Global Warming...New Report...and it ain't happy news

maporsche wrote:

In addition, very few GW people are saying that GW will cause more hurricanes so your totals by year for that doesn't mean much.

What the majority claim will happen is more severe storms, not more frequent.

Malarky! You guys change your pontifications about what climate changes humans are causing, each time your previous pontifications about what climate changes humans are causing is shown to be false.

Hint: Human influence on climate changes is negligible!

Trends in both hurricane frequency and intensity have fluctuated (i.e., increased and decreased) over the last 500 years.

http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/pastdeadlya1.html
Atlantic tropical cyclones causing at least 25 deaths

... simplified by ican

NAME and/or AREAS OF LARGEST LOSS.....YEAR ....... EST. DEATHS
...................................................................... (most to least)
1. MARMAR, STE, BAR, offshore.............. 1780 ............. 22,000
2. Galveston TX ..................................... 1900 ............ 12,000
3. FIFI Honduras .................................... 1974 ............. 8,000
4. Dominican Repub ............................... 1930 .............. 8,000
5. FLORA: Haiti, Cuba ............................. 1963 .............. 8,000
6. Pointe-a-Pitre Bay (GUA) .................... 1776 .............. 6,000
7. Newfoundland Banks .......................... 1775 ...............4,000
8. Puerto Rico, Carolinas ......................... 1899 ............. 3,433
9. FL, GUA, PR, TUR, ............................... 1928 ............. 3,411
10. Cuba, CI, Jamaica ............................. 1932 ............. 3,107
11. Central Atlantic ................................. 1782 ............. 3,000
12. Martinique ......................................... 1813 ............ 3,000
13. El Salvador, Honduras ........................ 1934 ............ 3,000
14. Western Cuba ................................... 1791 ............. 3,000
15. Barbados .......................................... 1831 ............ 2,500
16. Belize 6-10 ......................................... 1931 ........... 2,500
17. HAI, HON, offshore JAM ........................ 1935 ...........2,150
18. DAVID: DR, Dominica, US ..................... 1979 .......... 2,068
19. Offshore Florida ..................................1781 ............. 2,000
20. South Carolina, Georgia ...................... 1893 ........... 2,000
21. Eastern Gulf of Mexico ........................ 1780 ............. 2,000
22. Cuba .................................................. 1870 ............ 2,000
23. Louisiana ............................................ 1893 ............ 2,000
24. Guadeloupe, Martinique ...................... 1666 .............. 2,000
25. Martinique .......................................... 1767 ............. 1,600
26. Mexico ................................................. 1909 ........... 1,500
27. W Cuba, Straits of FL ........................... 1644 ............. 1,500
28. Guadeloupe, Puerto Rico ....................... 1825 ............ 1,300
29. Offshore Nicaragua ............................. 1605 .............. 1,300
30. GORDON: HAI, FL, CR, DR .................... 1994 ............. 1,145
31. Jamaica, Cuba .................................... 1780 .............. 1,115
32. Straits of Florida ................................. 1622 ............... 1,090
33. Gulf of Mexico .................................... 1590 ................ 1,000
34. Offshore Barbados .............................. 1694 ................ 1,000
35. S Bahamas, Straits of FL ....................... 1715 .............. 1,000
36. Havana (Cuba) .................................... 1768 ............... 1,000
37. Veracruz (Mexico) ............................... 1601 ............... 1,000
38. HAZEL: HAI, US, GRE, CAN ..................... 1954 ............ 1,000
39. INEZ: Caribbean, Mexico ......................... 1966 ............ 1,000
40. Cuba, PR, Turks Islands ........................... 1888 ............. 921
41. St. Thomas, Puerto Rico ........................... 1867 ............. 811
42. Texas, Cuba ............................................ 1875 ............. 800
43. Cuba, offshore Bermuda ........................... 1926 ............. 709
44. Martinique, TUR, PR .................................. 1891 ............. 703
45. Georgia, South Carolina ............................ 1881 ............. 700
46. Florida west coast around ........................ 1553 ............... 700
47. Florida ................................................... 1553 ................700
48. New England ............................................ 1938 .............. 682
49. JANET: Mexico, BEL, BAR .......................... 1955 .............. 681
50. FL Keys, S Texas, Cuba ............................ 1919 .............. 600
...
192. CESAR: NIC, HON, El Salvador ................. 1996 ............... 51
...
224. W Atlantic, US east coast ........................ 1635 ................ 35
...
242. Virgin Islands ......................................... 1793 ............... 28
...
247. Offshore Jamaica .................................... 1799 ............... 27
...
259. CONNIE: North Carolina .......................... 1955 ............... 25

