Dr. Jeff Masters' WunderBlog

Storms of My Grandchildren by Dr. James Hansen
Posted by: Dr. Jeff Masters, 23:34 GMT le 26 juillet 2010 +9
"Storms of My Grandchildren: The Truth About the Coming Climate Catastrophe and Our Last Chance to Save Humanity" is NASA climate change scientist Dr. James Hansen's first book. Dr. Hansen is arguably the most visible and well-respected climate change scientist in the world, and has headed the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies in New York City since 1981. He is also an adjunct professor in the Department of Earth and Environmental Sciences at Columbia University. Dr. Hansen greatly raised awareness of the threat of global warming during his Congressional testimony during the record hot summer of 1988, and issued one of the first-ever climate model predictions of global warming (see an analysis here to see how his 1988 prediction did.) In 2009, Dr. Hansen was awarded the Carl-Gustaf Rossby Research Medal, the highest honor bestowed by the American Meteorological Society, for his "outstanding contributions to climate modeling, understanding climate change forcings and sensitivity, and for clear communication of climate science in the public arena."

Storms of My Grandchildren focuses on the key concepts of the science of climate change, told through Hansen's personal experiences as a key player in field's scientific advancements and political dramas over the past 40 years. Dr. Hansen's writing style is very straight-forward and understandable, and he clearly explains the scientific concepts involved in a friendly way that anyone with a high school level science education can understand. I did not find any scientific errors in his book. However, some of his explanations are too long-winded, and the book is probably too long, at 274 pages. Nevertheless, Storms of My Grandchildren is a must-read, due to the importance of the subject matter and who is writing it. Hansen is not a fancy writer. He comes across as a plain Iowan who happened to stumble into the field of climate change and discovered things he had to speak out about. And he does plenty of speaking out in his book.

James Hansen vs. Richard Lindzen
Dr. Hansen's book opens with an interesting chapter on his participation in four meetings of Vice President Dick Cheney's cabinet-level Climate Task Force in 2001. It seems that the Bush Administration was prepared to let Dr. Hansen's views on climate change influence policy. However, Dr. Richard Lindzen, whom Hansen describes as "the dean of of global warming contrarians", was also present at the meetings. Dr.Lindzen was able to confuse the task force members enough so that they never took Dr. Hansen's views seriously. Hansen observes that "U.S. policies regarding carbon dioxide during the Bush-Cheney administration seem to have been based on, or at a minimum, congruent with, Lindzen's perspective." Hansen asserts that Lindzen was able to do this by acting more like a lawyer than a scientist: "He and other contrarians tend to act like lawyers defending a client, presenting only arguments that favor their client. This is in direct contradiction to...the scientific method." Hansen also comments that he asked Lindzen what he thought of the link between smoking and cancer, since Lindzen had been a witness for the tobacco industry decades earlier. Lindzen "began rattling off all the problems with the data relating smoking to health problems, which was closely analogous to his views of climate data."

Alarmism
Global warming contrarians often dismiss scientists such a Dr. Hansen as "alarmists" who concoct fearsome stories about climate change in order to get research funding. Dr. Lindzen made this accusation at Cheney's Climate Task Force in 2001. However, Dr. Hansen notes that "in 1981 I lost funding for research on the climate effects of carbon dioxide because the Energy Department was displeased with a paper, 'Climate Impact of Increasing Carbon Dioxide,' I had published in Science magazine. The paper made a number of predictions for the 21st century, including 'opening of the fabled Northwest Passage', which the Energy Department considered to be alarmist but which have since proven to be accurate." If you read Dr. Hansen's book and listen to his lectures, it is clear that he is not an alarmist out to get more research funding by hyping the dangers of global warming. Hansen says in his book that "my basic nature nature is very placid, even comfortably stolid", and that nature comes through very clearly in Storms of My Grandchildren. Hansen's writings express a quiet determination to plainly set forth the scientific truth on climate change. He has surprisingly few angry words towards the politicians, lobbyists, and scientists intent on distorting the scientific truth.

