly boring !!....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

an impossible question to answer unless one has been alive for a million years, and has lived at every part of the globe for those million (or more) years, and you would need an exceptional memory! (or a big note pad!).

but personally, i doubt it, they are just reported more these days due to technology.

but then, im a "denier" (or realist).

Edited by Mr_Pessimistic
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mr_Pessimistic, on 16 Apr 2014 - 16:05, said:

an impossible question to answer unless one has been alive for a million years, and has lived at every part of the globe for those million (or more) years, and you would need an exceptional memory! (or a big note pad!).

but personally, i doubt it, they are just reported more these days due to technology.

but then, im a "denier" (or realist).

Certainly a very pessimistic attitude - an impossible question? The purpose of science is to answer "impossible questions".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some lovely pics but some of them weren't really anything out of the ordinary, weatherwise, if I were to be honest.

Edited by Weather-history

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Full marks for the effort you put in in displaying some terrific photography...I especially like the pics of the cars cased in ice, parked by the lake/seafront! Bad timing if you needed your car in such a situation.

 

Is the climate producing more extreme weather events? I don't have the expertise to deliver a definitive answer and of course it isan obviously hotly contested subject. What is certain though, is that compared to decades ago, more people have cameras, enabling more people to visually document and share dramatic scenes in front of their eyes. The Increasing quantity of high quality weather images in turn may give the impression that more extreme things are happening in our world, no matter what the historical statistics suggest .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The only thing getting more extreme is the desperation of the global warming club. Have you noticed the number of weather programmes on the television device these days - which invariably open with rapid-fire, time-lapse photographs of a burgeoning Cb, followed by almost subliminal-quick images of lightning,tornadoes and hurricanes an' stuff, complete with a guy in a white shirt clinging onto a telegraph pole to avoid being swept away in the torrent? Then the voice-over, once your senses have been battered by this battery of apocalyptic images, asks the very same question as this thread's title.  Great pics nonetheless, by the way - though ones which would have been much harder to come by not too many years ago. At least back in the day they didn't come with free climate change crapola.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I must admit I never cease to be amazed that in a so-called scientific forum expert scientific evidence, across many disciplines, is so frequently trashed with no substantive reason given other than meaningless rhetoric. Actually I'm not.

Edited by knocker
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some great pics, I think like others have said that the explosion of social media and cameraphones means that more extreme events are getting reported, but whether they are more frequent is another matter! All climate change projections backed up by scientific reasoning shows more extremes being possible, but it doesn't seem to be the case necessarily so far. For example, category 5 hurricanes don't seem to have increased in recent years. Of course, this is akin to claiming that climate change isn't real because it hasn't warmed for 10 years, it's not statistically significant at all.

 

It's purely anecdotal, but it certainly seems that the UK has seen some wild swings in recent years!

I must admit I never cease to be amazed that in a so-called scientific forum expert scientific evidence, across many disciplines, is so frequently trashed with no substantive reason given other than meaningless rhetoric. Actually I'm not.

 

Frustrating, isn't it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Frustrating, isn't it?

 

I can think of more appropriate words!

 

There have been some recent papers on hurricanes but I'm not going there.

Edited by knocker
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The only thing getting more extreme is the desperation of the global warming club. Have you noticed the number of weather programmes on the television device these days - which invariably open with rapid-fire, time-lapse photographs of a burgeoning Cb, followed by almost subliminal-quick images of lightning,tornadoes and hurricanes an' stuff, complete with a guy in a white shirt clinging onto a telegraph pole to avoid being swept away in the torrent? Then the voice-over, once your senses have been battered by this battery of apocalyptic images, asks the very same question as this thread's title.  Great pics nonetheless, by the way - though ones which would have been much harder to come by not too many years ago. At least back in the day they didn't come with free climate change crapola.

