Weather or Not

Severe Outflow by R. Edwards

Archives for 2008

State-Supported Election Fraud

by Leave a Comment

Now the Coleman/Franken Senate election in Minnesota is being swung away from its original tally by speculative guesswork on the part of ballot counters. Insane! Where are we as a country when elections are decided in this corrupt way?

Clearly there’s an agenda. This makes Palm Beach’s Buchanan “votahs” in 2000 seem like child’s play. Judge voter “Intent”? Give me a break! How can any board objectively/systematically/consistently assess that? They can’t! Different standards are being used for different sets of ballots, simply by virtue that the same person isn’t doing the guessing. The deeper problem is the whole revisionistic process is exactly that: guessing! Is this the way to call an election? For the sake of our nation, I hope not, but it seems to have come to this. Welcome to Amerika.

My solution: Ballots like the one with a smudge between the two ovals should be disregarded. Ballots marked only for one candidate should go to that candidate, whatever the mark. Ballots marked for neither should go to neither. Ballots marked for both should be discarded, whatever the mark. Applied equally to all ballots, these standards should favor neither candidate, unless it can be shown that far more Franken or Coleman voters had some sort of dyslexic condition. That ain’t going to happen.

Instead, this vote is being rigged after-the-fact — election fraud perpetrated by the state at taxpayer expense. I hope Minnesotans will rise against this anti-democratic (lower case d) outrage and petition for a new election.

“Baroclinity” Is Not a Word

by Leave a Comment

I’m going to delve into what, for most normal and sane citizens of this great land, is scientific geekdom of the most obscure variety, picking semantic nits about which only a small cadre of weather dweebs ever gives a flying flip. So please feel free to skip right past this post if the title provoked no particular passion.

This constitutes the beginning of a campaign to eradicate at least one and perhaps two non-words from atmospheric science before the misuse spreads too far in both formal literature and informal meteorological lexicon: “baroclinity” and “barotropy.”

First, I assert that there is no such thing as “baroclinity.” It’s supposed to be “baroclinicity,” the state of being baroclinic.

[The definition of “baroclinic” actually isn’t relevant to the discussion, since the contention is linguistic only; but for the curious, here it is.]

When attaching a suffix to a state of existence, our language applies the letters “ity” in similar instances. Fully acknowledging that the English language is profusely littered with inconsistencies and inexplicable exceptions to the rule, and as such, is a damn stinking mess, will one of my fellow scientists please kindly justify why should the state of being baroclinic should be an exception to the general rule?

Some common language analogs to the recently manufactured misspelling “baroclinity” would be:
* “simplity” instead of “simplicity,”
* “elastity” instead of “elasticity” or
* “specifity” instead of “specificity.”

All three would be treated as misspelled in any usage.

Now, for you meteorologists, start saying
* “helity” instead of “helicity”

Get my drift?

Wikipedia already has fallen prey to the misspelling, as has the Glossary of the American Meteorological Society (even as each parenthetically acknowledges the true version). So have several formal papers of which I’m aware. How far will it go?

While we’re at it, let’s tackle “barotropy,” a spelling that, right or wrong, is entrenched in scientific use and has been since long before we all were young pups learning this stuff in basic atmospheric thermodynamics class.

It should be “barotropicity” instead. But if “baroclinity” is allowed, then for the sake of consistent usage, the opposite state then must become “barotropity.” Either that, or we need to use “barocliny” instead of either of the two terms for the baroclinic state that are now accepted.

What seems to be happening, instead, is a random mish-mash of suffix placement that makes no sense at all. Rubbish!

Which way are we going to have it? To get it right, our choices are the following married pairs of antonyms:
* Barocliny and barotropy
* Baroclinity and barotropity
* Baroclinicity and barotropicity

I’ve got solid reasons for favoring the latter. What are yours for the others?

Saffir and Simpson Need Good Home

by Leave a Comment

Last week, when I was at the NOAA Hurricane Conference at NHC (Miami), I had the privilege of making a few new friends. Two of them were of the feline variety. These little furballs, roughly 4-5 month old shorthair kittens nicknamed (what else?) Saffir and Simpson by the staff, have been hanging out around the NHC and WFO Miami building for awhile now, occasionally taking offerings of a paper plate of cat food.

Saffir

Saffir (photo from above) is the more outgoing of the two, very affectionate after an initial 20-30 seconds of mild hesitation, followed by sniffing, then abundant rubbing and willingness to be petted.

Simpson

Simpson (photo while looking up from a butt-bathing) is shy, but eventually will come around and let you pet him — especially if he sees Saffir getting lots of attention.

Both of them like to sun themselves on the sidewalk or light containers during the midday and afternoon, and hide in the landscaping bushes around the facility in the morning.

Saffir and Simpson could use a good home, preferably together since they’re obviously buddies (and maybe even siblings). I heard, while I was there, that someone was going to contact the local SPCA. They would make good pets for somebody, safer than where they are now near several busy streets.