The science of climate change
The bulk of Storms of My Grandchildren is devoted to explanations of the science of climate change. Hansen's greatest concern is disintegration of the gerat ice sheets in Greenland and West Antarctica causing sea level rise: "Once the ice sheets begin to rapidly disintegrate, sea level would be continuously changing for centuries. Coastal cities would become impractical to maintain." Hansen is concerned that evidence from past climate periods show that the massive ice sheets that cover Greenland and Antarctica can melt quickly, with large changes within a century. For example, sea level at the end of the most recent Ice Age, 13,000 - 14,000 years ago, rose at a rate of 3 - 5 meters (10 - 17 feet) per century for several centuries. Hansen is convinced that just a 1.7 -2°C warming, which would likely result if we stabilize CO2 at 450 ppm, would be a "disaster scenario" that would trigger rapid disintegration of the ice sheets and disastrous rises in sea level. Hansen advocates stabilizing CO2 at 350 ppm (we are currently at 390 ppm, with a rate of increase of 2 ppm per year.)

Another of Hansen's main concerns is the extinction of species. He notes that studies of more than 1,000 species of plants, animals, and insects have found an average migration rate towards the poles due to climate warming in the last half of the 20th century to be four miles per decade. "That is not fast enough. During the past thirty years the lines marking the regions in which a given average temperature prevails (isotherms) have been moving poleward at a rate of about thirty-five miles per decade. If greenhouse gases continue to increase at business-as-usual rates, then the rate of isotherm movement will double in this century to at least seventy miles per decade."

Hansen's other main concern is the release of large amounts of methane gas stored in sea-floor sediments in the form of methane hydrates. If ocean temperatures warm according to predictions, the higher temperatures at the sea floor may be enough to destabilize the methane hydrate sediments and release huge quantities of methane into the atmosphere. Methane is a greenhouse gas 20 - 25 times more potent than carbon dioxide.

Solutions to the climate change problem
Dr. Hansen is a controversial figure, since he has stepped outside his field of expertise and become an activist in promoting solutions to the climate change problem. He devotes a chapter called "An Honest, Effective Path" in the book to this. His main theme is that we need to tax fossil fuels using a "fee-and-dividend" approach. All of the tax money collected would be distributed uniformly to the public. This carbon tax would gradually rise, giving people time to adjust their lifestyle, choice of vehicle, home insulation, etc. Those who do better at reducing their fossil fuel use will receive more in the dividend than they will pay in the added costs of the products they buy. The approach is straightforward and does not require a large bureaucracy, but currently has little political support. Hansen is vehemently opposed to the approach that has the most political support, "Cap-and-trade": "Cap-and-trade is what governments and the people in alligator shoes (the lobbyists for special interests) are trying to foist on you. Whoops. As an objective scientist I should delete such personal opinions, to at least flag them. But I am sixty-eight years old, and I am fed up with the way things work in Washington." Hansen also promotes an overlooked type of nuclear power, "fast" reactors with liquid metal coolant that produce far less nuclear waste and are much more efficient than conventional nuclear reactors.

Quotes from the book
"Humanity treads today on a slippery slope. As we continue to pump greenhouse gases into the air, we move onto a steeper, even more slippery incline. We seem oblivious to the danger--unaware how close we may be to a situation in which a catastrophic slip becomes practically unavoidable, a slip where we suddenly lose all control and are pulled into a torrential stream that hurls us over a precipice to our demise."

"In order for a democracy to function well, the public needs to be honestly informed. But the undue influence of special interests and government greenwash pose formidable barriers to a well-informed public. Without a well-informed public, humanity itself and all species on the planet are threatened."

"Of course by 2005 I was well aware that the NASA Office of Public Affairs had become an office of propaganda. In 2004, I learned that NASA press releases related to global warming were sent to the White House, where they were edited to appear less serious or discarded entirely."

"If we let special interests rule, my grandchildren and yours will pay the price."

"The role of money in our capitals is the biggest problem for democracy and for the planet."

"The problem with asking people to pledge to reduce their fossil fuel use is that even if lots of people do, one effect is reduced demand for fossil fuel and thus a lower price--making it easier for someone else to burn...it is necessary for people to reduce their emissions, but it is not sufficient if the government does not adopt policies that cause much of the fossil fuels to be left in the ground permanently."

"I have argued that it is time to 'draw a line in the sand' and demand no new coal plants."

"The present situation is analogous to that faced by Lincoln with slavery and Churchill with Nazism--the time for compromises and appeasement is over."

"Humans are beginning to hammer the climate system with a forcing more than an order of magnitude more powerful than the forcings that nature employed."

"Once ice sheet disintegration begins in earnest, our grandchildren will live the rest of their lives in a chaotic transition period."

