Reporter Gives Update Covered In Sea Foam:

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.

  1. bobbo, are we Men of Science, or Devo? says:

    #28–McCullough===quite talkative on this subject?

    I agree with your repetition of all three elements ESPECIALLY the last one. Your ass, not mine.

    What politics does to us.

  2. MikeN says:

    If global warming is continuing an inexorable march, then where is the ocean heat? There is a lot of unaccounted for missing heat in the planet. This was the topic of one of the Climategate e-mails by uber-alarmist Kevin Trenberth, saying it was embarrassing they couldn’t account for it. The focus on planetary temperatures is foolish because the atmosphere contains only a small part of the total heat, equal to about the top few meters of the ocean.
    Why does the ocean get cooler each year with all that CO2 in the atmosphere? See Roger Pielke Sr for more.

  3. bobbo, we think with words, and flower with ideas. says:

    Hey Mickey==you are starting to rave. Ha, ha.

    Yes, sounding just like a flat earth darwin denier: finding your anti-science faith in the gaps. Where are all the missing fossils?????

    Why don’t you focus on the mountain of evidence you can see for yourself, the logic of it, the settled science of it, the common sense of it, and STOP forming your conclusions from the cracks, gaps, and remaining puzzles?

    Why don’t you do that Mickey????

    The rest of you retards too.

    Yea, verily.

  4. MikeN says:

    Now the science is settled too? Common sense tells me that when top scientists form a blog to explain their science, and then that blog goes about ignoring reasonable questions, or deleting them, that something is up. Logic tells me that when data is used upside down to reach a conclusion, that something may not be quite right. Especially when scientists refuse to issue a correction when this upside down use is pointed out to them(search for amac blog).
    The mountain of evidence is built on many weak links, and has climate models as a primary source. Real world observations are not as convincing. That the planet gets warmer from humans emitting CO2 is a reasonable conclusion. That the warming will be catastrophic, or anything over 3C is not as convincing.
    Some of the counterpoints like missing ocean heat, challenge even the settled part you mention.

  5. noname says:

    McCullough your picture is brilliant! It poetic justice to see how this shitty reporters network “myFOX” is repeatedly underlined!!!!

    One point of clarification, I do not claim FOX as my news network, therefore; the “my” in “myFOX” is another FOX lie!!

  6. bobbo, are we Men of Science, or Devo? says:

    Mickey: “parts” of the science are settled. If it were all settled, there would be no gaps.

    There will always be gaps in any honest system.

    Mind the gap.

  7. MikeN says:

    Just a gap to not know whether warming is 1C or 4C?

  8. bobbo, are we Men of Science, or Devo? says:

    Mickey–don’t you think the Hurricane Irene was instructive two days ago? Did you see the plot of the probable course? The probable wind speed, waves,swells, and so forth? Everything “a range” based on assumed variables.

    Why do you call that a gap? None of the experts do.

    Special language for special people I suppose. Funny, special people, average people, normal people and experts all call that area between your ears a gap…….but it too is in reality a range. What is your range Mickey???? From your postings, I’d go from dull normal to retarded. That too is definitional.

    Always another missing fossil in the record. Always a gap.

    Mind the gap.

  9. MikeN says:

    Hmm, very instructive. People were told to evacuate parts of town, get the hell off the beaches, this is going to be a big one, at least by wimpy Northeast standards. Then the reality was it wasn’t even a hurricane.

    If that is what you mean by global warming science, that CO2 emissions will lead to either catastrophic warming or warming that is no big deal, then OK, I’m with you.

  10. bobbo, are we Men of Science, or Devo? says:

    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.

  11. MikeN says:

    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.

  12. Mr. Fusion says:

    #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?

    see also

    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.

  13. MikeN says:

    The New York Times has scrubbed their reporting from their site.
    Search for “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.


Bad Behavior has blocked 7226 access attempts in the last 7 days.