But the hurricanes we aren’t having are very intense.
Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- Bicycles Can End Bad Weather
- “Gender-responsive climate action”
- Ellen Flees To The UK
- HUD Climate Advisor
- Causes Of Increased Storminess
- Scientist Kamala Harris
- The End Of Polar Bears
- Cats And Hamsters Cause Hurricanes
- Democrats’ Campaign Of Joy
- New BBC Climate Expert
- 21st Century Toddlers Discuss Climate Change
- “the United States has suffered a “precipitous increase” in hurricane strikes”
- Thing Of The Past Returns
- “Impossible Heatwaves”
- Billion Dollar Electric Chargers
- “Not A Mandate”
- Up Is Down
- The Clean Energy Boom
- Climate Change In Spain
- The Clock Is Ticking
- “hottest weather in 120,000 years”
- “Peace, Relief, And Recovery”
- “Earth’s hottest weather in 120,000 years”
- Michael Mann Hurricane Update
- Michael Mann Hurricane Update
Recent Comments
- dm on “Gender-responsive climate action”
- Francis Barnett on “Gender-responsive climate action”
- czechlist on “Gender-responsive climate action”
- Jehzsa on “Gender-responsive climate action”
- Peter Carroll on Causes Of Increased Storminess
- arn on HUD Climate Advisor
- spren on HUD Climate Advisor
- conrad ziefle on Scientist Kamala Harris
- Tel on Ellen Flees To The UK
- Petit_Barde on Ellen Flees To The UK
The US is only 2% of the Earth’s surface, so hurricanes are having trouble finding us. The other 98% is being cyclone savaged. Somebody said so.
None here in Canada either. What % of the Earth’s surface are we up to now? 😉
ROTFLMAO!
When you’re finished laughing, check out this site:
http://chartsbin.com/view/wwu
Surface are of the earth: 510,072,000 km2
Surface area of the U.S.: 9,826,675 km2
Expressed as a percentage: 1.9265%
Ivan,
I was laughing *with* the joke, not at it. Sorry about the confusion! Still friends?
P.S. you have some of the best links I’ve seen, I don’t know how you do it. Keep up the good work.
You know…….
I’m out here on this rock in the middle of the ocean…..
…..I’m afraid you’re going to jinx me with this
lol, keep your floaties handy!!
It is surprising to see such a lull in the pet rock naming contest. This is the peak of the rock naming season, you know.
Andy, the peak will start around Aug 15 and go until the end of Sept…..
…..we’re going to see some big changes this year, mostly in the western Carib
…and that’s the truth…..sputtttttttt
But..but.. Brad Pitt said we would have more intense and more frequant hurricanes because of all the SUVs!! HE CAN’T BE WRONG!!!
The meteorologists (NOT climatologists, nary a one) at the NHC have very distinct criteria for defining what qualifies as a tropical cyclone, in its various and varied manifestations. This is extremely valuable because it allows for a sensible and quantifiable measure of heat transfer from the tropics. Ryan Maue maintains a good record of this ACE index.
When the catastrophists claim increasing intensity, they are easy to refute because these numbers are so well vouched for. Criticize unfairly one of your best sources of defense against the inanities of the warmists if you will, it only weakens your argument when you have to cite those that you mock.
While that is somewhat true, the mocking comes from the naming conventions, which have changed numerous times.Interestingly, in 2002 storms that used to just get numbers, subtropicals, started getting names. You will hear arguments that only a couple of subtripocal storms have been named and not gone tropical. Either way the super hyper naming of systmes is amusing.
Scientific data evolves and thus requires adjustment to naming conventions etc. As long as these changes are well-documented (unlike the climatological conspirators) and readily available (as are the NHC methods and methodologies) there can be a perception of agendizing reporting but that can be quickly confirmed or dispelled by rational analysis.
Satellite monitoring was very effective in the 1930s. http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/hrd/Landsea/landsea-eos-may012007.pdf
There is the issue of standardization so data can be compared like to like. Changes in methodology without using that as a new starting point result in exaggerations.
Changing methodologies is rampant in climatology and destroys the credibility of those who have.
Insurance companies are using the changed figures to increase rates by comparing current to past without taking method changes into account. The Chicken Little Brigade are also doing the same thing.
By making claims that say: According to version X of our methodology we should experience Y which is not related to version W!
At least the Drought center is now advising a change point 12 years ago.