Hurricanes defying conventional science.

That was the post of a simpleton.Data. It's more data in a learning experience. And it will help undersstand and make the models even better.Sorry randman, but that's how science, unlike Creationism, ID, ouija boards, tarot cards and pyramidology works.The most important statement in science is "That's funny?"This message has been edited by jar, 12-04-2005 10:56 PM

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Randman, being one of your fans, I am certain that you did not open up this thread just to make that statement. You're implying something. I'm really bad with reading between the lines, so just tell me.

jar, you've got something so far stuck up your butt that you can't think straight. The media and meteorologists were all surprised very much by these 2 storms for the reasons I gave.Admit or deny?No throwing slurs at creationists or people that think aliens are real or whatever else your imagination conjures up.Just admit or deny, please.

here's the chart: 

quote:

---

Tracking info for Hurricane Epsilon
Time             Lat   Lon   Wind(mph)  Pressure  Storm type
------------------------------------------------------------------------
15 GMT 11/29/05  31.6N 50.4W     45        993     Tropical Storm
21 GMT 11/29/05  31.4N 51.2W     50        993     Tropical Storm
03 GMT 11/30/05  31.4N 51.9W     50        993     Tropical Storm
09 GMT 11/30/05  31.2N 52.5W     50        993     Tropical Storm
15 GMT 11/30/05  30.7N 53.9W     60        993     Tropical Storm
15 GMT 11/30/05  30.7N 53.9W     65        993     Tropical Storm
21 GMT 11/30/05  29.8N 54.2W     70        990     Tropical Storm
03 GMT 12/01/05  29.6N 53.4W     70        990     Tropical Storm
09 GMT 12/01/05  30.2N 52.1W     65        994     Tropical Storm
15 GMT 12/01/05  31.2N 51.6W     65        994     Tropical Storm
21 GMT 12/01/05  31.7N 51.0W     70        991     Tropical Storm
03 GMT 12/02/05  32.2N 50.2W     65        992     Tropical Storm
09 GMT 12/02/05  32.8N 49.4W     65        992     Tropical Storm
15 GMT 12/02/05  33.7N 48.2W     75        987     Category 1 Hurricane
21 GMT 12/02/05  34.2N 47.4W     75        987     Category 1 Hurricane
03 GMT 12/03/05  34.5N 46.6W     75        987     Category 1 Hurricane
09 GMT 12/03/05  34.6N 45.7W     75        987     Category 1 Hurricane
15 GMT 12/03/05  34.5N 44.4W     75        987     Category 1 Hurricane
21 GMT 12/03/05  34.5N 43.1W     80        985     Category 1 Hurricane
03 GMT 12/04/05  34.3N 41.6W     75        987     Category 1 Hurricane
09 GMT 12/04/05  34.3N 40.4W     70        990     Tropical Storm
15 GMT 12/04/05  34.3N 39.2W     85        979     Category 1 Hurricane
21 GMT 12/04/05  34.3N 38.0W     80        982     Category 1 Hurricane
03 GMT 12/05/05  34.2N 37.3W     75        985     Category 1 Hurricane

---

we're talking give or take ten miles an hour here. i think that might even be within the acceptable instrument error margins. it's not steadily growning, it's kind of wobbling about.This message has been edited by arachnophilia, 12-05-2005 12:01 AM

---

אָרַח

My question for you is.. So what? You even said its a still growing area of science, after all this time reading this board you expect us to gasp in horror, at the idea that something in science didn't work exactly as thought?come on rand you should know better, do we have to keep repeating science isn't perfect in every thread?yes they didn't follow the models, as I said so what? we make some new ones and test them, if they work, good if they don't, they don't.. that if you havn't guessed it, is science in actionedit:to correct some typos This message has been edited by ReverendDG, 12-05-2005 12:02 AM

I'm not really implying anything. The theories out there have a range from weapons systems testing to just we haven't figured it out yet. I have no ulterior motive. I live very near the ocean and pay a lot of attention to hurricanes, and these past 2 years, there has been some very strange stuff.I could not have believed a hurricane could strengthen over cold water (70 degrees), and the storm in the south Atlantic was odd, as well as the storms continually hitting the oil producing region though I guess that's predicted.

