Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > sci.physics > #521197 > unrolled thread

Sierra Nevada snowpack lowest in 500 years

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics

Contents

  Sierra Nevada snowpack lowest in 500 years Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-09-14 20:12 -0500
    Re: Sierra Nevada snowpack lowest in 500 years gilber34 <invalid@invalid.com> - 2015-09-14 20:32 -0500
    Re: Sierra Nevada snowpack lowest in 500 years jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-15 01:32 +0000
      Re: Sierra Nevada snowpack lowest in 500 years Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-09-14 20:57 -0500
        Re: Sierra Nevada snowpack lowest in 500 years jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-15 04:22 +0000
          Re: Sierra Nevada snowpack lowest in 500 years Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-09-15 07:46 -0500
            Re: Sierra Nevada snowpack lowest in 500 years jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-15 17:32 +0000
            Re: Sierra Nevada snowpack lowest in 500 years "reber g=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2015-09-15 16:07 -0700
              Re: Sierra Nevada snowpack lowest in 500 years jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-15 23:58 +0000
              Re: Sierra Nevada snowpack lowest in 500 years "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2015-09-15 20:42 -0700
    Re: Sierra Nevada snowpack lowest in 500 years Boris Mohar <borism_void_@sympatico.ca> - 2015-09-16 09:19 -0400

#521197 — Sierra Nevada snowpack lowest in 500 years

Sierra Nevada snowpack lowest in 500 years
> http://phys.org/news/2015-09-sierra-nevada-snowpack-lowest-years.html
> http://cdn.phys.org/newman/csz/news/800/2015/sierranevada.jpg


> "Our study really points to the extreme character of the 2014-15
> winter. This is not just unprecedented over 80 years—it's
> unprecedented over 500 years," said Valerie Trouet, an associate
> professor of dendrochronology at the UA Laboratory of Tree-Ring
> Research.

> "We should be prepared for this type of snow drought to occur much
> more frequently because of rising temperatures," Trouet said.
> "Anthropogenic warming is making the drought more severe."

> California's current record-setting drought began in 2012, the
> researchers note in their report.
>
>
> Read more at:
> http://phys.org/news/2015-09-sierra-nevada-snowpack-lowest-years.html#jCp

-- 

sci.physics is an unmoderated newsgroup dedicated
to the discussion of physics, news from the physics
community, and physics-related social issues.

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#521203

On 9/14/2015 8:12 PM, Sam Wormley wrote:
> Sierra Nevada snowpack lowest in 500 years
>> http://phys.org/news/2015-09-sierra-nevada-snowpack-lowest-years.html
>> http://cdn.phys.org/newman/csz/news/800/2015/sierranevada.jpg
>
>
>> "Our study really points to the extreme character of the 2014-15
>> winter. This is not just unprecedented over 80 years—it's
>> unprecedented over 500 years," said Valerie Trouet, an associate
>> professor of dendrochronology at the UA Laboratory of Tree-Ring
>> Research.

so 501 years ago there was another extreme drought.

>
>> "We should be prepared for this type of snow drought to occur much
>> more frequently because of rising temperatures," Trouet said.
>> "Anthropogenic warming is making the drought more severe."

no, it is not.

Global worming is an averaged 1/2 degree F rise from 1940 to 2015, 
(using many computer modles and filled in 99% of data by guessing) 
cannot cause anything.


>
>> California's current record-setting drought began in 2012, the
>> researchers note in their report.


because California would rathr grow almonds for the chinese than water 
their peoples

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#521207

Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> wrote:
> Sierra Nevada snowpack lowest in 500 years
>> http://phys.org/news/2015-09-sierra-nevada-snowpack-lowest-years.html
>> http://cdn.phys.org/newman/csz/news/800/2015/sierranevada.jpg
> 
> 
>> "Our study really points to the extreme character of the 2014-15
>> winter. This is not just unprecedented over 80 years?it's
>> unprecedented over 500 years,"

As there was no exploration of the Sierra Nevada range prior to
1827, how could anyone know what things were like 500 years ago,
spammng shit head?

Lake Tahoe wasn't discovered until 1844, spamming shit head.

Even by 1860 most of the area was unexplored much less was there
anyone keeping track of the snow pack.

This is just more hysterical, arm waving nonsense, spamming shit head.


-- 
Jim Pennino

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#521209

On 9/14/15 8:32 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
> As there was no exploration of the Sierra Nevada range prior to
> 1827, how could anyone know what things were like 500 years ago,
> spammng shit head?


   The article explains that jimp, but oh, no, you wouldn't be
   caught dead reading a science article. Get help, jimp. You
   need Rancho Cucamonga Anger Management Classes
> http://www.yellowpages.com/rancho-cucamonga-ca/anger-management-classes

   Someday, you will thank me, jimp.

   Sierra Nevada snowpack lowest in 500 years
 > http://phys.org/news/2015-09-sierra-nevada-snowpack-lowest-years.html
 > http://cdn.phys.org/newman/csz/news/800/2015/sierranevada.jpg


 > "Our study really points to the extreme character of the 2014-15
 > winter. This is not just unprecedented over 80 years—it's
 > unprecedented over 500 years," said Valerie Trouet, an associate
 > professor of dendrochronology at the UA Laboratory of Tree-Ring
 > Research.

