Wednesday, November 28, 2012


I get the stuff... except with this part:

"Taking moments around the point on the wall find the tension in the cable Tc
32.81 x 9.8 x 4 x 2 = 4 x Tc sin Ø
Tc = 643.1/sin Ø N"

I get the stuff... except with this part: Why do they multiply by 2 on the left side? There is the mass of the beam and g, and multiplying them together gives weight. Then you multiply by 4 to get the moment. But what about the 2?


Monday, November 26, 2012

Little Storms

Monday, November 26, 2012
1:37 P.M.

I was looking at the models this afternoon, and I noticed that there are a lot of little storms slated to hit our area later this week into next week. None of these storms look particularly strong. In some ways, they look kind of cute... in a nerdy meteorological way. If our rainstorm/windstorm last Monday was a bulldog, these storms would be adorable little pugs. Of course, I'd take a big bad storm any day over a cute one, but if I look at these storms from this perspective, maybe it'll tide me over until we get another fat cyclone headed our way.

Before I get any further, I'll show you the current 500mb chart over our area. Atmospheric scientists are obsessed with the 500mb level charts and use them all the time to determine upper-level flow patterns and the jet stream.

Valid 04:00 am PST Mon, 26 Nov 2012 - UW 12z WRF-GFS, 36 km 500mb absolute vorticity, heights

As you can see, there is currently a pretty sizable ridge over the West Coast from California to Alaska and a big ol' trough around 150 west. This ridge has been giving us the sunny weather with rather cool nights we have seen of late. I'm trying to go to 2013 without wearing long pants (apart from special occasions like weddings and stuff), but I was pretty darn chilly this morning in my gym shorts.

Over the next few days, this trough will drift on in to our region and we will start to feel its effects.

Valid 10:00 am PST Thu, 29 Nov 2012 - 78hr Fcst - UW 12z WRF-GFS, 36 km 500mb absolute vorticity, heights

The ridge has fallen off the wayside and we have a broad and modest (with respect to wind velocity) jet stream over the Pacific Northwest. The main upper level low around 140 west and 50 north will act as a chauffeur, escorting a variety of classy, well-mannered storms into our area.

The first of these storms will arrive Thursday. It could bring 2-3 inches of rain to the Olympics, which just might be enough rain to push the Skokomish River over flood stage. But this front will sag south over northern California and deliver copious amounts of moisture to the area via an atmospheric river. Take a look at the picture below!

 Valid 04:00 am PST Sat, 01 Dec 2012 - 120hr Fcst - UW 12z WRF-GFS, 12 km 48 hour precip, wind vectors

The WRF is forecasting 10-20 inches of rain in some regions, and it has been pretty consistent with this feature. Northern California should take action and prepare for river flooding.

After that, the details get really mushy as far as storms go. The good news is that I am fairly certain that the mountains will pick up some decent snow amounts with this pattern. The snow level looks like it will be all the way up to 8,000 feet early in the week and gradually settle down to around 5,000 feet by Friday. After Friday though, models show the snow level dropping below 3,000 feet, which means Snoqualmie Pass will get some snow and will probably open soon. 

Valid 04:00 pm PST Mon, 03 Dec 2012 - 180hr Fcst - UW 12z WRF-GFS, 12 km 24-hour snowfall

I'm dying to get back on the slopes!

Enjoy your Monday!

Tuesday, November 20, 2012


Tuesday, November 20, 2012
12:06 A.M.

Yesterday, I thought I had found true love. Sitting in math class, I occasionally took a few peeks out the window, yearning for the spiritual and enlightening connection I have been striving for my whole life. And every time I turned, I experienced a feeling so tender, so loving. I had no time for surface integrals. Instead, I bathed myself with the soft, silky touch of euphoric love.

And then just like she came into my life, she left for good. I would sacrifice my belongings and crucify my every societal standing just to get one more exalting smile and feel the that incredible, exciting, soothing empathy radiating through my every cell of my body.

Yeah, it's pretty hard to date a midlatitude cyclone.

When the Pacific storm train really gets ramped up, you are transfixed in a conveyor belt of shimmering beauty delivering gorgeous storms to your doorstep. But when the conveyor belt ends, I would do anything to bring it back.

Long story short: this was the last irresistible storm we'll see for a while. It's never the right time to say goodbye. Farewell, my one and only true love.

I'll post all that analysis stuff later.

Yours faithfully,
Charles Robertson Phillips

Friday, November 16, 2012


Friday, November 16, 2012
8:50 A.M.