"After the ice is gone, would Earth proceed to the Venus syndrome, a runaway greenhouse effect that would destroy all life on the planet, perhaps permanently? While that is difficult to say based on present information, I've come to conclude that if we burn all reserves of oil, gas, and coal, there is a substantial chance we will initiate the runaway greenhouse. If we also burn the tar sands and tar shale, I believe the Venus syndrome is a dead certainty."

"One suggestion I have for now: Support Bill McKibben and his organization 350.org. It is the most effective and responsible leadership in the public struggle for climate justice."

Commentary
James Hansen understands the Earth's climate as well as any person alive, and his concern about where our climate is headed makes Storms of My Grandchildren a must-read for everyone who cares about the world their grandchildren will inherit. Storms of My Grandchildren retails for $16.50 at Amazon.com. Dr. Hansen's web site is http://www.columbia.edu/~jeh1/.

Jeff Masters
  Permalink | A A A
Reader Comments
Display: 0, 50, 100, 200 Sort: Newest First - Order Posted
Viewing: 1901 - 1951

Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41 | 42 | 43 | 44 | 45 | 46 | 47 | 48 | 49 | 50 | 51 | 52 | 53 | 54 | 55 | 56 | 57 | 58 | 59 | 60 | 61 | 62 | 63 | 64 | 65 | 66 | 67 | 68 | 69 | 70 | 71 | 72 | 73 | 74 | 75 | 76 | 77 | 78 | 79 | 80 | 81 | 82 | 83 | 84 | 85 | 86 | 87 | 88 | 89 | 90 | 91 | 92 | 93 | 94 | 95 | 96 | 97 | 98 | 99 | 100 | 101 | 102 | 103 | 104 | 105 | 106 | 107 | 108 | 109 | 110 | 111 | 112 | 113 | 114 | 115 | 116 | 117 | 118 | 119 | 120 | 121 | 122 | 123 | 124 | 125 | 126 | 127 | 128 | 129 | 130 | 131 | 132 | 133 | 134 | 135 | 136 | 137 | 138 | 139 | 140 | 141 | 142 | 143 | 144 | 145 | 146 | 147Blog Index

1901. BFG308 18:58 GMT le 27 juillet 2010    
Wow definitions from websters...nothing personal to anyone but this has to be a new low for the blog
Member Since: 17 juin 2010 Posts: 2 Comments: 35
1903. Michale 18:59 GMT le 27 juillet 2010    
Quoting StSimonsIslandGAGuy:


It's a wikipedia article. Anyone could edit that at any time---no credible information that any of these scientists actually deny global warming. Next.


Don't you see the pattern here??

It would be hysterically funny if it wasn't so pathetically sad....

Why not just come out and say it..

Any scientific information simply cannot be credible if it disputes the AGW religion...

That is how you think...

Ergo, I would have a better chance convincing the pope that there is no god, than I would have convincing you that the AGW theory could be wrong..

Member Since: 19 juin 2006 Posts: 0 Comments: 98
1907. cirrocumulus 18:59 GMT le 27 juillet 2010    
StSimonsIslandGuy: We all appreciate your posts on global warming!
Member Since: 30 septembre 2005 Posts: 0 Comments: 1606
1908. mcluvincane 19:00 GMT le 27 juillet 2010    
Quoting augfan:


See, you are doing it again, saying the level of posts (average) doesn't measure up to your standards and another where you said you were on the blog first and everybody else should shut up and cave in to your opinion.

IMO, not much of a poster here but read slurs when I see them. Suggest you move on until you can cool off.


Yeah, he's been ranting and raving here all darn day
Member Since: 2 juin 2010 Posts: 0 Comments: 1315
1909. HarleyStormDude52 19:00 GMT le 27 juillet 2010    
Quoting KEEPEROFTHEGATE:


Your on a roll now!!! LMAO.. I mean, if this GW stuff is gonna roll on, gotta have a little fun with it!!! CMON people!!!!
Member Since: 8 juillet 2010 Posts: 0 Comments: 345
1910. extreme236 19:00 GMT le 27 juillet 2010    
Quoting Michale:


Don't you see the pattern here??

It would be hysterically funny if it wasn't so pathetically sad....

Why not just come out and say it..

Any scientific information simply cannot be credible if it disputes the AGW religion...

That is how you think...

