Uh oh, NOAA Calls Rita A Potential Category 5

[Cowperson]

Originally posted by transplant99@Sep 21 2005, 07:21 PM
That being....if THE 2 (TWO) foremost experts in North American hurricanes over the last 60 years BOTH agree that this is nothing more than a cyclical occurrence with variables that haven't all come togther at one time before (like it is this season) then what in the hell is the continuous argument against THEM??

Don't you know? They don't have an environmental/political agenda to push, either from the left or the right. That's what's wrong with them. They belong to nobody.

On another matter, the link I posted for the 80 animals and one human stranded at Galveston has been updated . . . . a local vet took matters in his own hands and evacuated the animals and the lady.

http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/m...politan/3363388

Good thing as the computer simulations on CNN have the entire place submerged in about 30 feet of water.

Cowperson

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally posted by transplant99@Sep 21 2005, 08:21 PM
OK>...everyone arguing that "global warming" is somehow responsible for the giant increase in hurricanes this year...please explain to me one thing.

That being....if THE 2 (TWO) foremost experts in North American hurricanes over the last 60 years BOTH agree that this is nothing more than a cyclical occurrence with variables that haven't all come togther at one time before (like it is this season) then what in the hell is the continuous argument against THEM??

These guys aren't just some fly by night, "im making a name for myself by being different", Dr. Quacks. These guys have devoted the majority of their lives and even more time to the science and reseach of hurricanes current as well as past...they conclusively and undeniably agree that this season is nothing more than....a normal cycle of things predicted and seen before.

Yet...and argument continues because of some other scienctists that DONT do this full time, nor as their particular study, and that becomes the gospel for the tree hugging crowd?

Come on.

As has been proven by HISTORY, and SCIENCE....this is not theory nor subjectivity....its freaking fact and a half. Deal with it. The people in the gulf coast are.

Fair enough. I don't know anything about hurricanes and global warming so I'll agree with that.

I assume though that you agree with the tree-hugger theory of "global warming" then, and the Kyoto science, and the IPCC et cetera? After all, all those scientists that speak of the dire consequences of global warming and the causes of it aren't "making a name for myself/fly-by-night/Dr.Quacks" and they have devoted the majority of lives to studying and researching climate change and conclusively and undeniably agree about it and are foremost experts on the subject.

If mean if two experts agree on this hurricane cycle thing, and they are well respected and all that so that means they are right, then thousands of well-respected and peer-reviewed experts that agree on a tree-huggers definition of global warming must be correct. Right?

[Mike F]

Originally posted by transplant99@Sep 21 2005, 07:21 PM
OK>...everyone arguing that "global warming" is somehow responsible for the giant increase in hurricanes this year...please explain to me one thing.

That being....if THE 2 (TWO) foremost experts in North American hurricanes over the last 60 years BOTH agree that this is nothing more than a cyclical occurrence with variables that haven't all come togther at one time before (like it is this season) then what in the hell is the continuous argument against THEM??

Well, I jumped into the thread late, so I'm not exactly sure who you're directing this at, but speaking for myself:

Natural cycles in hurricane strength and global warming influenced increases in hurricane strength aren't mutually exclusive --> it's not either A or B.

Yes, we were due for a stretch of increased hurricane activity, so yes, this would have been a bad year for hurricanes even if humans had never evolved beyond rodents, but that doesn't mean that human-induced global warming couldn't possibly have made this already bad season worse.

Anyone who says global warming has had no effect on hurricane activity this year is just as foolish (IMO) a someone who says it's 100% global warming.

[transplant99]

If mean if two experts agree on this hurricane cycle thing, and they are well respected and all that so that means they are right, then thousands of well-respected and peer-reviewed experts that agree on a tree-huggers definition of global warming must be correct. Right?

Right. Since i said nothing to the contrary.

Jeebus i wish you actually read what i say sometimes.

The two guys i talk about aren't just any 2 ordinary, horn-rimmed glass nerds, with pocket protectors.