I'm happy. You know why I'm happy? Because we will finally see a string of strong storms that will streak from ocean to peak through next week. Now that was clever.

Let's look at the timeline for our storms. 

Our first storm comes in on Saturday morning. This one looks pretty impressive in the model, but the front will stretch out and weaken before it hits the Western Washington lowlands. It won't be a notable storm, but it will open the door for the other storms to follow.

Valid 07:00 am PST Sat, 17 Nov 2012 - 27hr Fcst - UW 12km 12z WRF-GFS 3 hour precip

It will also bring some solid wind to some areas, mainly the coast. The map below shows the surface temperature, and more importantly, the isobars over the region at the given time. It also shows wind barbs, but unless you have the eyesight of a Peregrine Falcon, they are hard to see. It looks like there will be gale-force winds off our coast, though.

Valid 07:00 am PST Sat, 17 Nov 2012 - 27hr Fcst - UW 12km 12z WRF-GFS SLP, 2m temp, 10 wind

We'll get another storm Sunday night. This one will be significantly wetter but probably won't be as windy. Look at the three-hour precipitation map below, and you'll get an idea of the front of this storm.

Valid 07:00 pm PST Sun, 18 Nov 2012 - 63hr Fcst - UW 12km 12z WRF-GFS 3 hour precip

But the main thing that the meteorological community is looking at right now is a storm slated for Monday night. This storm will bring heavy rainfall totals here and massive amounts of rain in southern Oregon. It also has the potential to bring high winds to the area. Let's take a look.

The WRF-GFS brings a 982 mb low, deepens it to 979 mb, and brings it into southern Vancouver Island. This would certainly bring gales to the coast and would probably bring 25-35 mph sustained winds over Puget Sound, with gusts up to 50 in exposed regions, like Alki Point. Places. The pressure orientation isn't quite right for super high winds in the Puget Sound area, as there won't be a massive pressure gradient between Bellingham and Portland. In the 2006 Hanukkah Eve Storm, there was a pressure difference of over 22 mb between the two sites, and the current WRF-GFS shows a maximum pressure gradient of 9mb or so. It will still be our windiest storm of the season though, and it's a ways out. It bears watching

Valid 10:00 am PST Mon, 19 Nov 2012 - 78hr Fcst - UW 12km 12z WRF-GFS 10m wind, SLP

The bigger story with this storm will be the massive amounts of rain it will bring to the Pacific Northwest, especially southwest Oregon. In 48 hours, places like Brookings could see well over 10 inches of rain.

Valid 04:00 pm PST Tue, 20 Nov 2012 - 108hr Fcst - UW 12km 12z WRF-GFS 48 hour precip

In fact, the Portland office for the National Weather Service has issued a hydrologic outlook for Kelso, WA to Eugene, OR. South of Eugene, the Medford office is in charge, and they haven't issued any hydrologic outlooks yet, but they are predicted to see even heavier rain. 

Yesterday, in my WeatherOn long range blog, I mentioned that this would be a "Pineapple Express" type setup. Well, I read Cliff Mass' blog yesterday, and he had a better name for it: the "Teriyaki Express." He dubbed it as such because the moisture is originating from the higher latitudes closer to Asia than the subtropics from Hawaii. During true Pineapple Express events, the temperature can rise into the 60s. The warmest temperature recorded at Sea-Tac in December was 63 degrees and occurred during a Pineapple Express... at 2 A.M. in the morning! I'm only expecting highs into the mid 50s, which is still a bit milder than normal, but isn't too bad. The snow level will likely peak around 5,000 feet for the Monday storm. During a full-fledged Pineapple Express, the snow level can rise to 11,000 feet, meaning that it is raining in every single location in the state except the tops of Mt. Rainier and Mt. Adams.

One more thing... the track of the Monday storm is still pretty uncertain. It will be wet and windy, but it's hard to pin down the details at this point. As always, I'll keep you posted as the event comes closer.


Thursday, November 15, 2012

The Misrepresentation of Science in the Public Domain

Thursday, November 15, 2012
8:42 P.M.

So, I was thinking a lot about global warming today (like I always do), but I was struck by one thought. When I hear people talk about global warming, there seems to be a debate, even among scientists. Richard Lindzen, Joe Bastardi, and even our own George Taylor (Oregon State Climatologist) are all climate change skeptics or deniers. And in politics, it seems like it's almost a 50-50 debate, with most Democrats believing in climate change and most Republicans not believing it (that's a huge generalization, I know... it's just a trend I have observed).