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2005_Atlantic_hurricane_season
2005 = 15
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006_Atlantic_hurricane_season
2006 = 5
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_Atlantic_hurricane_season
2007 = 6

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006_Atlantic_hurricane_season
Atlantic hurricane season was an event in the annual cycle of tropical cyclone formation. The season was unusual in that no hurricanes made landfall in the United States of America, the first such occurrence since 2001.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_Atlantic_hurricane_season
On May 22, 2007, NOAA released their pre-season forecast for the 2007 season. They predicted 13 to 17 named storms, with 7 to 10 becoming hurricanes, and 3 to 5 becoming major hurricanes.[6]

One day before the official start of the season, the CSU team issued their final set of pre-season forecasts, making no change to the numbers from their April forecast.[7]

Over the last 400 plus years, hurricanes have increased/decreased in intensity, and increased/decreased in frequency.

One thing is for sure, if hurricanes had increased in number OR severity in the past couple of years, we would not be hearing the end of the hoopla about it being because of global warming, I would guarantee that. But because that did not happen, the global warmers are saying it is no big deal. They want it both ways, that is abundantly obvious.

http://etext.library.adelaide.edu.au/o/orwell/george/o79n/

Part III, Chapter II
'Reality exists in the human mind, and nowhere else. Not in the individual mind, which can make mistakes, and in any case soon perishes: only in the mind of the Party, which is collective and immortal. Whatever the Party holds to be the truth, is truth. It is impossible to see reality except by looking through the eyes of the Party. That is the fact that you have got to relearn. It needs an act of self-destruction, an effort of the will. You must humble yourself before you can become sane.'

PART III, Chapter III
'And do you consider yourself a man?'

'Yes.'

'If you are a man, you are the last man. Your kind is extinct; we are the inheritors. Do you understand that you are alone? You are outside history, you are non-existent.' His manner changed and he said more harshly: 'And you consider yourself morally superior to us, with our lies and our cruelty?'

'Yes, I consider myself superior.'

Part III, Chapter IV
'Anything could be true. The so-called laws of Nature were nonsense. The law of gravity was nonsense. I could float off this floor like a soap bubble'

'If he THINKS he floats off the floor, and if I simultaneously THINK I see him do it, then the thing happens.' Suddenly, like a lump of submerged wreckage breaking the surface of water, the thought burst into his mind: 'It doesn't really happen. We imagine it. It is hallucination.' He pushed the thought under instantly. The fallacy was obvious. It presupposed that somewhere or other, outside oneself, there was a 'real' world where 'real' things happened. But how could there be such a world? What knowledge have we of anything, save through our own minds? All happenings are in the mind. Whatever happens in all minds, truly happens.'

He had no difficulty in disposing of the fallacy, and he was in no danger of succumbing to it. He realized, nevertheless, that it ought never to have occurred to him. The mind should develop a blind spot whenever a dangerous thought presented itself. The process should be automatic, instinctive. CRIMESTOP, they called it in Newspeak.

Hmmm ... from your posts, parados and maporsch, you seem like you have suffered the equivalent of "group think."

Well, thats just as valid as proof of global warming if 2007 was warmer than 2006. Turnabout is fair play.

Hmmm ... from your posts, parados and maporsch, you seem like you have suffered the equivalent of "group think."

"Humans are causing increased hurricane frequency."

"The number of deaths caused by a hurricane is not a relevant measure of the intensity of hurricanes."

The main cause of Global Warming is:

a) pollution from factories and automobiles
b) orbital eccentricities of Earth and variations in the Sun's output
c) the Greenhouse Effect

That is correct!

How did you know that? Tom Brokaw or Dan Rather certainly didn't tell you. You are obviously up on your climatology!

Global Warming occurs in cycles caused mainly by changes in the sun's energy output and the sun's relative position to the earth.

ican711nm wrote:

Hmmm ... from your posts, parados and maporsch, you seem like you have suffered the equivalent of "group think."

"Humans are causing increased hurricane frequency."

"The number of deaths caused by a hurricane is not a relevant measure of the intensity of hurricanes."

1st, very few people have claimed that GW causes in increase in hurricane frequency. I certainately am not one of those who beleives this, nor has made this claim.

2nd, you cited hurricane deaths as proof of a hurricane's intensity. I'm merely stating that is not a relevant measure of intensity. ... Obviously your point is flawed, which is what I've challenged.

maporsche wrote:

ican711nm wrote:

Hmmm ... from your posts, parados and maporsch, you seem like you have suffered the equivalent of "group think."

"Humans are causing increased hurricane frequency."

"The number of deaths caused by a hurricane is not a relevant measure of the intensity of hurricanes."

1st, very few people have claimed that GW causes in increase in hurricane frequency. I certainately am not one of those who beleives this, nor has made this claim.

