Comments on: Why global warming means killer storms worse than Katrina and Gustav, Part 1

By: CapitalClimate

CapitalClimate — Sun, 31 Aug 2008 16:39:35 +0000

As with most things in the coupled atmosphere/ocean/land system, there are many complex interactions. What made Katrina so devastating was not the intensity per se, but rather the extraordinary size of the circulation. A recent conference presentation indicates this might have occurred as a result of an extra injection of vorticity (spin) from higher latitudes. This is still consistent with global warming, however, since heating of the atmosphere produces a more energetic system.

By: Luddhunter

Luddhunter — Sun, 31 Aug 2008 20:14:44 +0000

[JR: Ludd — we have certain rules that are well-established here. I don’t reprint long-debunked disinformation (and that certainly includes anything the Competitive Enterprise Institute has ever written). And we certainly don’t publish posts that are riddled with ad hominem attacks. I’m afraid that covers pretty much in 99% of your first post.]

POST 1 excerpt: Your snake oil won’t replace real oil, Joe. You’ve lost credibility because you just couldn’t stick to science, and compete on that field, you had to go ahead and enter the policy arena without consensus from your peers. Who’s to believe your science posts are not biased by your mystical chanting about choking current technologies before new ones are market-competitive economically viable substitutes?

You’re a Ludd, Joe, you are already killing growth by creating fear of investment in industry which is on it’s way to being overregulated and de facto nationalized. Ludds hurt our chances to survive as a species. Please do not breed anymore, Joe, we can’t afford more Ludds in the genepool.

Curious, what underlies your Luddism? I’m guessing Technophobia (Turdeating), or Socialism (Statesucking).

[JR: You really should go to A global warming denier site, or maybe Dot Earth, to post that.]

POST 2 in its entirety:

Cool! Did you spike me, Joe? Bad idea. Like OJ in the Bronco, baby.

[JR: I guess you are comparing me to a murderer, but the comment is a bit too cryptic to be sure.]

Joe,
I’ll give you another day to post my comment, and I’ll even invite you on my podcast (equal time promised) to make your case that there is consensus on AGW causing hurricane power to increase.

Don’t be a pussy, post my neanderthal comments and respond with class and don’t waste your time tell me how much science you know (wrong tack, i’m not arguing science, i’m arguing consensus), since YOU decided to come in the policy mudpen without consensus, not me.

To not respond is to admit you’re dogmatic and overtaken by Pope Gore’s shaman spell and don’t listen to credible dissent form you peers (not me, the science I cited).

[JR: Yeah, I’m the dogmatic one. Anyway, you apparently didn’t bother to actually read my post or you’d realize how non-germane your comments were. Anyway, like I said, this isn’t the website for trolls.]

By: Ronald

Ronald — Sun, 31 Aug 2008 23:09:24 +0000

I saw a map of the US with the most dangerous places to live weather and earth quake wise and by far most of it was along the gulf coast and southern Atlantic coasts. Tornados in the midwest weren’t very bad at all.

It might be time or past time for poeple to not live along these coasts at least in the low areas.

By: Robert

Robert — Sun, 31 Aug 2008 23:39:22 +0000

Realistically, what will happen is that we will continue to burn fossil fuels until they are depleted. Hurricanes will get much worse, but the workaround will be to abandon cities such as New Orleans. Once the ‘cane makes landfall it rapidly loses strength, so it is really only a coastal issue.

By: John Hollenberg

John Hollenberg — Mon, 01 Sep 2008 00:34:39 +0000

Joe, I think you showed remarkable restraint in publishing even excerpts of the LuddHunter diatribe/attack. Please don’t feel the need to allow any more of the garbage from this individual on climateprogress. This blog is remarkably free of junk like this, which is what makes it such a pleasure to read.

Keep up the great work!

By: David B. Benson

David B. Benson — Mon, 01 Sep 2008 00:47:35 +0000

What John Hollenberg just wrote.

A Dr. Box, associated with the Byrd (Center?, Institute?), has written that from Greenland ice shee3t melt so far, he expects a rise in sea level of one to two meters by century’s end. That’ll really spoil the parade for the gulf coast and lotss of other places.

By: Dano

Dano — Mon, 01 Sep 2008 02:07:35 +0000

Shorter Luddhunter:

I’m all hat, no cattle.

Delete away, Joe.

Best,

By: TomG

TomG — Mon, 01 Sep 2008 05:33:04 +0000

Please…
Jerks like Luddhunter throwing nothing but fecal matter are not needed…
Nuke’m.

By: ente

ente — Mon, 01 Sep 2008 10:30:04 +0000

very good article.

en-te@hotmail.de

By: hapa

hapa — Mon, 01 Sep 2008 12:55:02 +0000

i wonder which NAMfan17 character will be the first to say “people should just get used to it and leave NYC.”

By: Magnus

Magnus — Mon, 01 Sep 2008 13:26:35 +0000

Why do you chose a hurricane in 1979 and not the by far strongest, in the beginning of the 20th century?