They are, simply put, the two FOREMOST experts on on hurricanes in the Western Hemisphere....period. Both have devoted their entire scientific lives to the study and research of hurricanes in the Atlantic Basin. They have no political agenda. They have no reason to say that global warming hasn't had an effect on hurricanes if it has. In fact, their entire professional existance would require them to say that global warming was having a cause and effect on 'canes if it was. They dont say that at all. In fact they refute it explicitly by using data and history for their reasoning....what a novel concept eh?

I assume though that you agree with the tree-hugger theory of "global warming" then, and the Kyoto science, and the IPCC et cetera?

I don't know. Im niether a scientist nor someone who claims to have insight about global warming. I also, after going through two hurricanes (or the nasty remnants of) last year, have taken a huge interest in all aspects of weather with specific interest in hurricanes. Ive read papers and studies going back many years and NOTHING suggests that "global warming" has ANYTHING to do with the current violent and deadly hurricane cycle we find ourselves in. I was trying to find cause and effect doing just that. It does not exist.

I do know that there are guys/gals/scientists on both sides of the argument...i dont give either more credence over the other, as depending on who they are financed/supported by, they tend to miraculously come up with evidence to support that side.

The guys that run the hurricane center have no such agenda....so therefor i will tend to listen to their deductions and reasoning without hesitation. They have absolutely no reason to skew the facts one way nor the other. That makes them credible IMO.


Why you people that lean left/are enviromentally sensitive insist on piling one thing into the other is beyond me. They are seperate issues...period. Much to Mike F's chagrin im sure....after reading this hilarity.

Anyone who says global warming has had no effect on hurricane activity this year is just as foolish (IMO) a someone who says it's 100% global warming.

Take it up with the guys that do the actual research and tracking of these things for a living dude. They would love to hear your reasoning, or lack thereof, im sure.

Oh yeah...its just your opinion.

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally posted by transplant99@Sep 21 2005, 09:54 PM

Right. Since i said nothing to the contrary.

Jeebus i wish you actually read what i say sometimes.

The two guys i talk about aren't just any 2 ordinary, horn-rimmed glass nerds, with pocket protectors.

They are, simply put, the two FOREMOST experts on on hurricanes in the Western Hemisphere....period. Both have devoted their entire scientific lives to the study and research of hurricanes in the Atlantic Basin. They have no political agenda. They have no reason to say that global warming hasn't had an effect on hurricanes if it has. In fact, their entire professional existance would require them to say that global warming was having a cause and effect on 'canes if it was. They dont say that at all. In fact they refute it explicitly by using data and history for their reasoning....what a novel concept eh?




I don't know. Im niether a scientist nor someone who claims to have insight about global warming. I also, after going through two hurricanes (or the nasty remnants of) last year, have taken a huge interest in all aspects of weather with specific interest in hurricanes. Ive read papers and studies going back many years and NOTHING suggests that "global warming" has ANYTHING to do with the current violent and deadly hurricane cycle we find ourselves in. I was trying to find cause and effect doing just that. It does not exist.

I do know that there are guys/gals/scientists on both sides of the argument...i dont give either more credence over the other, as depending on who they are financed/supported by, they tend to miraculously come up with evidence to support that side.

The guys that run the hurricane center have no such agenda....so therefor i will tend to listen to their deductions and reasoning without hesitation. They have absolutely no reason to skew the facts one way nor the other. That makes them credible IMO.


Why you people that lean left/are enviromentally sensitive insist on piling one thing into the other is beyond me. They are seperate issues...period. Much to Mike F's chagrin im sure....after reading this hilarity.



Take it up with the guys that do the actual research and tracking of these things for a living dude. They would love to hear your reasoning, or lack thereof, im sure.

Oh yeah...its just your opinion.

You say two of the FOREMOST experts back up your opinion on the matter, so it's obviously right.

