Reporter Gives Update Covered In Sea Foam: MyFoxNY.com
MYFOXNY.COM – A local news reporter from Washington, D.C. ended up getting covered in what is probably the remnants of raw sewage as he delivered live hurricane reports from Ocean City, Md.
WTTG-TV reporter Tucker Barnes was providing live updates for stations around the country as a wall of what he described as sea foam poured over him. Barnes was on the boardwalk as Hurricane Irene hit the coast of Maryland. He noted that he had immersed himself in organic material. That “organic material” was most likely the effects of raw sewage pouring into the water during the storm.
“It doesn’t taste great,” he said.
He said it had a sandy consistency and added, “I can tell you first-hand, it doesn’t smell great.” The foam is often a toxic mix of pollution and cyanobacteria. 60 mph wind gust sprayed the toxic mix across the reporter and the boardwalk and coated buildings. Bubbles and foam in the ocean can be caused by several other things, including oils from decomposing animals.
Mom always told me, even a dog has enough sense to get out of the rain.
Mikey–you are such a regressive. Why all the negativity???? You even sound dissappointed. Typical for a regressive. Taking pleasure in the misery of others. Why do you do that?
Biggest floods in Vermont in 100 years. Not enough for you huh? But lets see specifically what you niddle is all about?……..
1. Evidently, you want weather forcasts to never overstate the danger meaning you want to err on the side of putting people at risk? Is that what you want Mickey????
2. This event is about weather. Weather is what happens day to day. “Global blah blah” is about trends and what is happening 30 or more years from now. Its ok, I know you are confusing the two just to be negative. See how you set yourself up to be disregarded when you are so uniformily regressive Mickey? You do see that don’t you?????
3. Inconsequential weather. Massive floods. Top Ten damage costs. 32 people dead. Yes Mickey, its consequential and will only get worse if you accept science rather than blather as your guide.
Time to get off carbon.
Mind the gap.
Warning of a Category 4 hurricane from the New York Times, and it turns out to not even be a hurricane but rather a tropical storm. You brought it up as to whether it is informative, perhaps you should look to it for info.
If you think it is indicative of global warming then you have been manipulated by someone who wanted to use it to sell their agenda.
http://drroyspencer.com/2011/08/the-al-gore-show-24-hours-of-denying-reality/
Lyin’ Mike
The problem with the skeptics is they point to one area, claim they refuted it and thus ALL the science is bad. Not quite. Science doesn’t work that way.
When scientists discover information, it is published for all to see. That discovery may be accepted, accepted with reservations, or rejected. No one forces others to believe and have full faith in any discovery.
Climate change however, has more scientists accepting the science behind climate change than there are rejecting it. The majority of the evidence leads to a conclusion of climate change. Is it a fact? No, because facts are 100% proven with no room for error. Which is why science demonstrates with evidence.
While most skeptics love to point to a specific point and argue that, they are usually wrong. In your case, the oceans are generally warming.
http://livescience.com/14892-warming-ocean-melting-ice-sheets.html
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2009/01/090128-ocean-dead-zones.html
http://sciencemag.org/content/287/5461/2225.abstract
There is a lot more citations out there.
Your claim that oceans are cooling is false. There was a data problem with mis-corrected numbers. When that issue was corrected to reflect actual values, the trend towards warmer waters was verified. As was the increase in ocean levels and melting icecaps.
Sorry, you lose again.
#42, Lyin’ Mike,
I don’t recall estimates of Irene being a Cat 4. When hurricanes hit land they almost always lose wind speed. They continue to hold all the water though.
Roy Spencer is a known fraud. As with most people advocating “intelligent design”, he has little credibility. As for his numbers?
http://realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2008/05/how-to-cook-a-graph-in-three-easy-lessons/
see also http://desmogblog.com/roy-spencer
Spencer can find few researchers to co-author papers. John Christy, another discredited scientist on Exxon’s payroll, (as is Spencer) is about the only one.
Another case where Lyin’ Mike has come up short.
http://newsfeed.time.com/2011/08/23/ready-or-not-hurricane-irene-could-swing-past-florida-as-a-deadly-category-4/
The New York Times has scrubbed their reporting from their site.
Search for site:nytimes.com “Category 4″ Irene and you find the google link to their mobile site.
So you feel NASA got it wrong on sea level, or is this more of your conFusion kicking in?
RealClimate is a site that can’t even admit they use upside down data. They did inadvertently admit that a prominent hockey stick paper was invalid however.
Either way, your links say nothing about whether Roy Spencer is right or wrong when he says tropical cyclone energy has not increased.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/09/01/reasons-to-be-a-global-warming-skeptic/