Contrary to the hysterical nonsense being spewed by global warming experts, the past 50 years has been about the quietest on record for US hurricanes. The 1940s was the worst.
Climate experts claim that the air in the 1940s was severely affected by sulfate pollution, so apparently they believe that hurricanes are caused by pollution.
 | Morgan Wright on Climate Engineering |
 | Chris Barron on The World’s Worst Scient… |
 | HiFast on “Trees are feasting on d… |
 | gelcarrion0t on “You Can’t Hide Yo… |
| gelcarrion0t on Doubling Energy Costs |
| gelcarrion0t on Australia Permanent Drought Up… |
| gelcarrion0t on “New computer modeling… |
| Morgan Wright on Climate Destroying Shrimp |
 | Christopher Simpson on 1896 : Japan Hit By Earthquake… |
 | energywise on What’s At Stake? |
When Katrina hit the USA they called it global warming. When no hurricanes hit the USA they call it global warming. They are clones. They do not think. They act like someone from Invasion of the Body Snatchers when they see you do think.
Wouldn’t it be best to use a full decade’s worth of data rather than using 2001-2004 and calling it 2001-2010. That is more than disingenuous, it is plain wrong.
The graph is a full decade of data for 2001-2010. I’m sure you could have figured that out for yourself had you bothered to spend ten seconds looking at it.
I was actually coming back to retract that statement. But where did you get the data for 2001-2010. I could only find 2001-2006.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_Atlantic_hurricane_season etc….
You could have also tried Ryan Maue’s site at FSU. He is a regular contributor at WUWT.
Steve,
You would dignify them by calling them “experts”? Well, maybe self-proclaimed experts.
“Where facts are few, experts are many.”
-Donald R. Gannon
I think that it would of been more interesting to graph the total atlantic hurricanes as being a measure of hurricane frequency as there are synoptic meteorologic conditions which could affect the inclination (or lack there of) towards making Landfall in the US.
Nevertheless, I erred in doing a drive-by rather than a more complete analysis and it will be a lesson for the future to not glance over things, as simple mistakes such as this can reduce one’s credibility.
Doesn’t work. Read this article from the head scientist at the National Hurricane Center. Landfall is the only reliable measure.
http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/hrd/Landsea/landsea-eos-may012007.pdf
It doesn’t say that landfall is the only reliable measure anywhere in that article. It only highlights the problems with historical counts. Why make stuff up?
Laz
It does not take a genius to work out that with satellites etc we can now detect events in the middle of the ocean that we could not do before. The report states this quite clearly if you had bothered reading it and spells it out as follows:-
“Researchers cannot assume that the
Atlantic tropical cyclone database presents a
complete depiction of frequency of events
before the advent of satellite imagery in the
mid-1960s. Moreover, newly available
advanced tools and techniques are also contributing
toward monitoring about one additional
Atlantic tropical cyclone per year
since 2002. Thus large, long-term ‘trends’ in
tropical cyclone frequency are primarily
manifestations of increased monitoring
capabilities and likely not related to any real
change in the climate in which they develop”
Paul:
You brought up a good point. Even if satellite monitoring began in the 60s the resolution has improved greatly over time which leads to more CANES being found and current historical records are the equivalent of the produce section in a store than just comparing apples and oranges. This goes beyond fruit salad.
Not just the number of hurricanes, but also their peak wind speeds and lowest pressures. There is almost 100% certainty that the same hurricane from the past would be recorded as more intense if it happened today.
Why do you just consider the US when talking about ‘global warming experts’? There is a whole world out that that doesn’t revolve around you.
Why not look at what the global warming experts are predicting and what the evidence suggests?
“Is the frequency of hurricanes increasing?
Globally (not just in the North Atlantic), there is an average of about 90 tropical storms every year. According to the 2007 Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC-AR4), globally “[t]here is no clear trend in the annual numbers [i.e. frequency] of tropical cyclones.”
However, in the North Atlantic there has been a clear increase in the frequency of tropical storms and major hurricanes. From 1850-1990, the long-term average number of tropical storms was about 10, including about 5 hurricanes. For the period of 1998-2007, the average is about 15 tropical storms per year, including about 8 hurricanes. This increase in frequency correlates strongly with the rise in North Atlantic sea surface temperature, and recent peer-reviewed scientific studies link this temperature increase to global warming.
There is an ongoing scientific debate about the link between increased North Atlantic hurricane activity and global warming. The 2007 report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change rates the probability of such a link as “more likely than not.” View a figure of the frequency of tropical storms in the North Atlantic.”
“Is the intensity of hurricanes increasing?
Several peer-reviewed studies show a clear global trend toward increased intensity of the strongest hurricanes over the past two or three decades. The strongest trends are in the North Atlantic Ocean and the Indian Ocean. According to the 2007 Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC-AR4), it is “more likely than not” (better than even odds) that there is a human contribution to the observed trend of hurricane intensification since the 1970s. In the future, “it is likely [better than 2 to 1 odds] that future tropical cyclones (typhoons and hurricanes) will become more intense, with larger peak wind speeds and more heavy precipitation associated with ongoing increases of tropical [sea surface temperatures].””
http://www.pewclimate.org/hurricanes.cfm#freq
Nonsense. Read Landsea
http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/hrd/Landsea/landsea-eos-may012007.pdf
LAZ:
Due to increased observation capabilities more storms are observed and classified than 10 years ago and 10 years ago they were observing and classifying more storms than previously possible. Now they can tell wave heights and wind speed from satellite to a greater resolution than the last group of satellites that were monitoring.With each satellite the resolution improves just like the digital cameras are better now than they were in the 70s.
Lazarus is good at global warming nonsense
Sunday, Nov. 21, 2010
“2010 typhoon tally may be lowest on record”
Kyodo News
The number of typhoons this year could turn out to be the lowest on record, which experts theorize could be a result of the El Nino phenomenon lasting until this spring and the summer’s powerful high-pressure system in the Pacific.
As of Saturday, 14 typhoons — tropical cyclones generated in the Northwest Pacific or the South China Sea north of the equator with a minimum wind velocity of 61.9 kph — have been spawned this year
The Meteorological Agency, which has been keeping statistics on typhoons since 1951, said the lowest number — 16 — was in 1998. The average per year between 1971 and 2000 was 26.7, while the most on record is 39 in 1967.
http://search.japantimes.co.jp/cgi-bin/nn20101121a5.html
For some comprehensive hurricane information see: http://www.appinsys.com/GlobalWarming/GW_4CE_Hurricanes.htm
All it will take is another landfalling storm and the alarmists will have themselves a regular hissy fit; should it hit a major city, say New York City, they’ll up and have themselves a full-blown conniption fit ! (Imagine GISS getting flooded.)
Pingback: Goracle Plays The Scienceless Doom Card : Stop The ACLU
Pingback: Goracle Plays The Scienceless Doom Card : South Capitol Street
Pingback: Uragani e Global Warming: ........ | Climate Monitor