By that criteria, if thousands of climatologists from all over the world (not thousands of ordinary horn-rimmed, pocket-protected nerds but some of the FOREMOST climatologists in the world that have devoted their lives bla bla bla) agree that humans are causing global warming, then it must be right.

But it's not, in your eyes, because of course there is a political agenda for all those thousands of scientists and no agenda at all for your cherished two experts.

It's not a separate issue. They are quite connected.

Like I said already, I don't know anything the effect of global warming on hurricanes so I can't challenge the experts you've cited.

I think I make a reasonable point though in challenging your double standard on what is irrefutable science and what is not.

To make a long story short, your standards seem to work like this;

Two experts believe what you believe (global warming doesn't affect hurricanes) so it must be true and us layman can't dare to disagree with them and...

Thousands of experts believe something you don't appear to agree with (humans cause global warming) so they probably have a political agenda.

[Hakan]

Shh! You're rousing the plebeians!

[Mike F]

Originally posted by transplant99@Sep 21 2005, 08:54 PM
I do know that there are guys/gals/scientists on both sides of the argument...i dont give either more credence over the other, as depending on who they are financed/supported by, they tend to miraculously come up with evidence to support that side.

The guys that run the hurricane center have no such agenda....so therefor i will tend to listen to their deductions and reasoning without hesitation. They have absolutely no reason to skew the facts one way nor the other. That makes them credible IMO.


Why you people that lean left/are enviromentally sensitive insist on piling one thing into the other is beyond me. They are seperate issues...period. Much to Mike F's chagrin im sure....after reading this hilarity.



Take it up with the guys that do the actual research and tracking of these things for a living dude. They would love to hear your reasoning, or lack thereof, im sure.

Oh yeah...its just your opinion.

So everyone but the people running the hurricane centre have an agenda? And you know that, by virtue of the fact that they occupy positions at the national hurricane centre, they're immune to having their beliefs influenced?

You haven't provided any links, but I'm assuming that you're referring at least in part to the testimony by Max Mayfield before the Senate Committee on Science, Commerce and Transportation which was linked to above.

A few things: Mayfield has his masters degree in Meteorology as opposed to Climatology; the difference being (according to Wikipedia):

"Climatology is the study of climate, and is a branch of the atmospheric sciences. In contrast to meteorology, which studies short term weather systems lasting up to a few weeks, climatology studies the frequency with which these weather systems occur. It does not study precise instances of atmospheric phenomena (for example cloud formation, rainfall and thunder), but rather their average occurrence over years to millennia, as well as changes in long-term average weather patterns, in relation to atmospheric conditions. Climatologists, those who practice climatology, study both the nature of climates - local, regional or global - and the natural or human-induced factors that cause climates to change. Climatology considers both past and potential future climate change."

Second: Mayfield's opinion seems to be that the current uptick in hurricane frequency can be completely accounted for without invoking global warming simply because there has been a cyclical pattern in the past.

Don't believe me? Go and listen to his testimony for yourself like I did -- the questioning starts ~1:28:00.

So because a leading meteoroligist who happens to work for the government says he doesn't believe global warming has caused the recent increase, it renders my opinion (based on studies published by dozens of climatologists) that that natural cycle could itself be influenced in some way laughable?

[transplant99]

i dunno why im even bothering with you.

Its pretty straight forward that the ENTIRE staff of the NOAA and associated branches agree that global warming has nothing to do with the current spate of hurricanes. Its not my opinion....its theirs...and they use facts, IE NOT speculation, as the basis for their findings.

You think Max Mayfield is the only guy that works there or something?

Here is a list of names, all of which have done research on canes for the better part of their lives.

Miles Lawrence

James Franklin

Edward Rappaport

But you may be on to something with the whole "he's a meteorologist and not a climatologist" thing.

I wonder if they have a any clue really?

however...since you brought it up....

Now climatologists say frenzied hurricane seasons will be a fact of life for the next 10 to 20 years, part of a lengthy cycle of stormy eras followed by calmer ones.
The engine driving these cycles is called the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation, or AMO. Scientists say it has triggered drought in the western United States while spawning hurricanes in the Atlantic.