2nd, you cited hurricane deaths as proof of a hurricane's intensity. I'm merely stating that is not a relevant measure of intensity. ... Obviously your point is flawed, which is what I've challenged.

How many = "very few?"

I did not claim that hurricane deaths were PROOF of hurricane intensity. I do claim deaths caused by a hurricane are a valid measure of the damage a hurricane did. If hurricanes did zero damage, then they would not be worth worrying about no matter what is their intensity. I think the number of deaths a hurricane causes correlates too well with the intensity of the winds of that hurricane. The intensity of the winds in hurricanes that do little or no damage is of zero interest to me. It would be better if most hurricanes did little or no damage either because they stayed well out to sea, or because their intensities were insufficient to cause any damage.

maporsche wrote:

ican711nm wrote:

Hmmm ... from your posts, parados and maporsch, you seem like you have suffered the equivalent of "group think."

"Humans are causing increased hurricane frequency."

"The number of deaths caused by a hurricane is not a relevant measure of the intensity of hurricanes."

1st, very few people have claimed that GW causes in increase in hurricane frequency. I certainately am not one of those who beleives this, nor has made this claim.

2nd, you cited hurricane deaths as proof of a hurricane's intensity. I'm merely stating that is not a relevant measure of intensity. ... Obviously your point is flawed, which is what I've challenged.

How many = "very few?"

I did not claim that hurricane deaths were PROOF of hurricane intensity. I do claim deaths caused by a hurricane are a valid measure of the damage a hurricane did. If hurricanes did zero damage, then they would not be worth worrying about no matter what is their intensity. I think the number of deaths a hurricane causes correlates too well with the intensity of the winds of that hurricane. The intensity of the winds in hurricanes that do little or no damage is of zero interest to me. It would be better if most hurricanes did little or no damage either because they stayed well out to sea, or because their intensities were insufficient to cause any damage.

ican711nm wrote:

maporsche wrote:

ican711nm wrote:

Hmmm ... from your posts, parados and maporsch, you seem like you have suffered the equivalent of "group think."

"Humans are causing increased hurricane frequency."

"The number of deaths caused by a hurricane is not a relevant measure of the intensity of hurricanes."

1st, very few people have claimed that GW causes in increase in hurricane frequency. I certainately am not one of those who beleives this, nor has made this claim.

2nd, you cited hurricane deaths as proof of a hurricane's intensity. I'm merely stating that is not a relevant measure of intensity. ... Obviously your point is flawed, which is what I've challenged.

How many = "very few?"

I did not claim that hurricane deaths were PROOF of hurricane intensity. I do claim deaths caused by a hurricane are a valid measure of the damage a hurricane did. If hurricanes did zero damage, then they would not be worth worrying about no matter what is their intensity. I think the number of deaths a hurricane causes correlates too well with the intensity of the winds of that hurricane. The intensity of the winds in hurricanes that do little or no damage is of zero interest to me. It would be better if most hurricanes did little or no damage either because they stayed well out to sea, or because their intensities were insufficient to cause any damage.

Of course it's of zero interest to you.....it invalidates your point.

Changing the pace a bit, I thought you guys might enjoy taking this little 10-question test on global warming. (I confess I did miss one thus scoring a pitiful 90%)

http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/GlobWarmTest/start.html

Quote:

The main cause of Global Warming is:

a) pollution from factories and automobiles
b) orbital eccentricities of Earth and variations in the Sun's output
c) the Greenhouse Effect

That is correct!

How did you know that? Tom Brokaw or Dan Rather certainly didn't tell you. You are obviously up on your climatology!

Global Warming occurs in cycles caused mainly by changes in the sun's energy output and the sun's relative position to the earth.

Foxfyre - got as far as question # 3 and stopped, as I thought some other posters would like to know that correct answer (obviously (b)) has been posted many times on this thread

Foxfyre wrote:

Changing the pace a bit, I thought you guys might enjoy taking this little 10-question test on global warming. (I confess I did miss one thus scoring a pitiful 90%)

http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/GlobWarmTest/start.html

I will admit I came to the first question, and decided not to take the test, as I am guessing the answer is supposed to be yes, although not due to man, nevertheless I don't like the question as the warming in my opinion is so small as to be negligible and virtually within the limits of the margin of error, and the earth may not be warmer in all regions, but only as an overall average, which is not surprising of course, as the climate is constantly changing. And right now, the earth is cooler than last year, so the question needs more information or qualifiers, such as compared to when, last year, 25 years ago, 100 years ago, whatever. As of right this very moment, we can't be sure the earth is actually warming, as compared to yesterday.

I admit to being too analytical, but I hate rhetorical and trapping questions that may have multiple answers, depending upon the qualifiers, which are not given.