I was disheartened by this article, where Peter Ferrara, for Forbes Magazine, said that the Earth is actually cooling, but he did something that caught my attention. Peter went to the "International Climate Change Conference," which is sponsored by the Heartland Institute. Check out this quote.

The conference featured serious natural science, contrary to the self-interested political science you hear from government financed global warming alarmists seeking to justify widely expanded regulatory and taxation powers for government bodies, or government body wannabees, such as the United Nations.  See for yourself, as the conference speeches are online.

What you will see are calm, dispassionate presentations by serious, pedigreed scientists discussing and explaining reams of data.  In sharp contrast to these climate realists, the climate alarmists have long admitted that they cannot defend their theory that humans are causing catastrophic global warming in public debate.  With the conference presentations online, let’s see if the alarmists really do have any response.

Well, my first thought was that this guy seems rather egotistical, but I love unbiased science, even if it goes against global warming. I went and checked out the International Climate Change Conference (ICCC), and much to my dismay, on their home page, there was a quote that said "The world’s most prominent think tank promoting skepticism about man-made climate change.” — The Economist, May 26, 2012. This is the kind of stuff I hate because I don't like it when scientific organizations present only one view... that's not science, that's just cherry picking. That's like me saying that trail mix is unhealthy when I'm only cherry picking the M & Ms.

But anyway, I decided to check out some of these videos, because I wanted to see what these scientists thought. I checked out Bob Carter, Ph.D's video entitled "The Misrepresentation of Science in the Public Domain." Trust me, I was anxious to hear this one.

It actually started out well. He talked about the scientific method and Richard Feynman, and made the point that a hypothesis is wrong if it does not agree with the data. I was very happy to hear this! That is absolutely true.

Things started to get a little sketchy though when he pulled out a graphic showing the IPCC's (International Panel on Climate Change, which is the leading scientific organization on climate change, and is, at least to my knowledge, in no way affiliated with the ICCC) predicted temperature vs. the observed temperature. The evidence on the graph was clear. The predicted global temperature was below the IPCC's predictions. He then used this statement to prove that since the data and hypothesis didn't match up, global warming was a flawed theory. It sounds like it makes sense.

But the graph only showed ten years of data. It is well known by all climate scientists that the Earth has not significantly warmed since 2000, both those who believe in global warming and those who don't. His statement about global warming being false just by simply looking at one graph of the global temperature over the past ten years vs. the IPCC's prediction is the biggest oversimplication you could ever make. Just like that trail mix I was talking about. On a positive note, he had solid evidence... the bad part is that he focused on one piece of evidence when there are countless pieces of evidence to be observed.

But it went downhill from there. He cited a statement by the Powerhouse Museum in Sydney, Australia, which read "The world's climate scientists agree that the world is getting hotter," and he said that this is a completely false statement, and that the world's climate scientists do NOT agree on global warming and that there is a huge debate. He didn't have any evidence to back it up though.

So I did a Google search on the percentage of climate scientists that believe in global warming, and I found a statement  that was backed up with sufficient evidence that, to say the least, disagreed with Carter's statement about the global warming debate among scientists.

I found an article written by James Powell, who is the Executive Director of the National Physical Science Consortium. He, like most other scientists, believes that global warming is real, and serious. He did a study where he looked at peer-reviewed climate articles online and calculated how many of then accepted global warming and how many of them rejected global warming. Of course, there are many shades of grey, but he did his best to put in in accept/reject categories. The methodology he used can be found here.

His scientific findings, as you can see, disagreed with Carter's statement, to say the least. Here's what Powell had to say.

"By my definition, 24 of the 13,950 articles, 0.17% or 1 in 581, clearly reject global warming or endorse a cause other than CO2 emissions for observed warming."

That, my friends, shows Carter's hypocrisy. His "hypothesis" that there is no scientific consensus that global warming is occurring does not match up with the data.

Oh yeah, his "International Climate Change Conference" video has 520 views. My video on Geoduck clamming has 576. It's my turn to be egotistical now. ;)

Bottom line: check your facts before making outlandish statements.


Tuesday, November 13, 2012

Pattern Change

Tuesday, November 13, 2012
7:05 P.M.

Hey everybody! I hope everybody had a nice Veteran's Day weekend. I didn't do much... besides sleeping of course. Funny story actually... I was going to bed last night (at my house) and our dog was already asleep on my bed. I tried to move him... but that guy is essentially a warm lump of organic matter when he is asleep. So I shoved him to the end of my bed and he tried to sleep there. Eventually he got off my bed... he was probably irked that I took his spot.