Very clear randman. LOL Sure they were surprised. Big damn deal. What's your point? They were not impossible, only unexpected. Not inexplicable, only unexplained.Do you have a point is is this going to be yet another thread of vague silly sophomoric assertions of incredulity?

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This is the Coffee House, not a science forum thread. If you don't like discussion on hurricanes, don't participate. It's that simple.I don't think meteorologists are that concerned about evolution. So it's not that sort of thread.

Their currently inexplicable, but if you don't like discussing anamolies that could affect a major area of the nation, then don't. Quit stinking up this thread and others with total BS, just blatant denials of facts for no reason.It's a fact that these storms defy what we all thought a hurricane could do, and it's sort of a serious issue depending on where one lives.So if you don't like me or don't like to discuss hurricanes or whatever, then stay the heck off the thread and quit behaving in such an asinine manner, especially to deny a basic fact like these 2 storms broke the models in terms of what we can expect.

What are you talking about? meteorology isn't science? someone tell all those future students of meteorology, that they should learn something else because suddenly the only thing thats science is evolution according to randman!now come on man, science is science, science doens't equal evolution and evolution doesn't equal science, you know this stop being evasive{ABE by the way I mean talking about evolution as being the subject when i say science, when in this case i mean meteorology which is a scienceThis message has been edited by ReverendDG, 12-05-2005 12:12 AM

Quit acting like a jerk. Clearly, the comment on evolution was that this is a coffee house thread not discussing 2 sides of a debate as you and jar seem to believe in your drivelling manner.It's about hurricanes and the science involved in predicting and understanding hurricanes.What part of that do you not get?

Hey, if you don't understand how science works (and your posts have made it perfectly clear that you don't) then don't start threads on science. If you'd started this off with a resaonable statement along the lines of "the storms from the last two years may lead to better understanding of tropical weather" then I'd be in full agreement.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

jar, you're so enraged by the evo/creo debate, you can't act like a normal human being and discuss a news story without lying because you are afraid admitting to a basic fact would hurt your side of the debate.News flash, buddy.This is not a debate, nor part of the evo/creo debate. You can admit that these storms behaved in an inexplicable manner not predicted by previous assumptions. It's safe. It's not going to damage your belief system in terms of evolution. So you don't have to freak out, deny reality or anything like that. The OP is not a threat to you or your evo paradigm.Capische?

what are you on about now, randman?are you honestly saying that you think any debate is offtopic? you think that saying "haha, the scientific models were wrong!" doesn't warrant some discussion?what do you suspect? we're not gonna sit around here and fellate you for taking potshots at science based on clear misunderstandings of what a model is.

---

אָרַח

Look at jar's comment. If I was perceived to be on his side, he would admit to the facts. He has no problem with them, as long as someone is using them not to threaten his belief system.But since I started out in a manner threatening to him, he denies those same basic facts.I don't expect you, arach, to see the delusion in jar's comments, but I suspect some others will. Jar, in a typical evo-mindset, thinks not of facts as independent empirically verified events, but things he should admit to, or deny, based on the person's viewpoint in discussing them. So he thinks, oh randman is attacking science, I better deny these hurricanes did anything unusual. He isn't even aware it seems that this is self-deception, delusional thinking. The facts are the facts regardless of how one tries to use them.And he admits he would have no problem if I stated the exact same facts but with a different angle.Well, if I stated them with a different conclusion or angle or disposition, do the facts suddenly change? Heck, he even said he followed the stories closely and that these set of facts were wrong, but anyone that followed these stories knows that these 2 hurricanes defied conventional models.So in typical evo-fashion, facts are only true when an evo sees them as non-threatening, but if they are threatening, they are wrong, and you guys really have no problem with that. it's amazing.This message has been edited by randman, 12-05-2005 12:22 AM