 > "We should be prepared for this type of snow drought to occur much
 > more frequently because of rising temperatures," Trouet said.
 > "Anthropogenic warming is making the drought more severe."

 > California's current record-setting drought began in 2012, the
 > researchers note in their report.
 >
 >
 > Read more at:
 > http://phys.org/news/2015-09-sierra-nevada-snowpack-lowest-years.html



-- 

sci.physics is an unmoderated newsgroup dedicated
to the discussion of physics, news from the physics
community, and physics-related social issues.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#521226

Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 9/14/15 8:32 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>> As there was no exploration of the Sierra Nevada range prior to
>> 1827, how could anyone know what things were like 500 years ago,
>> spammng shit head?
> 
> 
>   The article explains that jimp,

The explaination in the article is tree ring data from other areas
with nothing to correlate such data to snow pack level other than
a wild guess, spamming shit head.


-- 
Jim Pennino

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#521251

On 9/14/15 11:22 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
> Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 9/14/15 8:32 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>> As there was no exploration of the Sierra Nevada range prior to
>>> 1827, how could anyone know what things were like 500 years ago,
>>> spammng shit head?
>>
>>
>>    The article explains that jimp,
>
> The explaination in the article is tree ring data from other areas
> with nothing to correlate such data to snow pack level other than
> a wild guess, spamming shit head.
>

   Well I be danged -- you read, but didn't understand.




-- 

sci.physics is an unmoderated newsgroup dedicated
to the discussion of physics, news from the physics
community, and physics-related social issues.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#521307

Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 9/14/15 11:22 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>> Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On 9/14/15 8:32 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>>> As there was no exploration of the Sierra Nevada range prior to
>>>> 1827, how could anyone know what things were like 500 years ago,
>>>> spammng shit head?
>>>
>>>
>>>    The article explains that jimp,
>>
>> The explaination in the article is tree ring data from other areas
>> with nothing to correlate such data to snow pack level other than
>> a wild guess, spamming shit head.
>>
> 
>   Well I be danged -- you read, but didn't understand.
 
I read and understood the arm waving, spamming shit head.

The claimed correlation is tenuous at best, spamming shit head.
 
 

-- 
Jim Pennino

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#521375

On Tuesday, September 15, 2015 at 5:46:43 AM UTC-7, Sam Wormley wrote:
> On 9/14/15 11:22 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
> > Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> On 9/14/15 8:32 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
> >>> As there was no exploration of the Sierra Nevada range prior to
> >>> 1827, how could anyone know what things were like 500 years ago,
> >>> spammng shit head?
> >>
> >>
> >>    The article explains that jimp,
> >
> > The explaination in the article is tree ring data from other areas
> > with nothing to correlate such data to snow pack level other than
> > a wild guess, spamming shit head.
> >
> 
>    Well I be danged -- you read, but didn't understand.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> 
> sci.physics is an unmoderated newsgroup dedicated
> to the discussion of physics, news from the physics
> community, and physics-related social issues.

No snow on Baldy.No river to pan gold.No business on Mt,Baldy I was the lone old man of the mountain,There was one old man on Baldy's peak when I got up there. He asked me this question.U.C.L. A?  No I answered  He then jumped into the smog. TreBert

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#521384

reber g=emc^2 <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tuesday, September 15, 2015 at 5:46:43 AM UTC-7, Sam Wormley wrote:
>> On 9/14/15 11:22 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>> > Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> On 9/14/15 8:32 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>> >>> As there was no exploration of the Sierra Nevada range prior to
>> >>> 1827, how could anyone know what things were like 500 years ago,
>> >>> spammng shit head?
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>    The article explains that jimp,
>> >
>> > The explaination in the article is tree ring data from other areas
>> > with nothing to correlate such data to snow pack level other than
>> > a wild guess, spamming shit head.
>> >
>> 
>>    Well I be danged -- you read, but didn't understand.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> -- 
>> 
>> sci.physics is an unmoderated newsgroup dedicated
>> to the discussion of physics, news from the physics
>> community, and physics-related social issues.
> 
> No snow on Baldy.No river to pan gold.No business on Mt,Baldy I was the lone old man of the mountain,There was one old man on Baldy's peak when I got up there. He asked me this question.U.C.L. A?  No I answered  He then jumped into the smog. TreBert

From Anaheim you can see whether or not there is snow on Mt. Baldy.

The primary reason to go to the top is to ski, so if there is no snow,
there will likely be few people up there.

The gold and rivers are at the bottom of the mountain, not the top.

As you have just proven, rain in the valleys is not an indicator of
snow on mountains.


