2021 Record Hurricane Season

[brenthutch 388]

Record low that is

[murps2000 86]

Is this climate or weather related?

[brenthutch 388]

37 minutes ago, murps2000 said:

Is this climate or weather related?

Since it is global and not local, it falls into the category of climate.

[murps2000 86]

5 hours ago, brenthutch said:

Since it is global and not local, it falls into the category of climate.

So what does it mean for the climate, then?

[brenthutch 388]

33 minutes ago, murps2000 said:

So what does it mean for the climate, then?

To paraphrase Richard Feynman, “if the the predictions of a theory (catastrophic man made global warming causing more hurricanes) do not agree with observation, THE THEORY IS WRONG!  It doesn’t matter if 97% of anyone agrees with it or not…the theory is WRONG….and that’s how science works.”

[murps2000 86]

35 minutes ago, brenthutch said:

To paraphrase Richard Feynman, “if the the predictions of a theory (catastrophic man made global warming causing more hurricanes) do not agree with observation, THE THEORY IS WRONG!  It doesn’t matter if 97% of anyone agrees with it or not…the theory is WRONG….and that’s how science works.”

The above chart says it represents “global hurricanes” but hurricanes by definition only occur in the Atlantic and northern Pacific oceans. Does the chart also reflect other types of tropical cyclones?

Edited January 18, 2022 by murps2000
Misspelling

[brenthutch 388]

32 minutes ago, murps2000 said:

The above chart says it represents “global hurricanes” but hurricanes by definition only occur in the Atlantic and northern Pacific oceans. Does the chart also reflect other types of tropical cyclones?

Yes, hurricanes, cyclones and typhoons.  
 

From NOAA:

“A total of 94 tropical cyclones formed around the globe in 2021, which ties 1994 for the tenth most since 1981. Despite this above-normal number of named storms, the overall global tropical cyclone activity was down in 2021. Only 37 tropical cyclones made hurricane strength (>74 mph), which is the fewest on record since 1981.”

Edited January 18, 2022 by brenthutch

[murps2000 86]

25 minutes ago, brenthutch said:

Yes, hurricanes, cyclones and typhoons.  
 

From NOAA:

“A total of 94 tropical cyclones formed around the globe in 2021, which ties 1994 for the tenth most since 1981. Despite this above-normal number of named storms, the overall global tropical cyclone activity was down in 2021. Only 37 tropical cyclones made hurricane strength (>74 mph), which is the fewest on record since 1981.”

Last week when I said this:

“So cold weather in Boston is not evidence for or against climate change, then. Got it. Glad we got that cleared up.”

 

You replied with this:

“Neither are tornadoes, wildfires, hurricanes, droughts and floods. (But that doesn’t keep climate alarmists from claiming otherwise)”

 

So is the NOAA data evidence of global cooling or warming? Or neither? 

[brenthutch 388]

17 minutes ago, murps2000 said:

Last week when I said this:

“So cold weather in Boston is not evidence for or against climate change, then. Got it. Glad we got that cleared up.”

 

You replied with this:

“Neither are tornadoes, wildfires, hurricanes, droughts and floods. (But that doesn’t keep climate alarmists from claiming otherwise)”

 

So is the NOAA data evidence of global cooling or warming? Or neither? 
 local weather phenomenon are just that…local.  When discussing global warming, it is just that…global.  Bad weather has been with us since the beginning of time 

Edited January 18, 2022 by brenthutch

[murps2000 86]

13 minutes ago, brenthutch said:

 local weather phenomenon are just that…local.  When discussing global warming, it is just that…global.  Bad weather has been with us since the beginning of time 

You already explained that to me. I think we agree on that. But you posted a timeline statistic of a specific type of global weather event which made it about climate. I’m asking you what you think the data therein should tell us about climate. Or if it should tell us nothing about it. 
 

To paraphrase Richard Feynman, “if the the predictions of a theory (catastrophic man made global warming causing more hurricanes) do not agree with observation, THE THEORY IS WRONG!  It doesn’t matter if 97% of anyone agrees with it or not…the theory is WRONG….and that’s how science works.”

The text in parenthesis is your addition to the quote, correct? So is there catastrophic global warming but it’s not increasing hurricanes, or are there less hurricanes because there is not catastrophic global warming?

 

[brenthutch 388]

22 minutes ago, murps2000 said:

You already explained that to me. I think we agree on that. But you posted a timeline statistic of a specific type of global weather event which made it about climate. I’m asking you what you think the data therein should tell us about climate. Or if it should tell us nothing about it. 
 

To paraphrase Richard Feynman, “if the the predictions of a theory (catastrophic man made global warming causing more hurricanes) do not agree with observation, THE THEORY IS WRONG!  It doesn’t matter if 97% of anyone agrees with it or not…the theory is WRONG….and that’s how science works.”

The text in parenthesis is your addition to the quote, correct? So is there catastrophic global warming but it’s not increasing hurricanes, or are there less hurricanes because there is not catastrophic global warming?