"At least back in the day they didn't come with free climate change crapola." - Are you an expert in the field of climate science? Just wondering what qualifications you have that give you the authority to make such a sweeping statement? Do you know something that the world's scientists don't?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"At least back in the day they didn't come with free climate change crapola." - Are you an expert in the field of climate science? Just wondering what qualifications you have that give you the authority to make such a sweeping statement? Do you know something that the world's scientists don't?

are you?, and do you? you are doing the same thing..

he is quite right in my opinion.  the press gets hold of any weather related story and links it in with global warming (i dont use the term climate change, as climate change is, and has always been, not something created by us) to create a dooms day scenario.  the thing is, most people dont think for themselves, beleive what they hear (especially if it is banged into you day after day), and dont question anything. if it were not for people like lazerguy, we would all be religious like those in other less educated countrys who are stopped or killed just becase they question what the masses beleive.

problem is, the scientists are basing their argument on computer models, and we all know how reliable they are beyond three days! enough said i think..

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

are you?, and do you? you are doing the same thing..he is quite right in my opinion.  the press gets hold of any weather related story and links it in with global warming (i dont use the term climate change, as climate change is, and has always been, not something created by us) to create a dooms day scenario.  the thing is, most people dont think for themselves, beleive what they hear (especially if it is banged into you day after day), and dont question anything. if it were not for people like lazerguy, we would all be religious like those in other less educated countrys who are stopped or killed just becase they question what the masses beleive.problem is, the scientists are basing their argument on computer models, and we all know how reliable they are beyond three days! enough said i think..

Perhaps you need to question whether climate science is all based on computer models. And then question yourself as to the difference between weather and climate. Then consider if the media ever portrays scientific matters accurately, and how exactly that relates to the scientists.Then question why dismissing, with nothing more than opinion, decades of research and fundamental physics by countless scientists has helped move us away from religion.
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps you need to question whether climate science is all based on computer models. And then question yourself as to the difference between weather and climate. Then consider if the media ever portrays scientific matters accurately, and how exactly that relates to the scientists.Then question why dismissing, with nothing more than opinion, decades of research and fundamental physics by countless scientists has helped move us away from religion.

i knew either you or gray-wolf would be in here with a responce! 

but, no, i understand not all climate science is based on computer models,  and, to be fair, that is not what i said. but they are using those models to try to predict the future climate.  

i also understand the difference between the weather and climate, and how global warming enthusiasts like to point out the differences regurly to those that they think do not understand. but i very much doubt that predicting the climate is any easier (infact probably harder and more complicated than short term weather), as shown by the innacuracys of their previous climate & temperature predictions. 

you also assume i am dissmissing years of science, when i am doing no such thing. actually, i am not convinced either way as i feel i do not know enough about the subject. but, i do know that people are not always right, even if there are many with the same, scientific view.

people still need to consider this fact and not to just jump on the bandwaggon.   scientists do not say agw is a fact (controry to what the media says), they say it is the most likely scenario, and the most likely scenario is not always the right one, especially when it comes to matters so complex as the climate.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

are you?, and do you? you are doing the same thing..

he is quite right in my opinion.  the press gets hold of any weather related story and links it in with global warming (i dont use the term climate change, as climate change is, and has always been, not something created by us) to create a dooms day scenario.  the thing is, most people dont think for themselves, beleive what they hear (especially if it is banged into you day after day), and dont question anything. if it were not for people like lazerguy, we would all be religious like those in other less educated countrys who are stopped or killed just becase they question what the masses beleive.

problem is, the scientists are basing their argument on computer models, and we all know how reliable they are beyond three days! enough said i think..

 

But you and others don't question science. You just simply dismiss it without offering any scientific reasoning to justify that position apart from regurgitating the usual mantras. I was going to say it's an argument on a level with a bunch of Meerkats but that would be totally unfair on the latter.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i knew either you or gray-wolf would be in here with a responce! 

but, no, i understand not all climate science is based on computer models,  and, to be fair, that is not what i said. but they are using those models to try to predict the future climate.  

i also understand the difference between the weather and climate, and how global warming enthusiasts like to point out the differences regurly to those that they think do not understand. but i very much doubt that predicting the climate is any easier (infact probably harder and more complicated than short term weather), as shown by the innacuracys of their previous climate & temperature predictions. 

you also assume i am dissmissing years of science, when i am doing no such thing. actually, i am not convinced either way as i feel i do not know enough about the subject. but, i do know that people are not always right, even if there are many with the same, scientific view.

people still need to consider this fact and not to just jump on the bandwaggon.   scientists do not say agw is a fact (controry to what the media says), they say it is the most likely scenario, and the most likely scenario is not always the right one, especially when it comes to matters so complex as the climate.