Ergo, I would have a better chance convincing the pope that there is no god, than I would have convincing you that the AGW theory could be wrong..



Why don't you just give him a link for evidence of a credible meteorologist if you're so sure?
Member Since: 2 août 2007 Posts: 19 Comments: 19234
1911. MiamiHurricanes09 19:00 GMT le 27 juillet 2010    
If I ignored every person talking about Global Warming I would have like 4 people in my view...

C'mon people, even though this blogs' entry is about Global warming this is a mainly tropical blog.
Member Since: 2 septembre 2009 Posts: 129 Comments: 19976
1912. IKE 19:00 GMT le 27 juillet 2010    
Quoting Diplomacy:
Thanks, Ike. I'm loving your avatar, by the way. Would it reveal my age, if I say that I grew up listening to them? LMAO, :(.


My all time favorite band.

...........................................


12Z ECMWF...
Member Since: 9 juin 2005 Posts: 23 Comments: 37044
1914. Michale 19:01 GMT le 27 juillet 2010    
Quoting StSimonsIslandGAGuy:

br but the truth is that AGW is solid science and the only ones who deny it are cranks.


And THAT says it all... :D

YOUR religion is paramount..

ALL other religions are bogus...

Praise be to the almighty AGW

AMEN..

Jeeeze, it's just too damn easy.... :D
Member Since: 19 juin 2006 Posts: 0 Comments: 98
1915. CJ5 19:01 GMT le 27 juillet 2010    
Quoting JFLORIDA:


You should have actually read somre of them because they support warming and man made CO2 as a climate changer while just arguing degree.

As yet no working explanation to counter AGW.


Sorry, you obviously didn't read them. The problem here is it does not matter what one posts or what evidience is thrown your way you are blind.

There is plenty of peer reviewed data that blows holes in AGW. That is a fact.
Member Since: 4 juillet 2007 Posts: 0 Comments: 1709
1917. BFG308 19:03 GMT le 27 juillet 2010    
Quoting MiamiHurricanes09:
If I ignored every person talking about Global Warming I would have like 4 people in my view...

C'mon people, even though this blogs' entry is about Global warming this is a mainly tropical blog.


Seconded!

EDIT: I counted 6 actually...
Member Since: 17 juin 2010 Posts: 2 Comments: 35
1919. jholmestyle 19:04 GMT le 27 juillet 2010    
Michale, you have every right on this blog to express your views on the science, or lack there of (depending on your view), on AGW. You do not have the right to freely call people names and badger them relentlessly here. Unless you don't mind being put into timeout, I would stick more with facts, and less with calling people fanatics and religious zealots. JMO.
Member Since: 16 mai 2008 Posts: 0 Comments: 21
1921. Michale 19:04 GMT le 27 juillet 2010    
Quoting hendric:
What gets me is that deniers always assume scientists are wrong in their favor: What if they are not?


Did any of the climate scientists accurately predict the record cold spells of the last couple years??

Member Since: 19 juin 2006 Posts: 0 Comments: 98
1922. Snowlover123 19:04 GMT le 27 juillet 2010    
Hello! I am back again.

More confirmation that AGW is not a working theory. Global Warming happens on Mars and Earth concurrently, when the sunspot # changes. The co2 ppm has remained the same on both planets.

http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/story.html?id=edae9952-3c3e-47ba-913f-7359a5c7f723&k=0

To infer that a trace gas, .01% has more impact than the oceans (70%) or the sun, or volcanic activity, is quite silly.
Member Since: 1 avril 2010 Posts: 9 Comments: 2513
1925. KittyTwister 19:04 GMT le 27 juillet 2010    
Hello all.
I have been lurking for about 2 months, and figured I should say hiya before things ramp up and I have questions to ask. I really appreciate all of the information that is available here, and the knowledge that is shared is amazing. I don't know what half of the maps mean or how to read them yet, but hopefully that will change as the seasons go by. Thanks again for doing what ya'll do.
Member Since: 24 juillet 2010 Posts: 0 Comments: 13
1927. CJ5 19:05 GMT le 27 juillet 2010    
Quoting StSimonsIslandGAGuy:


It was from a blog post that someone just made up. You still haven't given a reputable meteorologist or climatologist who denies anthropogenic global warming. Couple hours, and you haven't found one name. Not. Even. One.

You can dance and weave all you want, but the truth is that AGW is solid science and the only ones who deny it are cranks.