 

Not only is there nothing catastrophic, there is nothing that is outside of the range of historical natural variability.  It’s not warmer than it has ever been, CO2 levels are not higher than they have ever been and NOTHING, (floods, droughts, tropical cyclones, wildfires, tornadoes, sea levels…etc) is outside of historic ranges.

The only thing that is well outside of historical norms is the number of climate related deaths, which have plummeted by 90+% in the last hundred years.

Edited January 18, 2022 by brenthutch

[wmw999 2,146]

And there have always been fat people in America; there is no fat epidemic.

Wendy P. 

[brenthutch 388]

7 minutes ago, wmw999 said:

And there have always been fat people in America; there is no fat epidemic.

Wendy P. 

Using your logic: There are fewer fat people in America now, than there have ever been, that means we have a worsening obesity epidemic.

Wendy:

 

 

[murps2000 86]

28 minutes ago, brenthutch said:

Not only is there nothing catastrophic, there is nothing that is outside of the range of historical natural variability.  It’s not warmer than it has ever been, CO2 levels are not higher than they have ever been and NOTHING, (floods, droughts, tropical cyclones, wildfires, tornadoes, sea levels…etc) is outside of historic ranges.

The only thing that is well outside of historical norms is the number of climate related deaths, which have plummeted by 90+% in the last hundred years.

From that data you posted it looks like the number of global hurricanes is outside of at least recent historical ranges. Isn’t that why you posted it?

[brenthutch 388]

5 minutes ago, murps2000 said:

From that data you posted it looks like the number of global hurricanes is outside of at least recent historical ranges. Isn’t that why you posted it?

Good point, you are correct.  However, if the consequences of higher CO2 is more food, fewer strong cyclones, fewer climate related deaths and more polar bears, I’m ok with it.

[JoeWeber 2,325]

10 minutes ago, murps2000 said:

From that data you posted it looks like the number of global hurricanes is outside of at least recent historical ranges. Isn’t that why you posted it?

Why he posted it is because we are all he has for now. He's freezing his nards off in Mifflin County with nowhere to go and no one to be amazed by his insights. 

[brenthutch 388]

10 minutes ago, JoeWeber said:

Why he posted it is because we are all he has for now. He's freezing his nards off in Mifflin County with nowhere to go and no one to be amazed by his insights. 

No my friend, I am comfortably ensconced in my den, enjoying a glass of wine, a nice fire and football game.

[JoeWeber 2,325]

13 minutes ago, brenthutch said:

No my friend, I am comfortably ensconced in my den, enjoying a glass of wine, a nice fire and football game.

Sweet. Give us an update tomorrow when you're making snow angels.

[murps2000 86]

56 minutes ago, brenthutch said:

Good point, you are correct.  However, if the consequences of higher CO2 is more food, fewer strong cyclones, fewer climate related deaths and more polar bears, I’m ok with it.

I am in favor of all of those things but what about tornadoes? If the price of higher CO2 levels is more of them, then I am not okay with that. Globally (which makes it climate related) they were up last year. And they’re way up from 1981

https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/tornadoes/202113

[brenthutch 388]

27 minutes ago, murps2000 said:

I am in favor of all of those things but what about tornadoes? If the price of higher CO2 levels is more of them, then I am not okay with that. Globally (which makes it climate related) they were up last year. And they’re way up from 1981

https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/tornadoes/202113

Actually EF4 and EF5 are at a record low

https://weather.com/safety/tornado/news/2021-12-11-ef5-f5-tornadoes-streak-record-longest

[murps2000 86]

I’m sure that will console EF1-3 survivors. Is intensity what matters or frequency? If it’s intensity, the Atlantic had quite an active hurricane season in 2021.

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/weather/2021/11/30/atlantic-hurricane-season-2021-recap/

[olofscience 422]

9 hours ago, brenthutch said:

the consequences of higher CO2

So according to your graph, 2018 had quite a lot of cyclones. Was it because CO2 was at a record low then?

[olofscience 422]

And CO2 must have been really high in 1986 and 1988 compared to 2018!

[wolfriverjoe 1,351]

8 hours ago, murps2000 said:

I’m sure that will console EF1-3 survivors. Is intensity what matters or frequency? If it’s intensity, the Atlantic had quite an active hurricane season in 2021.

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/weather/2021/11/30/atlantic-hurricane-season-2021-recap/

Oh hush.

You're using facts.
And reality.

And you're pointing out that the climate is a very complex and interdependent system that we have a very limited understanding of.
Any changes we make can and will have long term consequences (long term meaning decades or centuries).

But because the year to year data can be manipulated to show whatever anyone wants, the deniers use it to 'prove' nothing is happening.

[brenthutch 388]

2 hours ago, wolfriverjoe said:

the climate is a very complex and interdependent system that we have a very limited understanding of.

Including the role and extent higher levels of CO2 play. It’s what I have been saying for years.