Are Hurricanes Really Becoming More Intense?

[arcticfire]

Chrisnnavarre,

Again, as noted earlier, I do believe there is some contribution to the warming from human activity. I'm not in any way suggesting otherwise.

Moreover, in terms of intense hurricanes, it is fair to suggest what the models imply and prudent to take precautions for such a scenario e.g., building better flood protection, developing improved building codes, laying out more effective evacuation plans, etc.

My disagreement is not with forecasts per se, but with a specific conclusion based on a methodology employed in a single study--and only that study--that compared tropical activity during a warm cycle with a cold cycle and then generalized conclusions based on such a comparisons as if the longer-term Atlantic cycle didn't matter. I don't believe such comparisons are constructive and have serious reservations about the validity of that study.

Dr. Chris Landsea of the NOAA et. al., have also questioned the given conclusion that hurricanes are growing more intense from the specific study I have discounted.

So if your want to question a global study , why do you keep using onyl atlantic cycle reasoning to do it ? By your own numbers taht you used in this thread as I pointed out , you still managed to prove the study correct even using your comparision.

[oneness]

But if the 1945 to 1955 data is taken to be inconclusive, then a conclusion that there has been general intensification of cyclones is likewise invalid, as there is not enough data to substantiate it, either way. I weary of people hyping that there is a magical means of concluding either way as it becomes ideological rather than empirical or analytical, in the face of a lack of sufficient data. Like two sides locked in a battle, but can not unambiguously defeat the other, so on it goes with no end.

In an ideal world it should not be that way. i.e., either the global-warmer fraternity have a convincing relationship, or the other side of the argument should not have to continuously say to them that they don’t have a convincing case.

But then ideology media plus 'promotion of the cause' kicks in to reinvigorate and fans the flames of their arguments. Permafrost is melting, glaciers are retreating. Ok, granted, but this does not mean tropical storms are more intense, nor occurring in more numbers.

Multi-year cyclicity of the numbers of tropical storms is well-known within the SW Pacific and SE Indian basins. Records go back to the mid 1860s. Documented storms along the Queensland coast are also recorded and observed, very starkly, within annual growth bands in corals of the Great Barrier Reef. Drill cores from much older (living) giant corals can be extended back continuously for hundreds of years prior to European settlement. Multi-year cycles of cyclone occurrence are obvious, and well documented in these coral cores. Cycles are not restricted to the Atlantic basin. Cycles are a global phenomena, and there’s little that suggests we are in particularly active period of cyclone formation, or of cyclones of higher intensity. In fact, just the reverse is observed. We are getting remarkably fewer storms than during cycles early and mid last century.

2 cents

[curtadams]

Sorry Don, didnt mean to imply we have caused global warming. We are at the end of a 15K to 20K warm cycle. Most true research I have read indicates our contribution to warming has been negligible.

My point is if that changes, most of us wont pay attention because of the cry wolf scenario. The group that has pressed this agenda is mostly anti capitalists who focus on green house gases (industry) instead of methane which is a far worse problem. IMHO

At the end is the relevant part. Go look at the Milankovitch cycle. The peak should have been 7000 years ago and temps should be falling into an ice age.

[donsutherland1]

Arcticfire,

The Atlantic is where the largest jump in Cat. 4/5 hurricanes has occurred since the 1970s and thus I offered an explanation for that.

FWIW, the Pacific's temperatures have also been warmer in the 1990-2005 period than the 1970s: R3.4 averaging 28.70°C vs. 26.71°C. A reason for this difference is the super El Niño of 1997-98, generally warm PDO cycle (might now be moving into a cool transition), and reduced frequency of La Niñas.

My principal objection is comparing the 1990s to 1970s.

[arcticfire]

Arcticfire,

The Atlantic is where the largest jump in Cat. 4/5 hurricanes has occurred since the 1970s and thus I offered an explanation for that.