Anyway, I had two posts on WeatherOn today. One was a long range outlook, and you can find it here! The other was for the climate blog I run there, and it was just a copy of an old post I wrote on this blog. The title of the blog post is "A Response to the Deniers of Anthropogenic Global Warming." I'm the long range and climate blogger over at WeatherOn. You can find that blog post here under "Recent Posts" on the right side of the blog, or you can check it out on WeatherOn here.

As I've stressed before, my blogging at WeatherOn does not mean I cease blogging here. I'll post links to my WeatherOn posts though. The more blogging, the better, right?

Alrighty then, let's take at what's in store for us over the next several days.

The short answer is that the weather will be pretty mundane, particularly for mid-late November, which is, on average, our stormiest period of the year. Take a look at the current 500mb setup over us.

Valid 04:00 am PST Tue, 13 Nov 2012 - UW 36km 12z WRF-GFS 500mb absolute vorticity, heights

This chart shows the heights of the atmosphere at the 500mb level and the vorticity of the air parcels. The vorticity is defined as the tendency for an air parcel to spin and is generally low over areas of high pressure and higher over areas of low pressure (look at the storm in the Alaskan panhandle for an example), but don't worry about that. 

The main thing we are looking for here is the gradient of the 500mb height lines. If the lines are close together, that means the upper level winds in that particular area are strong because there is a strong pressure gradient. It does not necessarily mean that the winds at the surface are strong (although the two are related). 

Over us, the lines are fairly far apart. This means that the 500mb winds are weak. Many of you have heard the colloquial term "jet stream" used before. You can trace the approximate location and strength of the jet stream from looking for the area with the steepest gradient lines. As you can see, the jet stream is extremely weak over the Pacific Northwest, as the lines are very far apart. 

Take a look at the 300mb isotach chart below. It shows the height lines at 300mb and the estimated wind speed, and is also useful for tracing the jet stream.

Valid 04:00 am PST Tue, 13 Nov 2012 - UW 36km 12z WRF-GFS 300mb isotachs, heights

You can never get exciting weather with this type of setup. Mid-latitude storms thrive off of horizontal temperature gradients in, well, the mid-latitudes. A strong jet stream implies strong temperature gradients, and areas of low pressure are formed by divergence aloft ahead of the direction the storm is travelling, and convergence behind the direction of the storm. The stronger the jet stream, the more air is brought up from the surface to the top, where it diverges, and the storm at the surface becomes lower in pressure and strengthens. Strong jet streams lead to strong storms. Our Hanukkah Eve Storm rode into our area on a 190 knot jet stream. The jet stream above our area in the above picture is a mind-boggling 60 knots. 

But, there is hope.

Over the next week, the jet stream pretty much departs from our area completely. But after 7 days, both the ECMWF and GFS place a fairly strong jet over our area. Here's the 500 mb chart, and below that is the 300mb chart.

Valid 04:00 am PST Tue, 20 Nov 2012 - 168hr Fcst - UW 36km 12z WRF-GFS 500mb absolute vorticity, heights

Valid 04:00 am PST Tue, 20 Nov 2012 - 168hr Fcst - UW 36km 12z WRF-GFS 300mb isotachs, heights

By day seven, there is a 140 knot jet stream centered right over our area. It's not historic by any means, and there aren't any big storms coming over our area within the end of this run (hour 180). However, if this pattern continues, we could see some nice systems swinging over our area.

Until next time,

Monday, November 5, 2012

A Nor'easter for the Northeast

Monday, November 5, 2012
2:39 P.M.

Let me first start out by saying that this storm will be nowhere near as strong as Sandy. I was looking at some of the statistics from Sandy... 185 fatalities and at least 52.4 billion dollars in damage (the second costliest hurricane in the history of the U.S.), and I was shocked. I knew the storm was going to be bad, but I had no idea it would cause as much devastation as it did. I underestimated the destructive potential of Sandy.

This upcoming Nor'easter is, however, a strong storm, and should be taken seriously, especially since it is hitting areas that have already been ravaged by Sandy.

