Global Warming & Hurricanes?

Question

In 2005 after Katrina and during the high number of storm recorded that year, there was no shortage of "experts" who claimed that there was a link between the two, and that 2006 and future years would be even worse for hurricanes than 2005.

Almost all "research" stated that there was no link, but then stated that "At present, however, the available scientific evidence suggests that it would be premature to assert that the recent anomalous behavior can be attributed entirely to a natural cycle." or it's defiantly because of man made "global warming"

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2005/09/hurricanes-and-global-warming/

Yet, they were wrong, as no one can predict what the future will hold. Maybe if they say just wait till next year, we'll forget all the years they were wrong and wonder at the genius of the men that "accurately" made the prediction.

Then you have the true believers who claim that over the last 30 years, hurricanes have been increasing in numbers, alluding to proof “global warming” is real. I find it funny that they look back only 30 years, as the 30 years before that we were declining from a record number of storms. The 1930’s and 1940’s recorded more hurricanes, more Cat 5 storms, more stronger storms, more storms hitting the US mainland than in 2005. Long before anyone thought of “man-Made” “global warming”

The best data to prove global warming exist is data carefully selected by “experts” with a specific conclusion already drawn up.

Answer 1

My recommendation is that we upgrade our disaster preparedness systems for the areas at risk of being affected by hurricanes.

Katrina showed us that we do need to upgrade the disaster preparedness systems in those areas affected affected by hurricanes, even if Global Warming were not a concern.

With or without Global Warming, hurricanes will be back and we should be better prepared for them than we were for Katrina.

Answer 2

Global warming isn't about one off events, what happens in one country or what happens in a short space of time such as a season or a year - it's about long term trends.

Climatologists and the like don't make predictions about what will happen in any given year, they use a baseline extending for 30 years or more (1960 to 1990 is the common default) and make comparisions for the coming decades and centuries.

We know that the number and intensity of hurricanes is increasing, that's something that no-one can deny. This is a trend over many years and within any trend there are peaks and troughs - that's normal.

No reputable climatologist stated that the 2005 hurricane season was caused by global warming, similarly no reputable skeptic claims that 2006 disproves global warming. Those with an understanding of the subject don't focus on single years, to do so is to deliberately distort the evidence by being selective. The media may focus on a single year as it can substantiate their argument whichever side of the debate they are on. But then the media aren't scientists and convey the message that gets across their viewpoint and is most likely to attract readers / viewers.

No-one can say just how much effect global warming is having on hurricanes and other storms. The numbers and intensities of such events are increasing and have been for as far back as records go. Global warming has a part to play, it would be foolish to claim otherwise as that would fly in the face of what we already know about the formation and behaviour of hurricanes. Just how big a role global warming plays will become more apparent in time as further studies are conducted.

Answer 3

Agreed..The 'experts' are looking only at what can swell their bank accounts. Well, some of them. The 'true believers' are so radical that they will be glad to give up modern technology and live in grass huts.
Then there's the 'leaders', who will be happy when only _they_ have access to petroproducts and only _they_ can rid in their cars, suv's, and Gulfstream jets.

For those who don't already know, here's some truth about global warming:


Global warming is one-half of the climatic cycle of warming and cooling.
The earth's mean temperature cycles around the freezing point of water.
This is a completely natural phenomenon which has been going on since there has been water on this planet. It is driven by the sun.
Our planet is currently emerging from a 'mini ice age', so is becoming warmer and may return to the point at which Greenland is again usable as farmland (as it has been in recorded history).
As the polar ice caps decrease, the amount of fresh water mixing with oceanic water will slow and perhaps stop the thermohaline cycle (the oceanic heat 'conveyor' which, among other things, keeps the U.S. east coast warm).
When this cycle slows/stops, the planet will cool again and begin to enter another ice age.
It's been happening for millions of years.
Humans did not cause it.
Humans cannot stop it.

Answer 4

It was in 2005 that the first study connected the dots between hurricane and climate change. Kerry Emanuel, of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (and elected to the U.S. National Academy of Sciences in 2007), published research showing hurricane intensity has doubled over the past 30 years and is linked to rising sea surface temperatures (caused by global warming).

