Jump to content

OK ..........110 degrees MINIMUM in Vegas next MINIMUM 12 days


FISHHEAD
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 562
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Fuk that desert oven. Better in Fl. I decided to park next to the Rich AF author compound John Grisham. I think he shows up for maybe a month. Walked about an hour on the beach.  Took a quick dip and looking at Milfs at Starbucks     FL island life is the best.  

IMG_1436.jpeg

IMG_1438.jpeg

IMG_1441.jpeg

IMG_1434.jpeg

IMG_1433.jpeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, WVU said:

None of these pictures prove or disprove anything.  One could be at high tide and the other at low tide.  Derrrrrr

That is correct, but the odds that one was at high tide and the other the opposite are low, and it would be possible(if you know the date of both photo's) to use shadows/sun angles and determine the time of day and extrapolate tides.

The odds that all those photo's of different things in different places being at different tide times is almost nill.

The earth is not warming, the oceans are not rising appreciably, isn't it interesting that the media "chooses" to run around like chicken little about temps in July-  the warmest month and this week is the warmest week of the year in the northern hemisphere..

In about 1990 when climate hysteria heated up they said low lying island groups like the maldives and in the pacific would be under water in 20 years or so - it's 30 yrs later and they're still there with no visible changes. In 2008 al gore said the arctic would be ice free in the summer by 2014, here's today's image(9 yrs after that prediction).

image.thumb.png.de5f07eb8b690c9eb951e51f0494c738.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, WVU said:

Mike, you clearly know nothing about tides.  I'll leave it at that.  I could post pictures that look like the opposite.  And you know that

Tides are twice/day right - 2 highs and 2 lows/day, is that correct? i believe if you knew the time of day a pic was taken, even 100 years ago, you could determine where the moon was and thus the tides, am i wrong on that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, mikeman said:

Tides are twice/day right - 2 highs and 2 lows/day, is that correct? i believe if you knew the time of day a pic was taken, even 100 years ago, you could determine where the moon was and thus the tides, am i wrong on that?

7 foot difference in most places.  So even if it wasn't full high or full low there could still be a 5-6 foot difference .  6 feet changes those pics dramatically

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, WVU said:

Mike, you clearly know nothing about tides.  I'll leave it at that.  I could post pictures that look like the opposite.  And you know that

How do you feel about what they did to long term temperature records a few yrs ago? They weren't seeing enough long term warming to satisfy their global warming theory's so they decided the thermometers in the past were "wrong", They then adjusted temp records from 120, 80, even 30 yrs ago to show lower temps than were actually recorded. This allowed them to say it's warmer today than in the past.

I could possibly believe the thermometers  and the temp records from say 1890 were not as accurate - maybe, but do you really think they were wrong in the 1990's?

It's a con WVU.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, mikeman said:

How do you feel about what they did to long term temperature records a few yrs ago? They weren't seeing enough long term warming to satisfy their global warming theory's so they decided the thermometers in the past were "wrong", They then adjusted temp records from 120, 80, even 30 yrs ago to show lower temps than were actually recorded. This allowed them to say it's warmer today than in the past.

I could possibly believe the thermometers  and the temp records from say 1890 were not as accurate - maybe, but do you really think they were wrong in the 1990's?

It's a con WVU.

I never heard this, but do you think it is just a coincidence that Phoenix has smashed their own record of straight days over 110.  They will see over 30 days straight of these temps.  Nothing even close has happened before.  Or are you suggesting that this is also due to tampering with older temp readouts?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, WVU said:

I never heard this, but do you think it is just a coincidence that Phoenix has smashed their own record of straight days over 110.  They will see over 30 days straight of these temps.  Nothing even close has happened before.  Or are you suggesting that this is also due to tampering with older temp readouts?

I have read that in certain locations they have moved the thermometers to locations more effected by things like cities/buildings, etc, no idea if phoenix is in that boat. obviously the growth of cities like phoenix could also lead to higher reading since there's more pavement, etc.

back to the tides, that one photo was from sydney harbor, it looks like their tides range on the order of 4 ft - meaning about 2 ft up and down from the median.

image.png.47bbd37bf1000d5a2a2d519a277d4bad.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you build a city that city will warm somewhat - that doesn't mean the climate is changing.

I commented the other day that it's terrible that phoenix is 116 or 117, but if it was 108 or 109 that would be peachy? yea, they're having a heat wave, just like vegas broke their record for most days WITHOUT hitting 100 - which just happened.

Vegas was cool now it's hot - big deal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, WVU said:

The planet is clearly warming.  Whether it's a billion year pattern or the work of humans can be argued, but it can't be argued we aren't currently heating up.

 

 

Right now we're in an interglacial phase - the last ice age when glaciers covered much of north america and europe only ended 10-12K yrs ago. that means 8-10,000 BC, not that long ago considering the pyramids were built what - 5000 yrs ago?

Humans may very well temporarily stop the return of the next ice age, is that a good thing or a bad thing?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, WVU said:

Mike, stick to being a war correspondent.  It better suits you.

You refuse to believe that we and YOU are being manipulated. Do you really think that the same people that lie about everything else, literally everything, are telling the truth about climate?

Climate hysteria is a means to give more power, more control, and more money to certain groups that crave power and control. it's as simple as that.

They want to do what they did during covid ALL the time, under the guise of a climate emergency.

Link to comment
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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  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.

Loading...
 Share


×
×
  • Create New...