Jeez....I don't think there is a requirement to post the actual peer reviewed data. The fact is, and that blog proves, there is plenty of peer reviewed data to blow holes in the AGW theory. You can deny that fact all you want but it is fact. Just because you believe in AGW does not mean you have a strangle hold on the fact. Take the time to review the "peer reviewed" scientific data list in the post.

AGW is NOT scientific fact.
Member Since: 4 juillet 2007 Posts: 0 Comments: 1709
1929. IKE 19:06 GMT le 27 juillet 2010    
Quoting IKE:


My all time favorite band.

...........................................


12Z ECMWF...


Eastern ATL view on the 12Z ECMWF... kills a wave coming off Africa. That's it through August 6th.
Member Since: 9 juin 2005 Posts: 23 Comments: 37044
1930. Snowlover123 19:06 GMT le 27 juillet 2010    
Quoting mcluvincane:
I just farted. Will that help cause global warming?


LMAO! :D
Member Since: 1 avril 2010 Posts: 9 Comments: 2513
1932. HarleyStormDude52 19:06 GMT le 27 juillet 2010    
Quoting KittyTwister:
Hello all.
I have been lurking for about 2 months, and figured I should say hiya before things ramp up and I have questions to ask. I really appreciate all of the information that is available here, and the knowledge that is shared is amazing. I don't know what half of the maps mean or how to read them yet, but hopefully that will change as the seasons go by. Thanks again for doing what ya'll do.



Welcome.. I cant do the maps either.. still learning.. Its a sure bet you will know what GW and AGW refers to in a few minutes!!!
Member Since: 8 juillet 2010 Posts: 0 Comments: 345
1933. WildWillyFL 19:06 GMT le 27 juillet 2010    
Quoting StSimonsIslandGAGuy:
Michale, I asked for any credible meteorologist or climatologist who denies anthropogenic global warming. You still haven't given one. I am sure if such a person existed you would have found him or her by now.


No is saying that we are not in a warming period. That temperatures are not rising slightly. The non-believers question whether the cause is man made. Also, whether it is just political posturing and a money grab.

I would bet that you didn't realized that the earth has been cooling for the last several thousand years. That even with the slight rise in temperatures over the last couple of years the average temps for this century are way below thousand years ago.

Look below, there have been plenty of periods that have been much colder and plenty that have been much warmer without man's intervention.

Member Since: 18 août 2008 Posts: 0 Comments: 34
1934. gordydunnot 19:07 GMT le 27 juillet 2010    
How this for a shocker I remember when there were liberal republicans in the republican party. Please don't confuse today's version with T.Roosevelt, D. Eisenhower, moderates by the way. They would be run out on a rail by Mr. Limbaugh, the Ayatollah of the present day Republicans.
Member Since: 18 août 2008 Posts: 0 Comments: 3044
1936. HarleyStormDude52 19:07 GMT le 27 juillet 2010    
Quoting mcluvincane:
I just farted. Will that help cause global warming?


Was that a scientific observation??? Ha.. How is the climate changing around you right now???
Member Since: 8 juillet 2010 Posts: 0 Comments: 345
1939. MiamiHurricanes09 19:08 GMT le 27 juillet 2010    
Isn't William Gray into Global warming? Ok, problem solved.
Member Since: 2 septembre 2009 Posts: 129 Comments: 19976
1940. Michale 19:08 GMT le 27 juillet 2010    
Quoting jholmestyle:
Michale, you have every right on this blog to express your views on the science, or lack there of (depending on your view), on AGW. You do not have the right to freely call people names and badger them relentlessly here. Unless you don't mind being put into timeout, I would stick more with facts, and less with calling people fanatics and religious zealots. JMO.


As I said before, I make it a point to attack the message and NOT the messenger..

However, I am only human and, when personal attacks are made, I respond in kind..

Having said that, if I intimated that A or B was a religious fanatic, I apologize..

Allow me to clarify...

The level of devotion to one single flawed theory and the exclusion of all other scientific data that may cast that single flawed theory into doubt is the type of fanaticism that is exhibited by religious fanatics all over the world.

I call 'em as I see 'em.. If it quacks like a fanatic and waddles like a fanatic, it's a safe guess that it IS a fanatic..
Member Since: 19 juin 2006 Posts: 0 Comments: 98
1942. IKE 19:09 GMT le 27 juillet 2010    
Quoting Diplomacy:
You know it, Ike. Thanks. Yup, the European model doesn't show much coming up, which is good news, since we are almost into August lol.