 

But you compared weather forecasting to climate forecasting, they are very different things and using one to dismiss the other suggests a lack of understanding.

Nope, I didn't suggest that was your opinion, but laserguy does dismiss it all: the warming, the climate change, and anything related to it. Claiming his type of attitude toward AGW (dismissing loads of evidence without any consideration for anything other than his own gut) is somehow what separates us from religious uneducated societies, is a little far fetched, don't ya think?

There is no scientific fact and once more the media nonsense, which is both for and against AGW, matters little.

We are without a doubt altering the planets climate. The exact manifestations of this have some uncertainties. But we're about as likely to discover that CO2 has no effect on climate, as we are discover that evolution was all a big mistake!

Edited by BornFromTheVoid
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But you compared weather forecasting to climate forecasting, they are very different things and using one to dismiss the other suggests a lack of understanding.

Nope, I didn't suggest that was your opinion, but laserguy does dismiss it all: the warming, the climate change, and anything related to it. Claiming his type of attitude toward AGW (dismissing loads of evidence without any consideration for anything other than his own gut) is somehow what separates us from religious uneducated societies, is a little far fetched, don't ya think?

There is no scientific fact and once more the media nonsense, which is both for and against AGW, matters little.

We are without a doubt altering the planets climate. The exact manifestations of this have some uncertainties. But we're about as likely to discover that CO2 has no effect on climate, as we are discover that evolution was all a big mistake!

not much time so i will reply more tomorrow depending on youre response, but please just answer one question for me then void,,  are you seriously telling me that you think that the climate is alot easier to predict, and less complex than the weather?

i will be supprised if youre answer is yes.

 

knocker - youre statement was answered in my previous one if you care to read it again. theres no need to get personal, it just makes you look like an idiot. i wasnt dismissing anything, im saying a general view on something is not always right and one should always question things, especially when reguarding such complex matters. surely even you can understand that..

But you compared weather forecasting to climate forecasting, they are very different things and using one to dismiss the other suggests a lack of understanding.

Nope, I didn't suggest that was your opinion, but laserguy does dismiss it all: the warming, the climate change, and anything related to it. Claiming his type of attitude toward AGW (dismissing loads of evidence without any consideration for anything other than his own gut) is somehow what separates us from religious uneducated societies, is a little far fetched, don't ya think?

There is no scientific fact and once more the media nonsense, which is both for and against AGW, matters little.

We are without a doubt altering the planets climate. The exact manifestations of this have some uncertainties. But we're about as likely to discover that CO2 has no effect on climate, as we are discover that evolution was all a big mistake!

not much time so i will reply more tomorrow depending on youre response, but please just answer one question for me then void,,  are you seriously telling me that you think that the climate is alot easier to predict, and less complex than the weather?

i will be supprised if youre answer is yes.

 

knocker - youre statement was answered in my previous one if you care to read it again. theres no need to get personal, it just makes you look like an idiot. i wasnt dismissing anything, im saying a general view on something is not always right and one should always question things, especially when reguarding such complex matters. surely even you can understand that..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

knocker - youre statement was answered in my previous one if you care to read it again. theres no need to get personal, it just makes you look like an idiot. i wasnt dismissing anything, im saying a general view on something is not always right and one should always question things, especially when reguarding such complex matters. surely even you can understand that..

 

Accepting that I'm an idiot I find your comment "a general view on something is not always right" rather quaint. How can you have a general view on the masses of scientific evidence accrued from many disciplines over many years that global warming and climate change are down, along with natural variations, to human input? If you disagree with the science fine, you can then support your disagreement with scientific rebuttal. Or you can question some of it but the same criteria applies. I don't see how you can have a 'general view' unless the definition has changed. And on that subject LGs view is far from general, quite specific I would say, with which you agreed.

 

Regarding science on TV In the last few years, presenters like Brian Cox, Iain Stewart, Alice Roberts, Jim Al-Khalili and Michael Moseley have featured in a range of superbly filmed and superbly scripted science programmes. I agree that some of the climate programmes are OTT but then one can always consult the primary sources if doubts or confusion are niggling. Surely even you realise that.

