Looks like "scientist" are going to have to tweak the models, AGAIN.?

Question

Ever notice how these powerful "models" the scientist use to predict global warming are never right at the time of their predictions? Take for instance the 2007 hurricane season. Once again (they said the same thing in 2006), the experts predicted a more active hurricane season than normal. And for the second straight season, they were wrong. All in all, this is good news as less loss of life and property. But, for global warming enthusiast, this news is bad. Their "models" have predicted more storms and more powerful storms. And yet,for 2 years running, their models have been WRONG. Now, they will go back and "tweak" the models and tell us the improved models actually predict less storms due to global warming. At that time, they will deny ever saying they predicted more storms (unless there are more storms, in which they will go back to their original statement). Sort of like Hillary's position on the war.

http://news.bostonherald.com/news/national/general/view.bg?articleid=104733

Bob,
You are completely ignoring the global warming advocates, or have your head in the sand. The AGW enthusiasts have continuosly made claims involving increased storms and increased severity. Neither has happened. So what do they do? Go back and adjust their models to reflect current trends. unfortunately for them, the trends never continue and thus the cycle of making dumb claims, being proven wrong, adjusting the models, making more dumb claims. Ahhhh! The life cycle of the modern Global Warming Advocate.

Don,
Seriously, what the heck are you talking about? Who controls NASA's launch schedule? Government. Who are some of the biggest global warming fanatics? Government.

I think you have it backwards (Thats ok. Most liberals are backwards). NASA does not launch as they know it will end the AGW debate.

Answer 1

Yes and a few years ago I remember being told that since 1998 was the warmest year up to that point. We could expect the years to become increasingly warmer and probability said that by now we should have had several years warmer than 1998. Well it's going on ten years after 1998 and a warmer year hasn't happened.
The scientists that are trying hard to convince us of global warming need to keep trying to convince us to get continued funding.

Answer 2

Here's Emmanuels 2005 paper on hurricane intensification and global warming:

ftp://texmex.mit.edu/pub/emanuel/PAPERS/NATURE03906.pdf

Read it. It doesn't sound to me like the people who understand tropical cyclones are saying storm frequency should be increasing. Emmanuel surely doesn't.

However, as part two of your homework, find a list of tropical cyclones and their maximum intensities in the Atlantic and Western Pacific over the past 30 years. Plot the ratio of the number of major storms (Cat. 3 or higher for the Atlantic, super-typhoons for the Western Pacific) to total number of tropical cyclones. If you actually do that exercise, which you won't, you would find that the fraction of storms that grow to "major" status has increased by over a factor of two in both basins. Meaning that in 1980, approximately 20% of all hurricanes and typhoons were major storms. Today, the number is closer to 50% and 2007 was no exception to this trend in either the Pacific or the Atlantic.

Now go back and re-read Emmanuel's paper. Note he says that there may not be more storms, but the storms we will have are going to be larger. Just like the observations. Huh. Imagine that. No matter, Emmanuel is probably lying and even if he isn't you will probably be dead of old age before the really bad things start happening. That must give you some comfort but how do your kids feel?

Answer 3

Climate models can only explain past events. No one can ever see what will happen because of global warming - any time span shorter then 50 years is considered weather.

For example the Southern Hemisphere got off of the coldest winter in 150 years (you have heard this, right?). No one who studies the climate saw this coming. But now that it's over the models can show you exactly why this occurred and why global warming was to blame.

No one can see a flood coming, but once it happens, global warming is the perfect explanation. Same with hurricanes, lack of hurricanes, droughts, warmth, cold, snow, autumn, and football kickoffs.

A short memory also helps global warming believers. Many will point to the drought in the southeast, show the low levels of Lake Lanier as proof, but conveniently forget that in 1980 the lake levels were lower than they are today.

Answer 4

the global warming believers are going to have to scrap the models altogether, and realise you can't rely on a computer to predict mother nature, then maybe they will realise that the earth isn't warming. Nasa have recently said the circulation of the oceans current has changed direction which means that the arctic will refreeze and we will cool again.

Bob the global warming lovers keep telling up that climate change/global warming will bring harsher storms and hurricanes.

Answer 5

After Katrina it would be politically impossible not to claim that hurricanes would get worse.

For the sake of obtaining funding, it was claimed that human activity caused Katrina and this cause can be meaningfully studied.

Research is driven by funding and that is how funding works.

Dana: It was claimed that global warming would increase the frequency of hurricanes, but the statistics proved otherwise so researchers had to reduce their claims to something which is not so easy to prove false.

(edit) gcnp, I notice in that paper you provided, for whatever reason, the author didn't use any pre-existing storm severity index - he developed his own specifically for the purposes of demonstrating a link between warming and storm severity.

Answer 6

Just remember ... these are the same people that just 20 to 30 years so ago were predicting that the world was entering another ice age. Go figure.

It's a natural cycle that lasts longer than any of us are going to be alive. So just sit back and enjoy the ride ...

Answer 7

You're talking about weather. If you have a problem with a weather prediction such as the number of hurricanes, take it up with meteorologists.

I don't know how many times I have to tell you global warming deniers. Climate scientists have concluded that global warming likely increases the intensity of hurricanes, but does not impact the frequency with which they form.

Maybe you should try reading the IPCC report (which discusses this specifically). Or at least read some freaking media articles. Here are a couple that took me 5 seconds to find.

http://www.usatoday.com/weather/climate/2005-09-15-globalwarming-hurricanes_x.htm
http://www.usatoday.com/tech/science/discoveries/2006-09-11-warming-hurricanes_x.htm
http://www.livescience.com/environment/070201_climate_hurricane.html

No offense, but making ignorant claims and putting things in quotation marks doesn't make global warming denial seem very intelligent.

Answer 8

This question confuses weather with climate, a common problem with "skeptics".

Predicting hurricanes is just a form of weather forecasting. It has little to do with global warming science.

The climate models that are used in global warming bear little relationship to the models that try to predict weather (hurricanes).

And, of course they're being continuously tweaked. Science improves over time. But they're plenty good enough to identify us burning fossil fuels as the main cause:

http://www.globalwarmingart.com/wiki/Image:Climate_Change_Attribution.png

Answer 9

scientists are always constricting better and better weather models, this is largely due to more computing power being available. this dosent mean that they are wrong.