-- 
Jim Pennino

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#521425

<herbertglazier0@gmail.com> Glazier the Drunkard "reber g=emc^2" wrote:
<edited for factuality and clarity>
> No snow on Baldy. No river to pan gold. No business on Mt,Baldy 
> I IMAGINED that I was the lone old man of the mountain,
> There was one old man on Baldy's peak but it was NOT me,
> when I got up there in my Beer soaked dreams. He asked me this 
> question. U.C.L. A?  No I answered, I dropped out of the 4th grade.
>  He then jumped into the smog. TreBert ... which shows that 
>
Glazier is like a dog that barks into the night at a distant noise it 
knows nothing about, & he so did for 24 years, as is seen in Glazier's 
postings that had nothing but _Gutter physics_ and Glazierola
about which....
>
Glazier's ex-tutor Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> wrote:
Glazier, your brain is entangles with a used garbage can.
Glazier, "Its a shame"  that your science is far worse
than the man's on the street.
Glazier, your postings are old man's garbage.
reber, take your you know it all thinking to your grave .
reber, your horseshit gets old.Say hi to Allah for me.
reber, you don't believe in science.
Glazier, do not post in a science newsgroup.
Glazier, quit posting __ your Gutter Science__.
Glazier, exit USENET. -- IOW Glazier, beat it!
>
"Mahipal" <mahipal7638@gmail.com> wrote:
Glazier, you are babbling desperately. Is it sympathy 
or pity you're grasping for? Stop it, either way.
>
Jim Pennino jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
Glazier, you are a spamming piece of shit...
>
Astrophysicist "Saul Levy" <saullevy1@cox.net> wrote:
GLAZIER YOU ARE A LAMEbrain PIECE OF SHIT!
Saul Levy
>
"benj" <nobody@gmail.com> Jacoby Ben, MSc wrote:
One only has to read Glazier's posts to see when Bert was lobotomized.
>
Moderator General "HVAC" <Mr.HVAC@gmail.com>
Harlow Campbell succinctly added & wrote:
>
"TreBert, you are one stupid cocksucker".
"Bert, Seriously. You are the stupidest cocksucking
moron who ever came down the Mass Pike.
"Bert, does your stupidity know no bounds?"
"Bert, you really are a pathetic excuse for a human
fucking being". "Bert is a racist. (And he's stupid too)"
"Bert, are the stupidest cocksucker on the planet."
"Spin THIS, Glazier, you fucking idiot." "Bert get
some spelling lessons, you feeble-minded fuck".
"Bert, your opinion doesn't count"
"Bert you are an idiot."
"Bert, you are a clueless cocksucker .... and "Bert
you are senile, dazed & confused. Fucked in the head.
"a trained cockroach is smarter than Bert"
"Bert, you should be arrested"
"Bert, I will call the police and tell them that your
van seems to be a center for drug activity in the
Wal-Mart parking lot"....
>
hanson wrote:
So Glazier you filthy Swine, given that the police is aware
that YOU issued criminal threats to some of the above 
posters with your intent to shit into their mouths and 
piss onto their graves, ... and then you being the criminal
offender blaming your victims, the ones you offended, 
for your criminal acts, ... what did the cops say to you 
when you made the local police "aware" that....
>
<herbertglazier0@gmail.com> :B::ert Glazier, the Swine,
Hate filled War monger, Jewish Jailbird, Face-shitter and
Graveyard Vandal, Thief, Racist, Bigot & Criminal Communist
Traitor Sympathizer "reber g=emc^2" introduced himself
as/with
>
:B:: "I am a proud Jew with a Superiority complex &
:B:: an IQ of 122", & "I do know how everything works,.."
:B:: "Being Jewish I know this is so very true" -- Bert.
:B:: "I'm a non-bible(torra) Jew I'm the only Jew that
:B:: got 2 letters from two Popes". Bert
:B:: "I'm M&M's Clueless Fuck-faced turd".Bert.
:B:: "I gave G=EMC^2 (wrong & stolen) to the world"
:B:: "Israel will drop its first H-bomb 'David' ". TreBert
:B:: __"I'm glad when war breaks out"__ Bert
:B:: "I'll be sitting on Benj's, Saul Levi's & HVAC's
:B:: face to take a shit & say: "Open your mouth wide".
:B:: "Hanson, I will piss on your grave. And laugh".
:B:: __** "Why am I not loved by all?" --- Bert **__.
:B:: "Even the FBI has me as a trouble maker and
:B:: the FBI blocks my phone from calling them. "....
:B:: cuz "I was mixing sulfur,carbon & iron together
:B:: to make gun powder" ....
>
>
<http://tinyurl.com/G-EMC2-Recall-Therapy>
for <http://tinyurl.com/Swine-Glazier>.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#521451

On Mon, 14 Sep 2015 20:12:50 -0500, Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> wrote:

>Sierra Nevada snowpack lowest in 500 years
>> http://phys.org/news/2015-09-sierra-nevada-snowpack-lowest-years.html
>> http://cdn.phys.org/newman/csz/news/800/2015/sierranevada.jpg 
>> http://phys.org/news/2015-09-sierra-nevada-snowpack-lowest-years.html#jCp


http://wattsupwiththat.com/2015/09/14/claim-sierra-nevada-snowpack-lowest-in-five-centuries/
-- 
Boris

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | sci.physics

csiph-web