Re: [Phys-l] climate vs weather; was "why and how"

[Kyle Forinash <kforinas@ius.edu>]

Those interested in the relationship between climate and weather may 
find this report of changes in the location of the jet stream interesting:
http://www.sciencentral.com/articles/view.php3?type=article&article_id=218393120

Most meteorologists believe the jet stream affects the movement of large 
storm systems. So a shift in the jet stream could possibly explain 
unusual weather patterns, for example the recent snow in UK. The 
researchers in the article suggest that the shifts in the jet stream are 
consistent with a warming climate.

kyle
----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Message: 1
> Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2010 15:34:50 -0700
> From: William Robertson<wrobert9@ix.netcom.com>
> Subject: Re: [Phys-l] About the "why" and "how questins."
> To: Forum for Physics Educators<phys-l@carnot.physics.buffalo.edu>
> Message-ID:<D465CF20-AB6F-4C72-A478-68F7554A618A@ix.netcom.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes
>
> They say that there will occasionally be heavy snowfalls. I suppose
> you could say that's what the UK is going through right now, but as
> someone who, in Colorado, knows all about heavy snowfalls, I wouldn't
> classify what the UK is going through as just an anomalous heavy
> snowfall. I did read the entire article, and it seems rather alarmist.
> Kids in England won't even know what snow is? When scientists overstep
> the bounds of science and get involved in sensationalist predictions,
> that comes back to bite them in the butt, and it erodes confidence in
> science from laypeople.
>
> Because these threads move in so many directions so quickly, I want to
> make it clear what I'm concerned about. It's scientists complaining
> that there is an anti-intellectual, anti-science bias while
> contributing to the problem. Stating that evolution is a fact is one
> example. Overstating issues related to AGW is another. I am not
> arguing against evolution as a good theory, and I'm not arguing
> against AGW per se.
>
> Bill
>
>
> On Dec 21, 2010, at 1:43 AM, John Clement wrote:
>
> > If you read the entire post, they do say that snowfall has been rare
> > in past
> > few years.  The climatologist said it would become rarer, but that
> > occasionally there would be heavy snowfall, and the country would be
> > unprepared.  It looks like an accurate prediction.  But of course
> > people
> > will forget the other parts of the prediction.
> >
> > One prediction that has been made is that the weather would become
> > more
> > violent.  More variability is possible.
> >
> > John M. Clement
> > Houston, TX
>
>
> ------------------------------

--
------------------------------------------
 'Before you open your mouth, just remember,
  the empty wagon rattles the loudest.'
         -- my dad

  kyle forinash   812-941-2039
  kforinas@ius.edu
  http://Physics.ius.edu/
-----------------------------------------