PDA

View Full Version : Tropical Cyclone Activity [still] lowest in 30-years



SarasotaRepub
03-14-2009, 06:51 PM
Sorry AlBore... (http://www.coaps.fsu.edu/~maue/tropical/) :rolleyes:



Tropical cyclone (TC) activity worldwide has completely and utterly collapsed during the past 2 to 3 years with TC energy levels sinking to levels not seen since the late 1970s. This should not be a surprise to scientists since the natural variability in climate dominates any detectable or perceived global warming impact when it comes to measuring yearly integrated tropical cyclone activity.

PoliCon
03-14-2009, 07:18 PM
Sorry AlBore... (http://www.coaps.fsu.edu/~maue/tropical/) :rolleyes:

It's a lie! It's all a lie! Global warming is going to end teh wolrd!:rolleyes:

AHeneen
03-15-2009, 01:23 AM
...Time to petition the home insurance agencies with this info! Seems like every month or two they're trying to raise rates. State Farm was denied a 47% increase in rates by the FL insurance (whatever) and then threatened that they'd leave. Almost one and a quarter million customers are fixin' to be dropped like used dental floss by those bastards!

You should have thrown in this damn-good quote:

Bottom Line

Under global warming scenarios, hurricane intensity is expected to increase (on the order of a few percent), but MANY questions remain as to how much, where, and when. This science is very far from settled. Indeed, Al Gore has dropped the related slide in his PowerPoint (btw, is he addicted to the Teleprompter as well? :eek: :D [author said it, not me!]) Many papers have suggested that these changes are already occurring especially in the strongest of hurricanes, e.g. this and that and here, due to warming sea-surface temperatures (the methodology and data issues with each of these papers has been discussed here at CA, and will be even more in the coming months). The notion that the overall global hurricane energy or ACE has collapsed does not contradict the above papers but provides an additional, perhaps less publicized piece of the puzzle. Indeed, the very strong interannual variability of global hurricane ACE (energy) highly correlated to ENSO, suggests that the role of tropical cyclones in climate is modulated very strongly by the big movers and shakers in large-scale, global climate. The perceptible (and perhaps measurable) impact of global warming on hurricanes in today's climate is arguably a pittance compared to the reorganization and modulation of hurricane formation locations and preferred tracks/intensification corridors dominated by ENSO (and other natural climate factors). Moreover, our understanding of the complicated role of hurricanes with and role in climate is nebulous to be charitable. We must increase our understanding of the current climate's hurricane activity.

PoliCon
03-15-2009, 01:42 AM
...Time to petition the home insurance agencies with this info! Seems like every month or two they're trying to raise rates. State Farm was denied a 47% increase in rates by the FL insurance (whatever) and then threatened that they'd leave. Almost one and a quarter million customers are fixin' to be dropped like used dental floss by those bastards!

well then pay up or find someone else. Sounds like a no brainer to me.

hazlnut
03-17-2009, 04:26 PM
Sorry AlBore... (http://www.coaps.fsu.edu/~maue/tropical/) :rolleyes:

Why sorry?

Did you read the study?

Did you even read your own (partial) quote? Or did you just rely on Matt Drudge to tell you what it means?

And for those who would like to see the quote in it's full context:


Tropical cyclone (TC) activity worldwide has completely and utterly collapsed during the past 2 to 3 years with TC energy levels sinking to levels not seen since the late 1970s. This should not be a surprise to scientists since the natural variability in climate dominates any detectable or perceived global warming impact when it comes to measuring yearly integrated tropical cyclone activity. With the continuation (persistence) of colder Pacific tropical sea-surface temperatures associated with the effects of La Nina, the upcoming 2009 Atlantic hurricane season should be above average, as we saw in 2008. Nevertheless, since the Atlantic only makes up 10-15% of overall global TC activity each year (climatological average during the past 30 years), continued Northern Hemispheric and global TC inactivity as a whole likely will continue.

Oh, by the way, also from COAPS--the same research center as above--you're going to love this one:


Model Projections of Sea Level Rise in the Northeast U.S.

