Freak flooding in Guadalajara after a massive hail storm. Pictures on BBC:
Six suburbs in the Mexican city of Guadalajara were carpeted in a thick layer of ice after a heavy hailstorm. The ice was up to 1.5m (5ft) thick in places, half-burying vehicles.
[...] Hailstorms form when warm, moist air from the surface rises upwards forming showers and storms. Temperatures higher up, even in summer, can get well below 0C and so ice crystals form along with something called "supercooled water" which then grows into pellets of ice.
In severe thunderstorms, air can rise rapidly and is able to hold up these hailstones and allow them to expand in size. Eventually they get too heavy and fall to the ground.
In warmer parts of the year, such as in Guadalajara which has maximum temperatures of around 31-32C [(87-90 °F)] in June, more moisture is available, contributing to the formation of hailstorms.
Temperatures this month have been higher than normal with Torreon, to the north of Guadalajara, reaching highs of 37C [(99 °F)].
Hm, I wonder if somebody is going to mention anthropogenic warming with this?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 01 2019, @04:14PM (20 children)
If this is true why don't we just move the surface of the earth up a few meters so it cools down?
(Score: 5, Funny) by c0lo on Monday July 01 2019, @04:20PM (5 children)
Because khallow holds a patent on this solution.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Monday July 01 2019, @05:42PM (2 children)
Then let's just take air out the atmosphere to reduce the pressure. The effect is the same.
La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
(Score: 2) by fyngyrz on Monday July 01 2019, @08:29PM (1 child)
No, see, then all the Sasquatch would come down out of the mountains to breathe air of their accustomed density. Plus, what about the beings living in the hollow earth? Won't they suffer from such an act? And anyway, if we just wait, won't the air just fall off the edges of the flat earth?
I mean, come on. This hot global warning, er, warming, stuff is totally #fakenudes. Er... Fakeknews. No no, #fakenews, that's it. Sorry.
--
"Faith": The possessive form of "Superstition."
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 01 2019, @09:24PM
Sasquatch don't breath air.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 03 2019, @06:25PM (1 child)
Who / what is khallow?
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Wednesday July 03 2019, @11:28PM
FYI https://soylentnews.org/~khallow [soylentnews.org]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 01 2019, @04:21PM (9 children)
Because for a few meters of additional elevation, you'd have to increase the surface by several million square kilometers, and where would we take that surface from? ;-)
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Monday July 01 2019, @04:39PM (3 children)
First, I reckon that not all the Earth surface will need elevating - perhaps only Greenland and Antarctica would do? Ok, maybe the Arctic Ocean too
Second, I have this wonderful idea - how about instead raising soil, we acrually raise some glaciers. I mean, look, 'ts cheaper and will keep us cool.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2) by PartTimeZombie on Monday July 01 2019, @09:53PM (2 children)
I've got a couple in the storeroom I'm not using.
They are in pretty good condition, and I can give you a good price for them. Just give me a chance to get in there to find them.
(Score: 3, Funny) by Runaway1956 on Monday July 01 2019, @09:58PM (1 child)
It took more than long enough just to raise some sons. I'm not signing on for raising glaciers. You guys are on your own.
(Score: 2) by PartTimeZombie on Monday July 01 2019, @10:15PM
If you have some fjords lying around these glaciers will really go well with them.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 01 2019, @05:39PM
The raised surface would be on stilts.
(Score: 5, Funny) by DannyB on Monday July 01 2019, @06:14PM (3 children)
Landfills. But more specifically, AOL floppy disks. These were once part of AOL's "pave the earth" campaign to sink the continental US below sea level.
The lower I set my standards the more accomplishments I have.
(Score: 2) by bob_super on Monday July 01 2019, @09:30PM (2 children)
Actually, if you put all the AOL CDs on roofs reflecting the sunlight away, you'd probably drop the local temperature by a few degrees.
#AOLsaveTheWorld. It's a good thing we keep getting lots of Third-world kids to dig through those landfills...
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 02 2019, @12:23AM (1 child)
Are landfilled CDs shiny enough? Do we need to employ an army of CD polishers as well?
(Score: 2) by DannyB on Tuesday July 02 2019, @01:19PM
There are many good CD sander-polisher tools [grainger.com] to help keep your CDs in excellent condition so they are shiny and easy to read.
The lower I set my standards the more accomplishments I have.
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 01 2019, @04:52PM (1 child)
Assuming it was even possible, move mass on this scale and you’d slow the rotation of the earth in the same way a spinning ice skater slows as soon as they put their arms out.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 01 2019, @05:09PM
According to holders inequality slowing the rotation will tend to cool the average temperature too by making it less uniform (cooler nights and hotter days).