The biggest differences between this storm and Sandy is that this storm is much weaker and is not a hurricane. Remember how I talked about hurricanes being "warm core" storms and extratropical cyclones being "cold core" storms? This shows up very clearly on the models. I took another look at the 850 mb temperatures forecast by the European model and was struck by how different the temperatures at the storms' core were. Below is Sandy. Again, it is from the Monday, October 29 12z HWRF model at 850 mb, and these charts show the geopotential heights (contours, 30m interval), temperatures (color fill, 2 degrees Celsius interval), and the wind vectors (m/s)

6 hour forecast (from 12z October 29)

And here's the chart for the upcoming storm.

75 hour forecast (from 12z November 5)

You can clearly see that the upcoming storm has much more cold air at its center than Sandy, and you can also see that it is considerably weaker than Sandy. However, comparing your typical Nor'easter to Sandy is like comparing a Toyota Prius to a Mack Truck.

This Nor'easter is expected to bottom out at around 984 millibars, which isn't historically strong but still qualifies as a major storm. The Hanukkah Eve Storm of 2006 bottomed out at 970 millibars offshore and weakened to 976 millibars by the time it crossed southern Vancouver Island, and the Hanukkah Eve Storm knocked out power to nearly 1.5 million people. This storm will pack a punch, and it needs to be taken seriously.

57 hour forecast

The chart above shows the 10 meter wind speed in knots, with the direction given by the streamlines. There is a swath of 50 knot winds offshore, and it looks like the strongest winds are ahead of the storm's warm front and bent-back occlusion. Places like Cape Cod and Long Island will get hammered with winds, and these winds are strong enough to push a weak storm surge into these areas, which brings the danger of re-flooding low-lying areas that were pummeled by the surge from Sandy.

81 hour forecast

This storm will also be extremely slow-moving, and 24 hours later, it has only moved ~ 350 miles at an average of 14.5 miles per hour, which is pretty slow for an extratropical storm. This is not a good thing; it means that the Northeast will get battered by wind and snow (yes, snow) for an extended period of time. The snow is predicted to start Wednesday afternoon, and the map below (which is 6 hours after the snow is predicted to start according to this model, which is the Euro) shows the three-hour snowfall over the area for Thursday November 8 at 03:00 UTC. I looked for a 24-hour snowfall map, but this was all I could find. 

 Thu, 08 Nov, 03:00 GMT

Forecast hour 63

Six hours later, the snow has moved northward into Maine. 

Forecast hour 69

These model charts show snowfall all the way down to the coast, but I seriously doubt the coast will see snow. Instead, it will see 1-3 inches of rain, which is enough rain to cause some serious problems, and places inland could see several inches of heavy, wet snow. We'll have a better idea of the predicted snow totals as we get closer to the event.

This storm has the possibility to bring flooding due to higher-than-normal water levels and waves to coastal regions and the potential to damage trees and structures that were weakened by Sandy. The bottom line is that this will not be a historic storm, but it will be strong, and it couldn't come at a worse time. My thoughts are with the people on the East Coast, and I hope this storm doesn't make things too much worse.

Thanks for reading.

Sunday, November 4, 2012

Climate Change and the Election

Sunday, November 4, 2012
~12:00 P.M.

This election season has been pretty intense from both sides. I've seen some outrageous, unsupported claims on Facebook from people in support of both Obama and Romney, although I have to admit, I've seen more ridiculous posts in support of Romney. I've honestly gotten to the point where I am tired of all this stuff and just want the election to be over and done with. I'll go out and vote, but I won't be voting for Romney or Obama.

Why, you may ask? America has its fair share of problems right now. We have a massive debt, we involve ourselves in unnecessary wars, we have very high unemployment levels, and, in this day and age, we are still actually debating over the right of same-sex couples to get married. Homelessness, hunger, health, and poverty are all immediate issues, and the candidates have addressed these. But they have not addressed global warming as an immediate issue. As obvious as the evidence for climate change is, it is invisible compared to the fear and dread a soldier feels when he/she learns they will be sent off to war, and silent compared horrific suffering that same soldier feels when one of their comrades is killed, or when they, years after returning from combat, are still reeling from the pain, depression, and anxiety associated with PTSD. From this perspective, it seems immoral to spend money on trying to reduce greenhouse gas emissions when so many people in the U.S. are suffering, and even worse when you consider the rest of the world. Hell, it seems immoral to spend money on anything that doesn't help people.

But global warming and ocean acidification are immediate issues. Since "Superstorm Sandy" struck last week, Michael Bloomberg, the Democrat-turned-Republican-turned-Independent mayor of New York City has expressed his unequivocal support for Barack Obama, stating that Obama has worked the last four years to reduce carbon emissions from power plants and cars, while Romney has "reversed course" and abandoned the pro-environmental positions he held while he was governor of Massachusetts.

