Daily Fishing and Outdoor Report
Career changes suck ...
As I was dropping something off at the art studio, I managed to win the day's "It was worth a try!" award.
Friday, July 17, 2015: Great looking – and feeling -- day out there. It’s utterly ideal if you’re into lounging about on the beach and getting an allowable tan, i.e. just enough to blush the skin but not enough to leather up come winter. As to fishing, the bay is doable but still feeling the easterlies, as they swing around to the south throughout the day.
Ocean fishing is a lot more turbulent, though I see a few boats heading through the inlets.
As of midday, the easterly winds were still pushing 12 to 15 miles per hour so small craft have their work cut out for them as they head out to places like The Tire or reefs. Even when safely out there, there’s a major drift in play, based both on the winds and the residual north-to-south currents from yesterday’s SCA winds out of the north.
Tomorrow should be a bit better in the a.m., though afternoon southerly winds could get really brisk, even reaching SCA conditions. Sunday could be the winners, with light winds and the ocean swells finally subsiding.
The latest in "Child-proof tents":
PLUTO SHOT MIGHT BE UNREAL – LITERALLY: Well, it seems I hung around long enough to see what the surface of Pluto looks like, compliments of the “piano-sized” spacecraft New Horizons, which reached the dog-named planet after nine years in space; hurtling faster than a speeding bullet – and, dare I say it, able to leap buildings in a single bound. It took of Jan. 19, 2006.
From the one photo I saw of this out-there celestial body, it seems I could have just as easily looked at a close-up photo of roadkill toad skin and got the same general impression. In fact, who’s to really say this Pluto photo isn’t a black-and-white close-up of, say, a Fowler’s toad?
Come on, you surely recall the solid suspicions that the Apollo 11 “moon landing” was actually one-giant-step onto a secret movie set -- somewhere on the planet New Mexico. Hell, I first had my doubts on the moon landing when I noticed it was sponsored, in large part, by the Chattanooga Bakery, makers of Moon Pies – the sales of which shot through the roof with the landing. How convenient.
For those distrustfully inspecting this alleged photographing of Pluto, it’s essential to also focus on some of the cosmically outlandish claims of the mission, not the least of which is project scientists first telling the media that Pluto is, and I quote, “billions of miles away.” Everyone knows that’s just an expression, not a measurement. And, sure enough, those “experts” eventually pegged Pluto’s current distance from Earth at 3.6 billion miles. And here I pegged it at 3.7 billion miles. Maybe the calibration of my pegger was off.
But getting down to brass tacks, what’s this about New Horizons covering 3.6 billion miles in just nine years? We’ve already been assured the craft was moving faster than a speeding bullet. So, let’s envision a bullet whizzing merrily through space to suddenly have the equivalent of a piano suddenly come up from behind, flashing its high beams to pass – or, better yet, how about New Horizons pulling up next to speeding bullet and giving a quick “Beep-beep,” all Road Runner-like, before bolting off in a swirl of space dust.
To put things in casual Sunday driving terms, New Horizons was covering nearly a million miles a day, at one point. Since New Horizons genii knew that those speed would be hard to place in the public eye, they strategically adding some magical physics into the project, knowing most folks got out of math when the alphabet entered into it. They lectured the media on the way New Horizons reached that coveted million-miles-per-day club by tapping into this wild gravitational slinging action compliment of sumo-planet Jupiter.
Did you ever play that kid’s game where a bunch of you held hands and began swinging around in a big circle, until the last person on the outside of the line left his feet, screaming bloody murder, before flying through the air and into the side of a nearby building. Well, you really shouldn’t play games like that. Now, where was I going with this? Oh, that’s right. Oddly, that kid-level whiplash action is similar to how New Horizon got dramatically flung forward by the children of Jupiter, obtaining faster-than-ever speeds.
Anyway, here’s some more suspicious data concerning the Pluto-or-Bust mission. Guess what the Pluto space mission folks say is fueling the spacecraft? Actually, they’re offering two answers. My favorite answer has the space-bugger moving 37,000-miles-per-hour powered by a single shove it got nine years ago, shortly after busting out of the Earth’s atmosphere. That’s right, it’s traveling billions of miles … powerless, or maybe that’s power-free. That’s a good one, eh? One small push from man, one giant leap for Pluto-kind.
But it gets better if you listen to some other project scientists. They swear the billion-mile vessel is powered by … a 200-watt light bulb. Ta-da. Fortunately the Pluto probe was launched before those stinkin' energy-efficient bulbs. Hell, New Horizons wouldn't be able to see squat out there.
OK, so many it’s not a lightbulb, per se, but the only onboard energy source, used exclusively to position the vessel and activate cameras, is a measly 200 watts of power. It gets sapped when New Horizons is at its closest to Pluto, approximately 7,750 miles. As I figure it, the bill from the Pluto Electric Company will be something like four cents. However, just the postage to get the bill back to Earth will run well over $100 million, local. What’s more, it’ll take a decade to get here, which is the same time frame data/photos from New Horizons take to get back to planet blue.
On that note, I’ll also come back to earth. Hopefully it’s obvious I’m fully unserious about this photo-shoot of Pluto being some sort of Hollywoodesque hoax. Not only is it the real Milky Way McCoy but it’s a mind-bogglingly mesmerizing glance at the true mystery planet of our solar system. I went a bit out-there in hopes of getting yinz to probe the mind boggling details associated with this Pluto trip, likely the greatest low-cost space exploration saga to date.