Since then, no fewer than 16 studies on hurricanes and global warming have been published, most strongly supporting the link (see summaries of the studies: http://www.environmentaldefense.org/page.cfm?tagid=654 )

This is happening because hurricanes draw their strength from warm ocean waters (hurricane season peaks when ocean waters are warmest). As global warming heats up the oceans, hurricanes get more intense. It is not known whether they also become more frequent.

Answer 5

Most of the experts did not agree that global warming will cause more hurricanes. Here are a couple of quotes from Chris Landsea, on one the best experts on hurricanes, that prove how the IPCC purposely exaggerated the effects of hurricanes and global warming.

"I found it a bit perplexing that the participants in the Harvard press conference had come to the conclusion that global warming was impacting hurricane activity today. To my knowledge, none of the participants in that press conference had performed any research on hurricane variability, nor were they reporting on any new work in the field. All previous and current research in the area of hurricane variability has shown no reliable, long-term trend up in the frequency or intensity of tropical cyclones, either in the Atlantic or any other basin."

"It is beyond me why my colleagues would utilize the media to push an unsupported agenda that recent hurricane activity has been due to global warming. Given Dr. Trenberth’s role as the IPCC’s Lead Author responsible for preparing the text on hurricanes, his public statements so far outside of current scientific understanding led me to concern that it would be very difficult for the IPCC process to proceed objectively with regards to the assessment on hurricane activity."

"a scientist with an important role in the IPCC represented himself as a Lead Author for the IPCC has used that position to promulgate to the media and general public his own opinion that the busy 2004 hurricane season was caused by global warming, which is in direct opposition to research written in the field and is counter to conclusions in the TAR."

Answer 6

The link between global warming and increased hurricane activity is a weak one. The basic idea is that weather is driven by heat energy. More heat energy means more weather and more severe weather. So more heat in the oceans would cause stonger and more frequent hurricanes.
This idea is plausible. The data to support this idea is weak. There are many other factors that contribute to hurricanes. There is not enough evidence to prove or disprove this theory. Don't jump to conclusions either way. Climate change occurs over many years and no one is really sure what the effects will be.

Answer 7

Let's not forget what they were saying in 2005:
http://www.livescience.com/environment/ap_050731_hurricanes_stronger.html

"This year marked the first time on record that the Atlantic spawned four named storms by early July, as well as the earliest category 4 storm on record."

And before the start of the season this year:
http://www.cpc.noaa.gov/products/outlooks/hurricane.shtml

Now, we have quite a ways to go until November, but we're only up to Tropical Storm Barry, and folks were hoping that storm was a little greater to help put out those fires in Georgia and Florida.

There will be silence and denial until the first major hurricane, and THEN all the talk will begin. If the season comes in anywhere near forecast, we;ll never hear the end of it.

Answer 8

The "global warming" alarmists will throw all theories out, hoping something will stick. The hurricane theory was good, until last year proved that it was false. These same alarmists were predicting an ice age in the 70's. Didn't happen. Now let's change it from "global warming" to "climate change". What's next? Unfortunately there are people who blindly follow without listening to all sides of the issue. The same will vote for Hillary. God help us.

Answer 9

"I find it funny that they look back only 30 years..."

Back in the 70's, scientists were predicting global cooling based on the way the world was using (and increasing its use of) CFCs in the 60's and early 70's. However, because CFCs damage the ozone, the world drastically reduced its CFC usage. Unfortunately though, there was one other effect of CFCs that we didn't realize at the time; up to that point, CFC-related atmospheric cooling was actually counteracting the effect of increasing CO2 concentration in the atmosphere. That's why the most drastic increases in world temperature have occured since the 70's (after CFC usage was dramatically reduced). That's also why many weather studies focus on post CFC decades (i.e. the past 30 years).

Answer 10

Wow this is a major blow to the denier movement. Chris Landsea was a major coup for them, even though he doesn't dispute AGW, but merely disagreed with mainstream conclusions on its impact on hurricanes. It was basically Landsea vs. Emanuel - not to overhype the situation - and it appears that Landsea has concluded that the mainstream view that AGW will produce stronger hurricanes is correct. Not surprisingly deniers are on the attack, throwing Landsea on the bus and spouting off their usual nonsense about how models are worthless. Very predictable.