FWIW, the Pacific's temperatures have also been warmer in the 1990-2005 period than the 1970s: R3.4 averaging 28.70°C vs. 26.71°C. A reason for this difference is the super El Niño of 1997-98, generally warm PDO cycle (might now be moving into a cool transition), and reduced frequency of La Niñas.

My principal objection is comparing the 1990s to 1970s.

I agree with you that comparing 90's to 70's was probly not the best way to go about it. If memory serves on the study in question they limited themselves to satalite backed data. Which I belive is where most critisism of the study comes from is the data they choose to include.

With that said , even comparing as you did 95-05 to 45-55 yeilds an increase in the number of stronger storms. Which would actually lend itself to supporting the study not dismissing it. You are perfectly within reason thow to question the finding of a comparision from 90's-70's for you stated reasons. I was just trying to point out the comparision you did from 45-55 did not support you conclusion except by creative math.

I understand your pov , and agree with it partly in regards to the study , I just don't follow you to the same conclusion is all.

oneness-

Firstly I would be interested in some links to information on how coral stores hurricain records (not sarcasim actually interested).

As to the overall cycle phenomena , of cource there is going to be circular events when speaking of a system surrounding a sphere thats spining in a circle. However , the cyclonic nature of event systems does not nessisarly explain away new influinces. I see it comonly touted round here and from mets , that our really busy seasons these past few years is totally normall and all part of this grand 30-40 year atlantic cycle. It's used kneejerk like to explain away any question of global warming. Thats a non objective way of looking at an infinitly complex system.

My personal take is that global warming is having a dramatic effect on the world (in large part because of my location and the very real effects up here). I don't claim there is a direct link to hurricains but I think it's foolish and bad science to discount it without doing studies. I personally think common sence would advocate warmer oceans mean stroI keep hearing cycle this and cycle that , like it's some prayer that in 10-20 years everything will suddenly go back to "normal' regardless of the possibility global warming may have run amuck by then.

But you are also right , that this whole idea that global warming may affect hurricain invariably decends into political-science regardless of the merits of either argument.

[oneness]

oneness-

Firstly I would be interested in some links to information on how coral stores hurricain records (not sarcasim actually interested).

As to the overall cycle phenomena , of cource there is going to be circular events when speaking of a system surrounding a sphere thats spining in a circle. However , the cyclonic nature of event systems does not nessisarly explain away new influinces. I see it comonly touted round here and from mets , that our really busy seasons these past few years is totally normall and all part of this grand 30-40 year atlantic cycle. It's used kneejerk like to explain away any question of global warming. Thats a non objective way of looking at an infinitly complex system.

My personal take is that global warming is having a dramatic effect on the world (in large part because of my location and the very real effects up here). I don't claim there is a direct link to hurricains but I think it's foolish and bad science to discount it without doing studies. I personally think common sence would advocate warmer oceans mean stroI keep hearing cycle this and cycle that , like it's some prayer that in 10-20 years everything will suddenly go back to "normal' regardless of the possibility global warming may have run amuck by then.

But you are also right , that this whole idea that global warming may affect hurricain invariably decends into political-science regardless of the merits of either argument.

Well said. Indeed, it would be unwise to be sarcastic about what coral banding research tells us about climatic cyclicity over a vast region. It provides a wealth of environmental and climatic chronology and insight into what is climatically ‘normal’ for the region on a scale of tens of centuries. In particular, known cyclonic events are always recorded in the growth history of corals, and a detailed chronology of tropical storm occurrences, cyclicity and the area affected by a particular storm or strong monsoonal flow/disturbance can be assembled. From these known events the previously unknown record can be deciphered and interpreted in detail.

--

Australian Institute of Marine Science - Australian Coral Records Research Group: Coral banding bibliography
http://www.aims.gov.au/pages/auscore/auscore-08-9.html

ENVIRONMENTAL GEOCHEMISTRY AND GEOCHRONOLOGY:
http://wwwrses.anu.edu.au/admin/annrep/ar2000/legg_.pdf

General Info:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coral