Little to nothing on that run.
Member Since: 9 juin 2005 Posts: 23 Comments: 37044
1943. Neapolitan 19:09 GMT le 27 juillet 2010    
Quoting CJ5:


Sorry, you obviously didn't read them. The problem here is it does not matter what one posts or what evidience is thrown your way you are blind.

There is plenty of peer reviewed data that blows holes in AGW. That is a fact.


The term plenty is relative, while the phrase "blows holes in AGW" is more than a little hyperbolic. The vast preponderance of peer-reviewed literature--and a growing percentage of it--supports the theory of AGW where the former is concerned, while questioning details in a theory--part of the scientific method of truth-seeking--isn't about "blowing holes".

Next!!!
Member Since: 8 novembre 2009 Posts: 4 Comments: 11160
1945. MiamiHurricanes09 19:11 GMT le 27 juillet 2010    
*Falls asleep on keyboard...has dream about Global Warming*
Member Since: 2 septembre 2009 Posts: 129 Comments: 19976
1947. hcubed 19:12 GMT le 27 juillet 2010    
Quoting Michale:


Because you have proven beyond any doubt that you won't LISTEN to any conflicting opinion..

First it had to be meteorologists and climatologist. Then it had to be climatologists only.. And so on and so on and so on..

Like I said, it's like providing a religious fanatic all the evidence that disputes what the bible says.. They can explain it all away.. And, then they can't, they just stick their fingers in their ears and say, "nyaaa nyaaaa nyaaaa"...

You are at the finger/ear stage and it's useless to show you anything..

Ergo, I simply allow you to live in your little world in peace and I will simply go on in reality..

Everyone is happy.. :D


The same thing happens whenever an AGW proponent posts "THE LIST".

You know, the list that shows the "10 independent facts tha MAN caused GW".

Then they don't want to discuss it...
Member Since: 18 mai 2007 Posts: 286 Comments: 1639
1948. Snowlover123 19:12 GMT le 27 juillet 2010    
You folks that shout about Climate Models should look at this model, in agreement with the CFS.



Could 2011 rank as one of the top 5 coldest years?

SST



Not to mention, that this has an off the charts La Nina.



The cold PDO could help the La Nina last into 2012, the Apocolypse.



All images come from here:
http://www.jamstec.go.jp/frcgc/research/d1/iod/
Member Since: 1 avril 2010 Posts: 9 Comments: 2513
1951. ElConando 19:12 GMT le 27 juillet 2010    
1872. It gets read, maybe not all by the congressman or women in general but it gets read and the info is brought to their attention.
Member Since: 6 septembre 2009 Posts: 2 Comments: 3703

Viewing: 1901 - 1951

Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41 | 42 | 43 | 44 | 45 | 46 | 47 | 48 | 49 | 50 | 51 | 52 | 53 | 54 | 55 | 56 | 57 | 58 | 59 | 60 | 61 | 62 | 63 | 64 | 65 | 66 | 67 | 68 | 69 | 70 | 71 | 72 | 73 | 74 | 75 | 76 | 77 | 78 | 79 | 80 | 81 | 82 | 83 | 84 | 85 | 86 | 87 | 88 | 89 | 90 | 91 | 92 | 93 | 94 | 95 | 96 | 97 | 98 | 99 | 100 | 101 | 102 | 103 | 104 | 105 | 106 | 107 | 108 | 109 | 110 | 111 | 112 | 113 | 114 | 115 | 116 | 117 | 118 | 119 | 120 | 121 | 122 | 123 | 124 | 125 | 126 | 127 | 128 | 129 | 130 | 131 | 132 | 133 | 134 | 135 | 136 | 137 | 138 | 139 | 140 | 141 | 142 | 143 | 144 | 145 | 146 | 147Blog Index

New Comment
Community Standards Policy Comments will take a few seconds to appear.
Post Your Comments
Please sign in to post comments.
Not only will you be able to leave comments on this blog, but you'll also have the ability to upload and share your photos in our Wunder Photos section.
About JeffMasters
Jeff co-founded the Weather Underground in 1995 while working on his Ph.D. He flew with the NOAA Hurricane Hunters from 1986-1990.

Community Activity