March 2009: COAPS scientist Jianjun Yin and colleagues have published a study online in Nature Geoscience showing that regional sea level along the northeastern coast of the United States, particularly near New York, is expected to rise almost twice as fast as global sea levels during the twenty-first century. The rising waters in this particular region are attributed to a slowing of the North Atlantic Ocean circulation, as estimated by a range of state-of-the-art climate models.



I wonder how matt will spin this one...?


Thank you for bringing to light these studies. All good information. Glad I don't live in NYC.

PoliCon
03-17-2009, 04:30 PM
Hey Nutter - how much will the sea level? Please quote your source when you answer. THANKS! :rolleyes:

hazlnut
03-20-2009, 09:59 AM
Hey Nutter - how much will the sea level? Please quote your source when you answer. THANKS! :rolleyes:

Same source as OP, COAPS... Please read more carefully...Thanks.

http://coaps.fsu.edu/

PoliCon
03-20-2009, 11:08 AM
Same source as OP, COAPS... Please read more carefully...Thanks.

http://coaps.fsu.edu/

Way to dodge the question - HOW MUCH WILL SEA LEVEL RISE??? and be sure to site your answer with a source.

SarasotaRepub
03-21-2009, 07:29 PM
Why sorry?

Did you read the study?



Yes I did. Have you listened to Al Gore? The former VP of the United States has made broad sweeping claims that we and the world can expect Cat 5 hurricanes on nearly a daily basis. See, I can do it too. ;)

Since Al Gore is nothing but a Google Keyboard Commando I don't take what he has to say very seriously. And since his PowerPoint movie has been picked apart I really don't see him as much more than a snakeoil salesman selling carbon credits.

Global weather patterns change. Maybe the 2009 season for the US will be above
normal and then again it may not be. No one really knows till it happens. It was
a very quiet hurricane season in 1992 when Andrew slammed into South Florida.
It only takes one storm to grab the headlines.

Katrina was another, you remember Katrina right? The storm Bu$h & Cheney caused to hit New Orleans and kill only brown people. :rolleyes:

hazlnut
03-23-2009, 02:32 PM
Way to dodge the question - HOW MUCH WILL SEA LEVEL RISE??? and be sure to site your answer with a source.

How would I know? I'm not a scientist. Never said I was. My expertise is in writing, journalism, vetting sources and fact checking etc. I've been following the energy and oil industry's attempt to slow and muddy the scientific process for 10+ years. It's frustrating to see so many good people turn their backs on 3 decades of research and consensus simply because they don't like Al Gore.

Oil, coal, and energy are already positioning themselves for the next big round of bailouts in 2010. It won't happen. They'll blame the Dems, throw a ton of money at the midterms, maybe win back some seats, possibly a majority, but all that money would be better spent on R&D. They'll lose market share to smaller upstarts and fall behind on new tech development when they could and should be at the forefront.

I don't even get where you're coming from...

I point out that OP and Drudge are tying to imply that a certain study proves or disproves something that it doesn't. What's you're deal? Blogs and pundits disputing Al Gore and global warming end up pushing the GOP and conservative thinkers toward some pretty corrupt and unethical business practices. This doesn't help reinvent the party or further the cause.

PoliCon
03-23-2009, 04:24 PM
How would I know? I'm not a scientist. Never said I was. My expertise is in writing, journalism, vetting sources and fact checking etc. I've been following the energy and oil industry's attempt to slow and muddy the scientific process for 10+ years. It's frustrating to see so many good people turn their backs on 3 decades of research and consensus simply because they don't like Al Gore.

did you catch that youtube video I posted that explained how Maggie Thatcher is at least partly to blame for creating the climate crisis? Oh and - for the record - I was a global warming skeptic long before Al Gore took up the cause. I remember when they were suggesting that we needed to cover the polar caps with coal dust to prevent a new Iceage - AND I remember when the world was going to end if we didn't ban CFC's . . . . Global warming will become passe' eventually and be replaced by the next drastic anti-human anti-capitalist movement.





Oil, coal, and energy are already positioning themselves for the next big round of bailouts in 2010. It won't happen. They'll blame the Dems, throw a ton of money at the midterms, maybe win back some seats, possibly a majority, but all that money would be better spent on R&D. They'll lose market share to smaller upstarts and fall behind on new tech development when they could and should be at the forefront.
Amazingly enough - once upon a time everyone got around on horse back. THEN amazingly enough cars came in and replaced horses. Didn't need the government to interfere then - why do we need it now? When the next innovation comes along - it will replace what came before and it will do so without government force. If you need the government to force the change - then it's not really time for the change then is it?