A curious “cherry pick”…

The statistics:

Hurricans and storms globally:
http://www.sciencemag.org/ content/ vol309/ issue5742/ images/ medium/ 309_1844_F2.gif

From Science Magazine:
http://www.sciencemag.org/ cgi/ content/ full/ 309/ 5742/ 1844/ FIG2

US hurricanes strikes 1900-2004:
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/ 3096/ 2815775382_c487c1ecb1_o.jpg

Numbers of cyclones globally:
http://www.coaps.fsu.edu/~maue/tropical/tc_ace.jpg

Cyclone energy on the northern hemisphere:
http://www.coaps.fsu.edu/ ~maue/ tropical/ monthly_2004_2008.jpg

Intensity in tropical cyclones:
http://bp3.blogger.com/ _xTUB8vsmURU/ SCHhAPuUqWI/ AAAAAAAAAMo/ McRjtOVwLGY/ s1600-h/ global_ace.gif

I’ve got more graphs on hurricane activity with sloping curves, but this is enough here.

[JR: I don’t understand the thrust of your comment at all. But for the record, Tip is “largest and most intense tropical cyclone on record.”]

By: Magnus

Magnus — Mon, 01 Sep 2008 13:28:56 +0000

BTW: Kerry Emanuel changed his mind on stronger huricanes early this year.

http://www.chron.com/ disp/ story.mpl/ tech/ news/ 5693436.html

At least get facts right in this otherwise funny rhetorical blog.

[JR: Again, not sure what the point of this comment is. You do not actually seem to have read this post.]

By: Johnnyb

Johnnyb — Mon, 01 Sep 2008 15:36:43 +0000

I seem to recall in 2006 the Global Warmists came out and said that it was going to be the worst hurricane season ever, and not a single one hit the US and I believe that there were fewer storms formed than in previous years, below the longterm average. Then 2007 rolls around, and the Global Warmists come out and say that this will be the worst hurricane season ever, and the results were the same as 2006, no hurricanes hitting the US and fewer storms than normal.

OK, so the Argos project confirms a recent cooling trend in the world oceans, and temperature monitors from arounf the globe confirm that 2008 is the coolest year that we have had at least since 2000. And joila, we get what appears to me to be an average hurricane season.

By: David B. Benson

David B. Benson — Tue, 02 Sep 2008 00:52:57 +0000

Johnnyb — Is ten named storms by this date average?

By: TomG

TomG — Tue, 02 Sep 2008 04:56:50 +0000

Johnnyb terrible at recall.
From Philip Klotzbach, William M. Gray and their associates at Colorado State University the average number of storms/season based on 1950-2000 stats: 9.6 tropical storms
5.9 hurricanes
2.3 major hurricanes
They got their prediction for 2006 wrong (17, 9 and 5), but there still were:
10 tropical storms
5 hurricanes
2 major hurricanes
No hurricane hit the US
The prediction for 2007 was much better (17, 9 and 5). There were:
15 tropical storms
6 hurricanes
2 major hurricanes
Humberto hit the US as a cat 1, Dean hit Yucatan as a cat 5
and Felix hit Nicaragua also as a cat 5
As for 2008….Sept 2 and we already have 10 storms?? This average?
Use Google, not your recall.
It took me all of 5 seconds to find all this information.

By: TomG

TomG — Tue, 02 Sep 2008 05:10:19 +0000

Bit of a follow-up…
The original prediction for the 2007 season was issued in December 2006.
It was 14 storms, 7 hurricanes and 3 major hurricanes.
In April 2007 they changed the numbers to 17, 9 and 5.

By: Luddhunter

Luddhunter — Tue, 02 Sep 2008 21:08:39 +0000

Joe,

OK forget CEI. I noticed you didn’t mention my second source for cvlaiming Non-Consensus: the Geophysical Research Letters science that came out last year, so if you’ve debunked it, it’s not “long-debunked”, and I’d like to see the debunk. If you spike this one, I’ll know I’m on to something. I’ll take your debunk at face value and promise not to troll again (on this thread).

http://www.agu.org/ pubs/ crossref/ 2007/ 2006GL028836.shtml

Calling someone a Ludd and requesting they don’t breed more Ludds is not ad hominem. The former is a simple characterization of someone who advocates a ban/reg/tax without a viable replacement and without a strong case for safety impact. The latter is just good comedy. The Mating Curse is one of my staples for Ludds… like all good comedy, it’s half rational…if you were an ECONOMIC parasite on humanity, as are all able bodied individuals who willingly stifle growth for social/political gain, isn’t genetic de-selection advantage the species? Lighten up, Joe, it’s derision. You gotta be able to think on your feet in the polemic mud pen. You came in the mudpen when you started recommending policy, I’m not dumb enough to go in your science ivory tower and get my ass kicked.

I know you’re not insecure enough to run an echo chamber, so please, debunk away.

[JR: No need to debunk. That study is not germane to my post, if you were to actually read both!]

By: John Hollenberg

John Hollenberg — Tue, 02 Sep 2008 21:35:57 +0000

The LuddHunter is not a good advertisement for whatever position he is advocating. Impossible to tell what he is ranting about (or why). Please, please don’t feel obliged to allow this stuff in the comments. It contributes nothing to the discussion, and is a waste of everyones time.

By: David B. Benson

David B. Benson — Tue, 02 Sep 2008 21:57:02 +0000

Correction — I think there are currently only nine named storms. No Josephine just yet.

By: David B. Benson

David B. Benson — Wed, 03 Sep 2008 00:21:35 +0000

Now ten:

http://www.livescience.com/ environment/ 080902-sept-hurr-forecast.html

August was ’slightly above average’.