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 01 2019, @05:02PM (1 child)
I suspect this is a troll question, but it triggered the What [xkcd.com] If [xkcd.com] XKCD [xkcd.com] series in my mind, so let me take a gander.
We don't because of several reasons:
1) It'd be extremely hard to do. It would take an infeasible amount of energy to move that much soil around to lift any appreciable amount of area up. Likewise, the social chaos (and maybe infrastructure and crop failure) displacement would be crazy. Think of how much disruption is caused when trying to move a bridge under on a busy highway, and that's just one piece of limited use area, not an entire city or farmland.
2) It would cause other issues it would not address, or even make worse. For example, there would be unknown impacts to rainfall (and thus crop harvests). Radiation from could be worse due to less atmosphere between us and the Sun.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 01 2019, @05:27PM
We could get the required energy by slowing the rotation of the earth.
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 01 2019, @04:34PM (18 children)
You can bet the MSM will, but they'll call it "climate change" and most likely include the words "in recent years".
(Score: 3, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 01 2019, @05:21PM (17 children)
It is interesting to watch the evidence pile higher and higher yuk yuk yuk while you morons double down on the number of fingers you stick in your ears. Maybe you popped an ear drum a while back?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 01 2019, @05:24PM (9 children)
The evidence that the climate always changes? Sane people didn't need any evidence for that since it is pretty obvious.
(Score: 2) by captain normal on Monday July 01 2019, @06:11PM (5 children)
Why do people like you remind me of the old parable of the frog sitting in a pot that is slowly brought to a boil?
Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts"- --Daniel Patrick Moynihan--
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 01 2019, @06:17PM (2 children)
People like me who are actually preparing for multiple future climate change futures (warming or cooling) with strategically placed multiple residences, etc?
It is the people like you waiting for the government to do something who are the frog getting boiled.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 01 2019, @06:22PM
typo: *multiple possible climate change futures
And the most likely one is not what the fake news has been telling you to worry about.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 02 2019, @07:29AM
So it is now necessary to believe in climate change, but to do anything about it yourself is trolling. The true motivations are obvious.
(Score: 1) by RandomFactor on Tuesday July 02 2019, @12:12AM (1 child)
For informational purposes - The boiling frog was addressed in the past here [soylentnews.org]
В «Правде» нет известий, в «Известиях» нет правды
(Score: 2) by captain normal on Tuesday July 02 2019, @05:25AM
???
Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts"- --Daniel Patrick Moynihan--
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 01 2019, @06:12PM (2 children)
lol, watch out or the next rainstorm will make YOU gayer than the frogs!
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Monday July 01 2019, @10:02PM (1 child)
Don't know what your fear of gay frogs has to do with anything.
(Score: -1, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 01 2019, @10:23PM
Nice try, just accept that your compadres are total fucking loons already! I mean surely some are very fine people.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 01 2019, @06:52PM (1 child)
Does it occur to you that some of us may agree that we need to take steps to reduce CO2 emissions, but we can see that the partisan media is using any random climate event to cast shadows over their hated president Donald Trump. Your "evidence piling higher" is the result of the Chicken Little chatter accumulating in your head. It is so far from science, it has become religion.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 01 2019, @08:51PM
Only identity politiking morons would throw in a Trump reference. Good job dumbass!
(Score: 1) by khallow on Tuesday July 02 2019, @11:22AM (4 children)
I'm willing to agree that anthropogenic global warming (AGW) is occurring. I'm not willing to make it worse by embracing poorly thought-out fantasies to solve it. Ultimately, overpopulation is the real generator of AGW and that in turn is caused by poverty. Driving large portions of the world deeper into poverty in a feeble attempt to fix AGW will make AGW worse.
And you know what? There's evidence to support my position. For example, there's plenty of high profile programs and projects that purport with varying degree of sincerity to solve global warming or other environmental problems, but turn out to be shitshows with brazen displays of incompetence, such as Germany's Energywende, banning of DDT (and other pesticides on dubious grounds), corn ethanol subsidies in the US, recycling plastic and paper, the carbon emissions credit markets in Europe, and the sacrificing of local or regional economies to show one cares about the environment. How does doubling the price of electricity, hamstringing global efforts to reduce mosquito borne disease, increasing the cost of global food supplies, poorly designed markets that thrash between cheap and expensive emission credits unpredictably, or token reductions in emissions at great cost, help us deal with AGW?
There is a stench of incompetence, waste, and profound economic (and often scientific) illiteracy that surrounds the advocates for climate change mitigation. I'm tired of hearing about the supposed growing body of evidence, when the evidence isn't in your favor.