"Our climate is changing," Bloomberg wrote in an editorial on Thursday, which you can find here. "And while the increase in extreme weather we have experienced in New York City and around the world may or may not be the result of it, the risk that it might be -- given this week's devastation -- should compel all elected leaders to take immediate action." It's not scientifically sound to say that Sandy was the direct result of global warming. Sandy was the direct result of, as Scott Sistek said in his blog, "a hurricane, an arctic storm, a strong jet stream, a strong blocking pattern in the western Atlantic, and a full moon" (the full moon made the storm surge worse). Sandy was a freak storm, and it makes just as much sense to cite Sandy as a direct result of climate change as it does to put a screen door on a submarine. Ok... maybe not that bad, but still, be wary of people pointing to Sandy as clear-cut evidence for climate change. It's not.

But let's go back to the topic of climate change/ocean acidification being immediate issues. When you are not prepared for something that will happen relatively soon, the issue needs to be given immediate attention to mitigate damage in the future. It's bad already here in Washington. There have already been massive oyster larvae kills in places like Willapa Bay and Grays Harbor due to decreasing pH levels in the ocean, and by the next 100 years, the water content of our snowpack will decrease five-fold at mid-elevation locations in the Cascades like Stampede Pass, which is located at 3,671 feet. As a result, river flows will decrease dramatically in the summer months, leading to problems with shortages in both water (for people, agriculture irrigation, and different flora and fauna that inhabit our region) and electricity (since 75% of our electricity comes from hydroelectric dams). Our ecosystem is not prepared for this, and neither are we, which means that it is an immediate issue.

But as bad as it is here, climate change will have exponentially worse consequences in the developing world. Take Bangladesh as an example.

The sea level is predicted to rise around 1.5 meters by 2100. This would displace 17 million people in one of the world's poorest countries. Add this with a predicted increase in the strength of typhoons in the tropical Pacific due to increasing heat energy in the oceans (95% of the increase in heat due to global warming has been absorbed by the oceans), and you have a recipe for disaster, as storm surges will be even more catastrophic to the area. The 1970 Bhola Cyclone killed over 500,000 people in Bangladesh. Imagine if a slight increase in sea levels meant that a similar cyclone could affect 17 million more people. That's a pretty immediate issue.

Heat waves will become more intense in regions, due to two reasons. First, since the average global temperature will rise, heat waves that are a certain anomaly above the average temperature will have bigger consequences because the average temperature will be higher. Second, heat waves are predicted to increase in frequency and intensity in certain regions, and even if the global average temperature wasn't rising, certain places would see more extreme events. I did some research last year (the research paper I wrote can be found here), and I looked in particular at a certain study by Tyler W. Ruff and J. David Neelin that predicted Gaussian "tails" in terms of temperature distribution in many areas, meaning that certain places would have a wider range of temperature distribution, and with it, the increased chance for unprecedented extreme heat events. The aging baby-boomer population will be especially sensitive to heat waves, particularly in California, where are large increase is expected to occur in many regions, particularly those in Southern California. But what about places in the third world that do not have the luxury of air conditioning or ample water supply? If these same Gaussian tails were present in, say, the Sahel, the consequences would be exponentially worse.

Who will I be voting for? Either Rocky Anderson, of the Justice Party, or Jill Stein, of the Green Party. I don't know which one yet... I still have to do some more research. But both of these candidates are not afraid to speak up about global warming in their campaigns. Yeah, I know they won't win... but I feel like my vote to support them will help them gain more recognition, and hopefully, make it clear that global warming is worldwide, extremely serious, and is an immediate problem that must be addressed on a level that it has not been addressed before, both for the U.S. and the rest of the world. If we, as the human race, are actually going to show the compassion and morality that we claim to have, we need to address climate change and ocean acidification as issues that require immediate action for the welfare of every other organism that lives on Earth.

Thanks for reading, and please choose your vote wisely on November 6th.

Thursday, November 1, 2012

The Official 2012-13 Winter Outlook!

Thursday, November 1, 2012
9:00 P.M.

I am extremely excited to announce the release of WeatherOn's Official 2012-13 Winter Outlook! I worked extremely hard on writing this outlook, and Tanner did an OUTSTANDING job creating some wonderful graphics to complement my writing and formatting the whole thing for his website. Please check it out, and I hope you find it informative, useful, and... as usual... pretty entertaining as well ;)