Reuters Headline:
Atlantic hurricane season quietest in 45 years, experts say
Take-away from this article:
MIAMI (Reuters) - The 2013 Atlantic hurricane season looks set to go down as a big washout, marking the first time in 45 years that the strongest storm to form was just a minor Category 1 hurricane.
Caveat:
There could still be a late surprise in the June 1-November 30 season, since the cyclone that mushroomed into Superstorm Sandy was just revving up at this time last year.
Curiouser and curiouser:
"We've been in this multi-decadal pattern of activity but it just didn't happen this year," Masters said, referring to the prolonged period of increased hurricane activity that began in 1995.
That period is still playing out, fed primarily by warm ocean temperatures in the tropical Atlantic that fuel hurricanes. But instead of increased activity, 2013 almost seems like a year when an enormous tranquilizer dart was fired into the heart of the main breeding ground for hurricanes.
11 comments:
I heard on the weather forecast that it's about 10 degrees below normal for this time of year (and it is frigid).
Must be global warming in action. Ouick, send Al Gore your money! He'll put a stop to it!
Good ol' Al has high-tailed it down to Oz to give them some moral approbation.
Global warming is like turning up the contrast. Cold places get colder. Rainy places get rainier. Dry places get dryer. Snowy places get snowier.
As for hurricanes, the IPCC AR4 said:
"...there is no clear trend in the annual numbers of tropical cyclones."
I'm sure anything you heard about global warming leading to an increase in hurricanes was, YET AGAIN, media hype and not something said by climate scientists.
Actually it was an AlGOREithm.
Oh yeah, it also was on PBS-Frontline in a show about Hurricane Sandy.
Yeah. Exactly. Media hype.
Let me know how many more times I will have to say this until it starts to sink in, so that I just have some idea. Less than 50, I hope? More than 10?
As a reminder, here again is the comic.
I gotta say this: man-made accellerated global climate change reminds me a LOT of the theory of evolution.
- It's got a few facts at bottom, spun like hell by people with an agenda into something called 'settled science' and 'the consensus of all scientists (who want to keep their job)'.
- It requires quite a bit of faith to ignore the bits of data that keep turning up in opposition.
- It is backed primarily by people who, rather than deal with the bits of odd data, either ignore the data or smear the folks who found it - or support it. These backers usually portray themselves as self-annointed superior intellects and oh, while we're at it - morally superiors as well. While they're superior, they can be as loud, violent and outraged as they like. Because, science.
- it has blog after blog, website after website singing its praises while demonizing people who are 'AGW deniers' at best and greedy, evil idiots at worst. One begins to think that if these internet-base propaganda sites were to go down tomorrow, the whole thing would vanish in a puff of smoke.
- it's implications for direct day to day life may not be very obvious; its actual effects are disputed even by believers and projected into a future conveniently placed just beyond the lifespan of those who support it most. However, it serves its turn to justify every money-making scheme individuals and governments can devise. And because Uncle Sam SAID there was man-made global climate change, and because you are a racist homophobe if you disagree, the most immediate effect is on your wallet.
- the last but most important similarity? No matter what the weather actually does, it supports accelerated man-made climate change. Too hot? CLIMATE CHANGE! Too cold? What did you expect with CLIMATE CHANGE? Lots of tornadoes? CLIMATE CHANGE! Distinct lack of hurricanes? Hey buddy, it's...
Well, you get the idea.
Ugh.
"The map is not the territory" - Alfred Korzybski
One of the most important considerations when creating a "map" (model) is the intended purpose of the model. That purpose determines what is included in the model - and just as importantly, what is NOT included in the model. If nothing is excluded from the model, then the model must duplicate the system being modeled, thereby removing any value from creating the model.
Wikipedia:
Lewis Carroll, in Sylvie and Bruno Concluded (1893), made the point humorously with his description of a fictional map that had "the scale of a mile to the mile". A character notes some practical difficulties with such a map and states that "we now use the country itself, as its own map, and I assure you it does nearly as well."
The Global Climate Change hysteria is driven by computer models which are simplifications of the "territory". These models (of necessity) must be simpler than the system which is being modeled. In most reputable research, the scientists caveat the results based on "unknowns". There are variables and complex relationships between these variables which are unknown. Obviously, what is unknown cannot be included in the models.
Unfortunately, there has been a history in the Global Climate Change "movement" toward producing the politically correct answers by fudging data and models to produce the desired political result. Some of this is due to governmental influence on funding for the research, as well as government apparatchiks writing the summaries for government consumption, contradicting any caveats or reservations within the research itself. There have also been allegations of fudging the raw data, with subsequent "disappearance" of that raw data so that others cannot duplicate the original findings. For those in denial concerning the subjectivity of scientists associated with Global Climate Change, please refer to this blog, Saturday, October 19, 2013
Phony Science Yet Again. To presume that scientists are always above being influenced by their own interests is to be (sadly) very naive about human failures.
In the absence of reliable long-term historical data, caution is advised in accepting cataclysmic predictions based on ANY present computer model. When the models more accurately reflect prevailing politically correct sentiments rather than the data, it would be best to take such results with the proverbial "grain of salt." The long-term solution is NOT to transfer unlimited power to government to effect radical changes RIGHT NOW to avert MODELED doomsday predictions.
"The map is not the territory."
Martin,
"Let me know how many more times I will have to say this until it starts to sink in, so that I just have some idea. Less than 50, I hope? More than 10?"
Hey, how else would I know you're still checking in? Gotta pull the chain every now and then. Besides, all the public knows about AGW is what the media tells them. I get to ridicule that - gotta have some fun! You can be the AGW good guy to my bad guy.
That cartoon misses only one thing: >50% of science papers are wrong to start with.
Robert,
I got a good laugh from the Lewis Carroll quote. I hadn't heard that before, thanks.
Post a Comment