(Score: 2) by Thexalon on Tuesday July 02 2019, @01:40PM (3 children)
It's more complicated than that: CO2 emissions = emissions per capita * population. And that means that population is not created equal when it comes to preventing climate change. For instance, 100 people living the average lifestyle in Madagascar is less of a problem than 1 person living the average lifestyle in Canada.
If you want to reduce population growth, the most consistent way to do that has generally been 3 efforts:
1. Educating girls and women, and in particular requiring children to attend school rather than let their parents make them work.
2. Making birth control widely available.
3. Draconian government policies like China's 1-child rule.
All the players in this game are not equally guilty. At this point, the good guys are, assuming the reporting is accurate:
1. The EU, which managed to cut its emissions by 1/5, while still maintaining a strong economy.
2. Russia, which cut its emissions by 1/4.
3. North Korea, which cut its emissions by 3/4. Probably this one wasn't by choice.
4. Ukraine, Georgia, and quite a few other former Soviet-controlled areas.
5. The UK, which cut its emissions by 1/3.
The really bad guys are:
1. China, which is aggressively burning coal, even as its population has levelled out, and has more than quadrupled its emissions.
2. India, which is also growing population rapidly and aggressively burning coal, and has more than quadrupled its emissions.
The US was the worst offender 2 decades ago, but has managed to at least more-or-less flatten its own emissions, albeit mostly by outsourcing all its industry. That said, a drop could still help, and the EU has demonstrated that to do so doesn't necessarily lead to complete economic ruin.
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Tuesday July 02 2019, @10:57PM (2 children)
(Score: 2) by Thexalon on Wednesday July 03 2019, @12:41AM (1 child)
Why not? Birth rates have declined significantly in low-income countries [worldbank.org] in the last few decades, without a dramatic increase in CO2 emissions. Per that link, low-income nations have had their birth rates drop by nearly 1/3 over the last few decades, and there's no particular reason to think that they couldn't keep going.
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Wednesday July 03 2019, @04:00AM
Low-income now is not the same as low-income fifty years ago. Everyone has been getting better wealth-wise. I believe that better explains the decline in human fertility worldwide. My view is that in 100 years what they speak of as low-income will correspond relatively to the low end developed world today, like say Spain - that is the world's economies will have narrowed to the point that there isn't much difference between the low end and high end economies. It's much easier to catch up to the developed world than it is to pass them.
That's a big part of the dynamic missed by much of the environmentalism movement. Wealth loss in the short term can result in a significant long term hit to environmentalist goals. And many of these plans create a substantial, permanent hit to wealth growth, meaning they're really destructive as both economic and environmental policies.
(Score: 2) by looorg on Monday July 01 2019, @04:57PM (4 children)
So did they promptly use all the ice to make tequila drinks for the gringos?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 01 2019, @05:55PM
Did you see the photos? It looks like the hail captured the smog on the way down. Probably about as pure as the TJ river.
(Score: 2) by DannyB on Monday July 01 2019, @06:19PM
Imagine.
A large Cenote [wikipedia.org].
But instead of water, it is filled with tequila. No worms. And multiple "jumping in" spots. Scuba divers would be given their own special entrance.
The lower I set my standards the more accomplishments I have.
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Monday July 01 2019, @07:31PM (1 child)
When this happened in Amarillo a couple of years ago, it was some nasty dirty looking hail in a very short time.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 02 2019, @12:25AM
That's why the drinks are for the gringos.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 01 2019, @05:03PM
Save it for your blog "Hm, I wonder if somebody is going to mention anthropogenic warming with this?"
Just the facts, none of this flat earth coal rolling nonsense please!
(Score: 3, Interesting) by iWantToKeepAnon on Monday July 01 2019, @05:49PM (3 children)
"Happy families are all alike; every unhappy family is unhappy in its own way." -- Anna Karenina by Leo Tolstoy
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Monday July 01 2019, @10:08PM (2 children)
I didn't think of Steely Dan - I heard James Taylor singing instead.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 01 2019, @11:37PM (1 child)
(Score: 2) by hendrikboom on Tuesday July 02 2019, @03:28PM
Where is that maize transport restriction quote from?
(Score: 2) by mhajicek on Monday July 01 2019, @06:46PM
Frostpunk.
The spacelike surfaces of time foliations can have a cusp at the surface of discontinuity. - P. Hajicek
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 01 2019, @06:59PM
oh yey! a online article with actual photos of the event! at least some ...
(Score: 3, Informative) by sshelton76 on Monday July 01 2019, @09:22PM
Well I didn't believe in global warming before. But this has me convinced!
I was right all along. Feels so good to be right.
(Score: 2, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 01 2019, @10:35PM
Chili today, hot tamale.