The New horizons mission cost $720 million, including spacecraft and instrument development, data analysis, education/public outreach, mission operations and launch vehicles from 2001-2016. That amount would barely cover the cost of the first-stage of some rocket launches. NASA’s fiscal 2014 budget was $17.65 billion.
But back to that toad skin photo. The not-so-comely lumpy Pluto-surface is the equivalent of a Playboy Centerfold to the folks at mission headquarters – the lonely folks at mission headquarters, who have spent over a decade living and breathing this flight.
Those warty lumps highlighting Pluto’s complexion are astounding 11,000-foot mountains, high as the Rockies -- but made of ice, as in water!
Just as interesting are sections of smoothness on Pluto’s surface. It shows some sort of dynamic surface action that fills in the massive crater scars and even larger valleys. Might it be that meteorite strikes superheat the planet’s frozen water surface, allowing it to melt long enough to fill in the impact zone, before refreezing perfectly smooth?
Hopefully, I perked your interest enough to keep you following this earth-shattering space effort.
I am not a proponent or de-ponent of global warming. as it is being set forth. I absolutely disagree that scientists have the ability to micromanage how global warming will play out -- be it droughts, floods or even rising seas. Jules Verne and Stephen King could do just as well, likely better.
At the same time, it's vital to keep up on what's being written. I like placing it all out there.
You might have seen an article I placed in here a short time back in which a group of respected scientists predict a mini ice age moving in. Global warming and an ice age. WTF!?
Hey, I can envision a planetary warming process leading to increased evaporation from the oceans, accompanied by a thickening and persistent cloud cover, throwing the planet into a manmade ice age, of sorts.
Again, there is absolutely no guessing at how planetary warming might play out on a global scale, especially with a site-specific accuracy.
What I stand behind is the warming of oceans. That is happening -- and we are seeing huge impacts worldwide, especially within the fishing industry. And it legitimately does not look good.
A new study published online today in the journal Science finds that the rate of global warming during the last 15 years has been as fast as or faster than that seen during the latter half of the 20th Century. The study refutes the notion that there has been a slowdown or "hiatus" in the rate of global warming in recent years.
The study is the work of a team of scientists from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's (NOAA) National Centers for Environmental Information* (NCEI) using the latest global surface temperature data.
"Adding in the last two years of global surface temperature data and other improvements in the quality of the observed record provide evidence that contradict the notion of a hiatus in recent global warming trends," said Thomas R. Karl, L.H.D., Director, NOAA's National Centers for Environmental Information. "Our new analysis suggests that the apparent hiatus may have been largely the result of limitations in past datasets, and that the rate of warming over the first 15 years of this century has, in fact, been as fast or faster than that seen over the last half of the 20th century."
The apparent observed slowing or decrease in the upward rate of global surface temperature warming has been nicknamed the "hiatus." The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's (IPCC) Fifth Assessment Report, released in stages between September 2013 and November 2014, concluded that the upward global surface temperature trend from 1998-2012 was markedly lower than the trend from 1951-2012.
Since the release of the IPCC report, NOAA scientists have made significant improvements in the calculation of trends and now use a global surface temperature record that includes the most recent two years of data, 2013 and 2014--the hottest year on record. The calculations also use improved versions of both sea surface temperature and land surface air temperature datasets. One of the most substantial improvements is a correction that accounts for the difference in data collected from buoys and ship-based data.
Prior to the mid-1970s, ships were the predominant way to measure sea surface temperatures, and since then buoys have been used in increasing numbers. Compared to ships, buoys provide measurements of significantly greater accuracy. "In regards to sea surface temperature, scientists have shown that across the board, data collected from buoys are cooler than ship-based data," said Dr. Thomas C. Peterson, principal scientist at NOAA's National Centers for Environmental Information and one of the study's authors. "In order to accurately compare ship measurements and buoy measurements over the long-term, they need to be compatible. Scientists have developed a method to correct the difference between ship and buoy measurements, and we are using this in our trend analysis."
In addition, more detailed information has been obtained regarding each ship's observation method. This information was also used to provide improved corrections for changes in the mix of observing methods.
New analyses with these data demonstrate that incomplete spatial coverage also led to underestimates of the true global temperature change previously reported in the 2013 IPCC report. The integration of dozens of data sets has improved spatial coverage over many areas, including the Arctic, where temperatures have been rapidly increasing in recent decades. For example, the release of the International Surface Temperature Initiative databank, integrated with NOAA's Global Historical Climatology Network-Daily dataset and forty additional historical data sources, has more than doubled the number of weather stations available for analysis.
Lastly, the incorporation of additional years of data, 2013 and 2014, with 2014 being the warmest year on record, has had a notable impact on the temperature assessment. As stated by the IPCC, the "hiatus" period 1998-2012 is short and began with an unusually warm El Niño year. However, over the full period of record, from 1880 to present, the newly calculated warming trend is not substantially different than reported previously (0.68°C / Century (new) vs 0.65°C / Century (old)), reinforcing that the new corrections mainly have in impact in recent decades.
On the Web
* Note: NOAA's National Centers for Environmental Information (NCEI) is the merger of the National Climatic Data Center, National Geophysical Data Center, and National Oceanographic Data Center as approved in the Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations Act, 2015, Public Law 113-235. From the depths of the ocean to the surface of the sun and from million-year-old sediment records to near real-time satellite images, NCEI is the nation's leading authority for environmental information and data. For more information go to: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/news/coming-soon-national-centers-environm...
NOAA’s mission is to understand and predict changes in the Earth's environment, from the depths of the ocean to the surface of the sun, and to conserve and manage our coastal and marine resources. Join us on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram and our other social media channels.