At a time when some are theorizing that global warming may be the reason for more intense hurricane seasons, climatologists say the AMO is the real culprit.

"The consensus among hurricane researchers and forecasters is that the hurricane landfalls of 2004 resulted from the AMO, a natural cycle of hurricane activity, combined with a lapse in the incredibly good fortune of the previous 35 years," Hugh Willoughby, a hurricane researcher at Miami's Florida International University, wrote in an essay last fall.

"The effect of global warming was at most second order," he wrote, "and probably not present at all."

http://www.sptimes.com/2005/09/13/Worldand..._is_not_a.shtml


Now what?

[transplant99]

Originally posted by RougeUnderoos@Sep 22 2005, 01:01 AM


Thousands of experts believe something you don't appear to agree with (humans cause global warming) so they probably have a political agenda.

I missed thsi earlier.

Where did I say that i didnt agree that global warming was caused by humans?

Here is what I actually DID say though...

Im niether a scientist nor someone who claims to have insight about global warming.

and

The whole "global-warming" thing really has no part in what we are seeing this year

Ya see....all i am saying, as are the guys that do this for a living ( both climatologists AND meterologists) is that global warming and the active hurricane season are unrelated. Its all I have ever said on this subject. I have never denied that glaobal warming occurs, which you seem to be trying to make it seem.

Again trying to pile seperate issues into one...you lave learned well from the leftist spinmasters young Luke.

[RougeUnderoos]

Oh sorry Tranny. I had no idea you were a tree-hugger and you actually believed in this global warming thing. I disagree though. I think the two issues are related. Some even say they are so related that they are the same issue. But whatever, this has been hijacked well enough so we can drop it. You win.

Just watching CNN and they seem to be pretty well organized in Houston. Not perfect of course, but it doesn't look like chaos. Traffic moving pretty slow north but I think they've finally got the south-running side of the highway open to north-going traffic. The chief of police was just on and he said people could even leave tomorrow. The gas stations are running out of gas but he said that there will be fuel trucks right on the side of the highway. Police officer's families have been/will be moved into the police academy so the cops don't abandon their post to go home and protect them as happened in New Orleans. The Astrodome will not withstand a Category 4 or 5 storm so it will not be used as any "last resort". I don't think anyone ever wants to see that again anyway.

[Mike F]

Climatologists say:

"Now climatologists say frenzied hurricane seasons will be a fact of life for the next 10 to 20 years, part of a lengthy cycle of stormy eras followed by calmer ones."

"'The effect of global warming was at most second order,' he wrote, 'and probably not present at all.'"

Mike F says:

"Yes, we were due for a stretch of increased hurricane activity, so yes, this would have been a bad year for hurricanes even if humans had never evolved beyond rodents, but that doesn't mean that human-induced global warming couldn't possibly have made this already bad season worse."

"Anyone who says global warming has had no effect on hurricane activity this year is just as foolish (IMO) a someone who says it's 100% global warming."

Wow, we're on hugely different pages here... boy is my face red.

We both agree that the increased activity is due to natural cycles
We both say any effect of global warming has been secondary
I say that to conclusively discount any possibile effect of global warming is silly, and they say it's probably not present, but they won't conclusively discount it.

[Cowperson]

An uncommonly sober and mature analysis, recognizing the politicization of the debate and trying to see through it.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/4276242.stm

Cowperson

[InTheSlot]

The frequency and intensity of these hurricanes shouldn't be a big shock to too many people. I saw somewhere, I think on the news, that every 10 years or so for about 2 or 3 years straight you'll see hurricanes brewing in the Atlantic and making their way westward to the gulf. (This of course just applies to the region in question and not the rest of the globe)


So my guess is that last year and this year just happen to be a couple of the years where the winds are making that cycle. I'm sure if not next year then certainly the year after that will quiet down as far as hurricane frequency is concerned.