I don't even get where you're coming from...

I point out that OP and Drudge are tying to imply that a certain study proves or disproves something that it doesn't. What's you're deal? Blogs and pundits disputing Al Gore and global warming end up pushing the GOP and conservative thinkers toward some pretty corrupt and unethical business practices. This doesn't help reinvent the party or further the cause. Corrupt and unethical? Kinda like the guy who owns a carbon cap and trading firm pushing for carbon cap and trade regulations by the government? The government giving out money at all is corrupt and unethical.

OH and as for how much the oceans are going to go up - the answer is a few centimeters at most - NOT the 6 feet that AL Gore and the extreme alarmists claim. Anyone who knows anything about history knows that.

BTW - how did you disprove the fact that cyclonic activity is at a 30 year low? I seem to have missed that . . . .

hazlnut
03-24-2009, 03:18 PM
Corrupt and unethical? Kinda like the guy who owns a carbon cap and trading firm pushing for carbon cap and trade regulations by the government? The government giving out money at all is corrupt and unethical.

OH and as for how much the oceans are going to go up - the answer is a few centimeters at most - NOT the 6 feet that AL Gore and the extreme alarmists claim. Anyone who knows anything about history knows that.

BTW - how did you disprove the fact that cyclonic activity is at a 30 year low? I seem to have missed that . . . .

1- I agree on carbon cap trading-- it's going to get messy.

2 - Regarding, the "few centimeters" claim--you wouldn't mind posting your source?

3 - On the cyclonic activity 30-year low-- I never proposed to disprove the study, only question it's interpretation in the OP and by Drudge. Here's what I base that on:

(from the study)


This should not be a surprise to scientists since the natural variability in climate dominates any detectable or perceived global warming impact when it comes to measuring yearly integrated tropical cyclone activity. With the continuation (persistence) of colder Pacific tropical sea-surface temperatures associated with the effects of La Nina, the upcoming 2009 Atlantic hurricane season should be above average, as we saw in 2008.

If the OP had stated that this study calls into question Al Gore's alarmist predictions re: increased TC activity, then I'd agree. But the study in no way shows the scientific consensus re: climate to be a lie, con, myth, etc. It's merely data. It shows a recent drop in activity, not unprecedented, just something to be noted. Drudge uses all kinds of colored fonts and sizes to imply some sort of smoking gun proof.

Also, as part of the scientific process, this study--data, conclusions, etc. will be reviewed over the next year by others in the same field of research and they will publish their review of the study. It's a process that's much longer than most people understand.

PoliCon
03-24-2009, 09:21 PM
2 - Regarding, the "few centimeters" claim--you wouldn't mind posting your source?You mean besides common sense? :p Welp lets see. How much do you know about history?

hazlnut
03-24-2009, 11:27 PM
You mean besides common sense? :p Welp lets see. How much do you know about history?

So, let me see if I understand. You ask that I site sources and answer your questions. I make an effort to explain what I meant and quote directly from the source mentioned in the OP.

Then I ask you to back your claim and...

Well, there you have it...:confused:

Historically speaking, when a person gives a smart ass non-answer to a legitimate question, it's likely that they're desperately trying to save face and leave the conversation.

PoliCon
03-24-2009, 11:30 PM
So, let me see if I understand. You ask that I site sources and answer your questions. I make an effort to explain what I meant and quote directly from the source mentioned in the OP.

Then I ask you to back your claim and...

Well, there you have it...:confused:

Historically speaking, when a person gives a smart ass non-answer to a legitimate question, it's likely that they're desperately trying to save face and leave the conversation.
Answer the fucking question rino - you want my answer - I'll give it my way. :mad:

hazlnut
03-25-2009, 12:06 AM
Answer the fucking question rino - you want my answer - I'll give it my way. :mad:

Indeed... You and Frank Sinatra.

PoliCon
03-25-2009, 12:29 AM
Indeed... You and Frank Sinatra.

so my pseudo-conservative "friend" are you going to answer the question? What do you know about history? I'll even go one better - what do you know about medieval history??