Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory – Global Warming and Hurricanes Figures
It has been seven years since a major hurricane hit the US, the longest such period in US history.
Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- Making Themselves Irrelevant
- Michael Mann Predicts The Demise Of X
- COP29 Preview
- UK Labour To Save The Planet
- A Giant Eyesore
- CO2 To Destroy The World In Ten Years
- Rats Jumping Off The Climate Ship
- UK Labour To Save The Planet
- “False Claims” And Outright Lies”
- Michael Mann Cancelled By CNN
- Spoiled Children
- Great Lakes Storm Of November 11, 1835
- Harris To Win Iowa
- Angry Democrats
- November 9, 1913 Storm
- Science Magazine Explains Trump Supporters
- Obliterating Bill Gates
- Scientific American Editor In Chief Speaks Out
- The End Of Everything
- Harris To Win In A Blowout
- Election Results
- “Glaciers, Icebergs Melt As World Gets Warmer”
- “falsely labeling”
- Vote For Change By Electing The Incumbent
- Protesting Too Much Snow
Recent Comments
- conrad ziefle on Michael Mann Predicts The Demise Of X
- Greg in NZ on Making Themselves Irrelevant
- arn on Michael Mann Predicts The Demise Of X
- Trevor on Michael Mann Predicts The Demise Of X
- czechlist on Michael Mann Predicts The Demise Of X
- arn on COP29 Preview
- arn on COP29 Preview
- conrad ziefle on COP29 Preview
- conrad ziefle on Making Themselves Irrelevant
- stewartpid on COP29 Preview
The longest stretch is just over 9 years (August 1860 to September 1869).
One of the satellites got shot down during the Civil War, and they missed one in 1865.
😆
We had people all along the coast between 1860 and 1869, and a major hurricane would have been noticed.
You can’t go by landfalls to determine a season’s activity. You have to sum the total amount of energy for each season.
People were busy fighting the Civil War, which killed more than 5% of the men in the US.
They still had towns all along the coast, and accurate weather observations back then.
Well that proves it. The 1880s had 26 hurricanes including five major hurricanes. Clearly the seven year drought of major hurricanes since 2005 is a sure sign of runaway global warming.
Wrong. You look at trends. You don’t look at statistical outliers. Besides, if you did, then 2005 would be an interesting record breaking year, would it not? 2005 saw four category fives. Confirmed category fives.
OK, I can do trends
http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2012/08/04/us-hurricane-strikes-have-dropped-more-than-25-over-the-last-100-years/
THEY WERE CAT 5’S OVER THE WATER, but cat 3s at landfall on the US, no different than the 7 cat 3s or greater that hit the US in 1915-1916, and may have been cat 5s over the water, but we had no recon or constant monitoring
BTW on my scale which incorporates PRESSURE and wind, Both Ike and Gustavs were major and Dolly was borderline. Pressure is important to the overall power of the storm and they were both deep into the cat 3 ( low 950s) This is why they stayed so strong so far inland, and in fact Ike knocked out power to the Ohio valley the day after hitting Texas, Contrast that with cat 4 but small Charley, which though over water again was barely recognizable 36 hours after 1st landfall
one more thing.. the ace is way down, so no matter which way you slice it, record low ace indexes cant be used as tool to argue warming.. though in the up is down and down is up world where agenda drives the day, I guess that gets thrown out too
You have to look at trends though – and broader numbers. Statistics is a funny thing because you pretty much have to do whatever you can to smooth trend lines and ignore statistical outliers because over time with more and more data points the trends will win out and noise will become less and less significant.
So WOT is a Bulls Hitter then.
😆 !
I don’t think you should incorporate pressure because it is relative to the basin in which it is in. Wind speed probably shouldn’t be used either because if you have a certain pressure next to another pressure wind speed is a product of that, and you could have two storms with equal pressure but highly different wind speeds – which we’ve seen. The only really objective way would be to look at total energy in a storm, but that’s just my opinion on the matter.
Wow, WOT is actually stupid enough to argue these points with Joseph Bastardi?
WOT, just a little suggestion for you there pal. I would recommend you take a breather and do a quick Google search on exactly who Joseph Bastardi is.
You are in WAY over your head here pal!
Looks like New Orleans and Miami are toast. Fluid dynamics can really tell you where hurricanes are going to hit (sarc).
Before satellites, there were probably a good number of CAT 5 hurricanes over the open water that no one knew were CAT 5s. So obviously there are going to be more CAT 5 hurricanes in the recent past than in the old days. Same goes for named storms. Naming storms is highly subjective anyhow.
Yeah, they’re pretty much naming clouds now aren’t they? Hey! there’s one—it looks like a bunny! Think I’ll call him ‘Buggs’. Add it to the list…
‘Before satellites, there were probably a good number of CAT 5 hurricanes over the open water that no one knew were CAT 5s. So obviously there are going to be more CAT 5 hurricanes in the recent past than in the old days.’
Yep, our technology has improved to measure & record this stuff. So everything looks ‘unprecedented’, or ‘trending to more extreme’, when it’s actually the same stuff that’s been occurring on this planet for millions of years. That’s all this is. They just developed it into a new industry. Before technology, this industry belonged to religion.