Edited by knocker
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mr_Pessimistic, on 17 Apr 2014 - 16:37, said:

are you?, and do you? you are doing the same thing..

he is quite right in my opinion.  the press gets hold of any weather related story and links it in with global warming (i dont use the term climate change, as climate change is, and has always been, not something created by us) to create a dooms day scenario.  the thing is, most people dont think for themselves, beleive what they hear (especially if it is banged into you day after day), and dont question anything. if it were not for people like lazerguy, we would all be religious like those in other less educated countrys who are stopped or killed just becase they question what the masses beleive.

problem is, the scientists are basing their argument on computer models, and we all know how reliable they are beyond three days! enough said i think..

 

I haven't claimed to be a climate scientist. But in order to make sweeping statements like the one in the post you need to have some solid research and knowledge to back it up - it is flying in the face of scientific opinion. If there is a reasonable chance of some nasty consequences resulting from climate change surely it is wise to take some preventive action just in case, rather than stick your head in the sand?

 

The standard model of particle physics is a mathematical model and is accurate to many decimal places. Quantum Mechanics is a mathematical model, General Relativity is a mathematical model and all are very accurate. Without mathematical models we would still be in the stone age. Clearly no one is saying climate models are perfect yet and there is still a way to go and more accuracy and factors to build in, but just dismissing them as you are is bizarre. Plainly, they will become better and better over time. However, it's not just mathematical models is it? There's a plethora of other evidence accumulating too.

 

I think you have your arguments back to front - if it wasn't for the application of scientific methods and mathematical models we would all still believe that the earth was the centre of the universe.

 

I would however agree with one your points; newspapers do associate every weather event with climate change before any evidence has been gathered, but that's tabloids for you.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Warmists, I understand your 'frustration' - it's easy to see why you feel that way. There was some guy from the UN on the news this week, saying how they'd got it all sussed at last (whatever 'it' actually is) and that they knew what had to be done and everything will be alright. What exactly are they foolishly trying to prevent, and what is this ideal climate Utopia they're trying to secure? Utter,utter, utter tripe.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, if you can't provide any justification for your rhetoric then just resort to slagging things off? I think the quality of debate just took a turn for the worst. Time to switch threads.

Edited by poseidon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

all the other models you quote are models where results can be tested and repeated in a lab of some sorts. you cant do that with a climate models or weather models, it just takes a long time to verify results, and due to this, it makes them very unreliable, as shown by the three top weather models beyond three days. im assuming, and probably quite rightly, that the climate models are just as unreliable.

so anyone dare to answer the question put to bornfromthevoid? 

and im not suggesting we put our heads in the sand and ignore the results given by climate science.

i suggest we wait to see some obvious sighns of global warming (of which there are none yet accept a tiny temp rise over the years, which could be just a natural fluctuation,  we need more time to know for sure.), and if we start seeing some, we adapt to the situation rather than suggest silly ideas (and scare mungoring) which just wont be implemented anywhere else in the world other than our small island.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Warmists, I understand your 'frustration' - it's easy to see why you feel that way. There was some guy from the UN on the news this week, saying how they'd got it all sussed at last (whatever 'it' actually is) and that they knew what had to be done and everything will be alright. What exactly are they foolishly trying to prevent, and what is this ideal climate Utopia they're trying to secure? Utter,utter, utter tripe.

 

No. Our frustration is the rhetoric you continue to peddle with no substance to back it up. I would have absolutely no problem with your point of view if it was backed up with some science, and wasn't so abrasive and unpleasant towards anyone who has a different view to yourself.

 

Now, let's try and keep this thread on topic rather than a debate between the flat Earth society and those using scientific reasoning...

Edited by Nick L
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No. Our frustration is the rhetoric you continue to peddle with no substance to back it up.

 

That's rich... still waiting for evidence of AGW let alone the means to 'tackle it' (always raises a chuckle, that one). All the science in the world ain't worth jack - even a switched-on five-year old can see thru' this. Ya don't need to be a 'climate scientist'.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's rich... still waiting for evidence of AGW let alone the means to 'tackle it' (always raises a chuckle, that one). All the science in the world ain't worth jack - even a switched-on five-year old can see thru' this. Ya don't need to be a 'climate scientist'.

 

If that's how you feel why bother with this forum when your only intention is to disrupt it. Pathetic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...