(Score: 1, Disagree) by The Shire on Monday July 01 2019, @11:57PM (7 children)
If you look at the aerial photos it's clear that an ice flow was responsible for the ice in the streets. There is clearly no ice on any of the roofs nor on the cars and in one photo you can see the heavy ice only exists down the main town roads and only a few dozen feet down along the side streets, just what you would expect from an ice flow and NOT from hail.
I suspect we're looking at some climate change zealots latching on to an upper elevation ice dam break and trying to spin it as "wild weather".
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 02 2019, @12:30AM (2 children)
I'm having trouble imagining an ice-damn that's not a pointless wall on the front edge of a glacier ... I don't see one busting and the ice going anywhere.
Luckily TFA had this to say:
(Score: 2) by Spamalope on Tuesday July 02 2019, @12:49AM
That'd make it the ice version of a snow drift.
(Score: 2) by The Shire on Tuesday July 02 2019, @06:06AM
Just take a look at this aerial photo: https://i.imgur.com/pj2cUC6.jpg [imgur.com]
You can't tell me that five feet of ice melted off all the roofs and the tops of all the vehicles but NOT from the road. And falling hail does not push cars around - that's the action of flowing mass of ice. It may well be the accumulated hail that fell across the mountainside and was funneled into a river that in turn flooded the town sort of like a lahar, but that's still nothing like the report they're pushing of "Five Feet of Hail falling out of the sky".
(Score: 1) by helel on Tuesday July 02 2019, @12:51AM (3 children)
So the cars are free of ice, as one would expect if hail was some kind of low friction roughly orb shaped object that obeyed the law of gravity. Meanwhile if you looked at the photos before posting here you'd see there's clearly ice on rooftops.
(Score: 2) by The Shire on Tuesday July 02 2019, @06:01AM (2 children)
There is no appreciable ice on the roofs. And falling hail doesn't push cars around. There is exactly NO CHANCE that this was a case of 5 feet of hail falling out of the sky. They may have gotten hail, which in a mountainous area is no different than the hail Denver got just a few days ago, it happens in the mountains - totally normal. No, in this case it seems pretty likely we are looking at an ice dam that broke and cause a lahar, only with ice instead of mud.
You can see it clearly in this aerial photo: https://i.imgur.com/pj2cUC6.jpg [imgur.com]
The ice swept down the main street and flowed out a short ways along the side streets. It didn't fall from the sky in anywhere near the amounts the reports are trying to say. This is journalism for ad clicks rather than honest journalism.
(Score: 1, Disagree) by jmc23 on Wednesday July 03 2019, @10:29AM (1 child)
Because Guadalajara, and Mexico in general, is known for it's Ice dams?
What are small towns in mexico known for though? Oh right, a single main road descending from the mountains.
Got to love westerners talking about things they have no clue about.
(Score: 2) by The Shire on Wednesday July 03 2019, @10:27PM
Did you bother looking at the aerial photo? https://i.imgur.com/pj2cUC6.jpg [imgur.com]
Guadalajara is up at 1 mile elevation and has a mountainous park adjacent to it - it's not difficult to see a storm system come in and dump hail and rain over a wide area of that mountainous area that then flooded in a few hundred feet into the outskirts of the town. This is no different than the hail Denver saw just a couple weeks ago - 80 degrees then rain and hail. All it takes is poor drainage (like you would expect in a place like that) to funnel that precip from a wide area into a side road and then some local official grandstanding to the media about how his town was devastated.
It should be clear to anyone with eyes that the ice flowed in down that road. It's also clear there's only about a 100 foot stretch of road affected. I can tell you that if anything close to 5' of hail fell on that town there would have been massive destruction, collapsed roofs, broken windows, and ice everywhere, not just on the main road. And falling hail does not push around cars like you see in that image, flowing water/ice does that.
So, ya know, stick to the evidence. I'm far more likely to believe this was a flood of ice and water from a storm further up in the mountains (ya know, up where it's still very cold in the summer), than believe a freak storm was capable of dumping five FEET of hail on a town in a pattern that just happens to match what a flood would look like.
This is climate change fear mongerer click bait, nothing less, nothing more.
(Score: 2) by pipedwho on Tuesday July 02 2019, @02:27AM
If they were golf ball size or larger, you'd see dimples on the car bodies and lots of smashed car windows. Luckily they look like the tiny hail stones. Not like the huge stones we sometimes get down here. Largest I've seen is half-brick sized chunks bouncing off the street. Roof tiles shattered, and cars in serious disrepair. People crapping their pants as they run for cover. The next day, all the roofs in the affected areas are a patchwork of terracotta tiles and blue tarpaulins.