Feb
More hurricanes, fewer hurricanes, stronger hurricanes…more BS
First global warming is supposed to be increasing hurricanes…
The issue of hurricanes and global warming splashed on to front pages in the summer of 2005 when MIT’s Emanuel published a paper in Nature saying hurricane destruction has increased since the mid-1970s because of global warming, adding it would only get worse.
And let’s not forget Al Gore telling the world the same thing. With Katrina, he had the “wind at his back,” so to speak.
Since then, however, the hurricane seasons have been rather mild, to say the least.
But don’t fret, now global warming is going to cause fewer but larger hurricanes…..
WASHINGTON – Top researchers now agree that the world is likely to get stronger but fewer hurricanes in the future because of global warming, seeming to settle a scientific debate on the subject. But they say there’s not enough evidence yet to tell whether that effect has already begun.
I think I’ll consult Madame Marushka and her crystal ball about this matter and get back to you with a report. It will probably be about as accurate of a prediction.
Source: AP
Possibly related posts:
Apparently we can have it both ways. It’s happening with the recent icy weather in Washington. The place is turning into a frozen tundra and we hear “Weather doesn’t make climate.” And yet every slightly abnormal weather event (and even the normal ones) are attributed to climate change. Which is it?
“TOP researchers agree” there are “LIKELY” to be less, “POSSIBLY” stronger hurricanes, because of “Global Warming”
“SEEMINGLY to SETTLE the scientific debate”. BUT there is “NOT enough EVIDENCE” to “TELL” it has begun.
The only Hurricane global warming is going to cause ,is the one that blows the Man*-made climate witches and warlocks away.
“
I still argue that the correlation between hurricanes and warming is strong. Check sea ice for example:
http://www.ijis.iarc.uaf.edu/seaice/extent/AMSRE_Sea_Ice_Extent.png
Warmest year (least sea ice) was 2006 if you look at the top of the cycle or 2007 if you look at the bottom of the cycle. Short term trend is towards more ice and cooler years.
Check out cyclone energy per year:
http://www.coaps.fsu.edu/~maue/tropical/
Down in 1990, double upward peaks 1993, 1998, down again in 2000, recent peak is 2006, after than short term trend is for less cyclones. Compare with this combined temperature & PDO graph of Washington:
http://www.appinsys.com/GlobalWarming/RS_Washington_usa_files/image005.gif
Note low point in 1990, double peaks between 1990 and 2000, low point in 2000, recent peak around 2004 after which we see steady cooling.
In the last few years there hasn’t been much hurricane activity and there hasn’t been much warming either. We are simply past the high point in the cycle and all indicators are moving towards a low point — that is correlation in action. Only when we get round a few more cycles will we see where the long term trend is going (and on the whole, long-term trend in all those graphs is close to flat).
For reference reasons, this link explains in minute detail how the Washington graph was put together… just in case anyone asks.
http://www.appinsys.com/GlobalWarming/RS_Washington_usa.htm
I’m not familiar with Madame Marushka – might I suggest either Madame Algore or Madame Hansen, guaranteed to give you catastrophic forecasts, on just about everything!
It’s interesting to see a previous AGW theory falsified and re-born in it’s new form, without changing the overall narrative.
Not to worry, just a minor tweak of the where the goal posts are for this one, I’m sure it’s still worse than we thought.
It’s an over simplified view to look at sea ice and hurricanes only over the past ten years. If a correlation further back can be made, then there’s something to consider. Even at that, there are many more factors than temperature that influence both the amount of sea ice and hurricanes.
Hurricanes do require heat but, as I recall, the 2006 season kicked off early with an extra-tropical cyclone off the east coast of the U.S. that cyclone formed when an unusually cold air mass moved in over the relatively warm gulf stream. It was also the first year that extra tropical cyclones were included in the hurricane count. So, we see that it’s not so much the amount of heat but the heat differential between the water and the atmosphere.
If you live in the hurricane zone as I do, you have a vested interest in watching them closely from development to destruction. What you see is that hurricane development depends profoundly on the amount of upper level wind shear. Lots of wind shear, no hurricanes; no wind shear, lots of hurricanes.
It’s a statistical correlation. Remember that the ACE index graph is averaged over a 24 month window so you get a general idea of hurricane activity (averaged across all seasons), but you are talking about being able to predict individual events on a day-to-day timescale.
An insurance company can tell you how many cars are likely to crash in a given year, but if you are driving your car on a given day then knowing the statistics is not as useful as pointing the car in the right direction.