Conservatives blame gays for OK storm

You dumb-dumbs always cite individual instances and think that tells the whole story. Let me explain how science works. There are plenty of real-world phenomenons that are not observable by the human senses. A storm here, a storm there all seem pretty much the same to any individual but if you collect data such as frequency, severity, intensity, locality, deaths, or any number of other factors, you are able to establish patterns that are just plain not observable to an individual. In other words, if you are suspicious that something may be occurring, you can collect event related data to determine if a change has happened that anecdotal evidence just doesn't reveal. That is how science works and why 98% of climatologists agree that the data supports that our activity, specifically the burning of hydrocarbons is changing the atmosphere.
You numbskulls remind me of the guy who was told by his doctor that he had to either give up drinking coffee for his health or switch to decaf. The guy said to his doctor, "Doc, I can't drink decaf, it gives me a headache." The doctor said, "Don't be stupid, it isn't the decaf giving you a headache, it's not drinking the caffeinated coffee that is giving you the headache."

 

That's exactly what I'm talking about. When we're talking about F5 (or EF-5 as they're termed now) tornadoes, not only has the frequency not increased since recording of such severe tornadoes began, but the severity hasn't increased either. An EF-5 indicates (on a damage scale) that everything in its path is nearly obliterated.

Here is a list of F5 and EF-5 tornadoes that have occurred since recording began. You're free to come to your own bewildered conclusions, but the list certainly shows that the frequency of such tornadoes has not increased as you've stated:

View attachment 1667
http://www.spc.noaa.gov/faq/tornado/f5torns.html

If that list doesn't blow your skirt up, here's more data from the Tornado Project:

http://www.tornadohistoryproject.com/tornado/f5/table

I don't know what "locality" you're referring to, but tornadoes aren't necessarily localized. Certainly, parts of the country have more than their share of tornadoes (as they have always had), but they're also widespread (and have been since recording began):

View attachment 1668

As far as "deaths" are concerned, with all due respect to the deceased, that measurement is only incidental. If an EF-5 travels through a pasture or a wheatfield, no deaths occur. But, if it travels through a populated area like the recent one then deaths, unfortunately, will occur. Its path is just happenstance. The recent tornado could have just as easily traveled through open fields and it wouldn't have been national news. Obama wouldn't be flying in to console the injured cows, now would he? But, it would still have been an EF-5 which is actually a very rare tornado as far as tornadoes are concerned. So, please explain how "deaths" relate to your argument that tornadoes are becoming more severe.

 

The problem with these "climate change" goofs is their claim that every type of weather occurence proves their case. Too hot? Global warming. Too cold? Global warming. Too wet? Global warming. Too windy? Global warming.

 

Please don't tell me that Obama now has control of that HAARP thing that Bush caused Katrina, the Chinese Earthquake, and the Indonesian tsunami with!!!! lol

Thank goodness I live in a blue state. The red states are doomed!

 

There are plenty of factors that you and I do not take into account that climatologists do. For instance, deaths decrease because warnings are better than they were in the early 1900's and home construction has improved. And the global warming effects certainly are not limited to just tornadoes. Remember my list above? I don't expect to ever convince people that do not believe in science in the first place but do take the word of oil companies that have a financial stake in disputing global warming. We all have the right to choose our own areas of ignorance and it seems that you have chosen yours. Why you feel that oil companies are being honest when they clearly have a stake in not being seen as the culprits here, I'll never understand. Maybe you have stock in oil companies? Whatever.
View attachment 1669

 

I can't believe some sorry sack of crap is blaming this tragedy on gays in this day and age. OK...I can believe it. Funny his it struck the Bible belt of all places though. Why not west Hollywood or San Francisco if it was gods wrath on the gay? Stupid. This is why I have no love for religion whatsoever. Its a place to hide your bigotry, racism, finaticism, and hatred behind. No wonder Christianity has been on an all time record decline for the past fifty years. Its about time.

 

Oklahoma passed a state constitutional ban on gay marriage. I guess nobody told God.

 

Yes, Moron Joe. Although the Fujita scale which measures the severity of tornadoes goes to EF-12, none are rated above EF-5 for the simple reason that an EF-5 causes total destruction and measuring beyond that is pointless. You can ask your climatologist friends, they'll tell you the same thing.

How does measuring deaths also measure the severity of the tornado? Like I've told you, an EF-5 is an EF-5 regardless of whether or not it kills anyone. Just exactly what measurements ARE you using to measure the severity?

If you're using tornadoes as an indicator of "global warming", I suggest you use something else. The frequency of tornadoes hasn't increased since measurements began nor has the intensity or severity.

 

I can tell you it's 30+ degrees cooler here today than it was on this date a year ago...damn global warming.

 

These are the kind of moronic statements Righties get suckered in by. "Oh Gee! It's colder today that it was a year ago so there must be no climate change happening."
You can't teach people like this anything. Dumb is simply not fixable.

 

I wouldn't throw the pejoratives and name calling around too much in your case. In other words, pot meet kettle. Just keep ignoring everything else and focus in on one aspect of climate change. That'll work out well. Like I said, you will never get it and die in complete ignorance. Why does that not surprise me? Oh yeah, it's YOU.

 

Yeah, it's kind of a b*tch when the narrative you've been told to believe doesn't jive with reality...

 

Don't know why exactly this turned into a flame war on global warming. But to deny global warming is asinine. Whether it's human induced or not, it's a scientific fact that it is happening. This is just what naturally takes place when a planet is emerging from an ice age, which earth is still doing. Not rocket science, people.

 

Arguing with fools is a waste of time. Enjoy your ignorance. It is it's own reward.

 

I'd agree with the gist of that.

I'll go further to say that if humans were not present on Earth, the Earth would still be warming. But, I have no doubt that the rate of the warming is increased by our presence.

I'd say that termites, as an example, contribute to that warming as well. Then there's the sun's cycles, and our varying orbit around it. Those things also likely contribute to global warming.

That's what the doubters usually point out, that there are other possible reasons as to why the Earth MAY be warming. What they refuse to accept is their own contribution, which is intentional ignorance, IMO.

 

Maybe you can explain to me how the "old tornado alley" was determined to exist since only 4 of the listed 25 worst tornadoes occurred in the "old tornado alley" since 1840! However, the other 21 occurred in the "new tornado alley" which apparently originated in the early 1800's (or previously)

 

So I'm totally puzzled Coin. What is it about my post that you object to?

 

Guy, just about EVERYTHING turns into a flame war around here.

 

I'm puzzled that you're puzzled.

 

You're one to talk. You've called me and every other conservative on this forum a variety of derogatory names. So why shouldn't I throw the pejoratives and name calling around? If the shoe fits, moron....