What part do you think Global Warming is playing?

[Clint_TX]

Global

[Clint_TX]

warming

[Tampa Bay Hurricane]

The following post is NOT an official forecast and should not be used as such. It is just the opinion of the poster and may or may not be backed by sound meteorological data. It is NOT endorsed by any professional institution including storm2k.org For Official Information please refer to the NHC and NWS products.

The biggest reason for the storms would be the
active cycles NHC was talking about,
but global warming is exacerbating this cycle by increasing
oceanic heat content.
Global warming provides some more fuel to a raging active
cycle fire.

[abajan]

Global warming is itself part of a cycle of alternating cooling and warming. I think the influence human activities have on this cycle is far less than we've been made to believe.

[patsmsg]

What a bunch of crap.

Hurricanes happen. Period. Sometimes (cycles) they are worse than other times. I get fed up with the arrogance of people thinking that we people cause everything. The earth rules, not us. We happen to be here for the time being. Thats it. You can try to politicize it, but it's nature, not human nature at work here.

[patsmsg]

Global warming is itself part of a cycle of alternating cooling and warming. I think the influence human activities have on this cycle is far less than we've been made to believe.

Exactly. Well put.

[timNms]

I think, like many, that global warming is, itself, a natural cycle. I also believe that active hurricane years run in cycles.

[wxmann_91]

None at all.

[Tampa Bay Hurricane]

The following post is NOT an official forecast and should not be used as such. It is just the opinion of the poster and may or may not be backed by sound meteorological data. It is NOT endorsed by any professional institution including storm2k.org For Official Information please refer to the NHC and NWS products.

:roll: What a bunch of crap.

Hurricanes happen. Period. Sometimes (cycles) they are worse than other times. I get fed up with the arrogance of people thinking that we people cause everything. The earth rules, not us. We happen to be here for the time being. Thats it. You can try to politicize it, but it's nature, not human nature at work here.

I like a chemistry debate...NOTE THIS IS
CLIMO-CHEMISTRY NOT POLITICS:

Enhanced methane content of the atmosphere intensifies storms, regardless of whether or not its emission is caused by man or nature. Recall that prehistorically prior to the production of oxygen by prolific cyanobacteria the atmosphere was filled with methane, ammonia, and H-2 and other gases and had too much violent weather activity to support anything more than the bacteria....



The reduced nature of methane renders it unstable, and thus in any reaction can give off quite a bit of Gibbs Free energy, its instability renders its Delta (change in) Gibbs Free energy in a reaction negative, since the Product energy-reactant energy < 0 since the product has much less energy than the reactants. Methane has powerful capabilities.



The impacts of Methane are felt in ACTIVE CYCLONE DECADE CYCLES ONLY (WITH REGARDS TO HURRICANES)....During inactive periods like 1970-1990 the atmospheric conditions are so unfavorable for hurricane development that not even methane can stimulate the development through increased warming or etc..!



The tremendous amount of Gibbs free energy as indicated by Delta G in methane reactions is due to methane structure. Methane is heavily reduced (not oxidized at all) and reduced hydrocarbons contain intense energy potential. Methane when it reacts is highly exothermic, meaning it is capable of giving off a large amount of heat (thus the products of a reaction involving methane contain much less energy, as that energy was released in the form of heat, which explains why methane oxidation reactions are SPONTANEOUS, the heat availabe in methane's constituent hydrocarbons are just BEGGING TO BE RELEASED!)



Methane is not the only dangerous pollutant out there. But I place emphasis on it here because it is twenty times more potent than carbon dioxide in terms of implications for global warming.

It's energy from the breakdown of methane and other hydrocarbonic molecules that increases heat and energy available to power a storm. Although this is not the only factor, it certainly plays an important role in exacerbating the impacts of other deleterious hurricane-intensifying factors (Oscillations, Solar Energy, Ionospheric Conductivity and Oceanic Coupling, etc.).

Methane also has large enthalpy release magnitude values that
are negative in nature, indicative of heat release and substantial chemical corroboration of my earlier claims.

[Tampa Bay Hurricane]

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hb ... rprop.html

http://chemistry.beloit.edu/Warming/pag ... sions.html

[milankovitch]

Right now, a little, the Earth as a whole is warmer now then it was 100 years ago a really don't think that is debateable. You could probably attribute a few tenths of a degree in the tropical attlantic to global warming. SST aren't the only variable playing a role, low shear helps too. So I'd say global warming's impact on this season is "a little." However, in 100 years I bet it'll be the main reason for increased hurricane activity.

[MGC]

ZIP, normal cycle.....MGC

[Tampa Bay Hurricane]

I remain steadfast in support of my views
as elaborated upon earlier until observational oceanic
evidence proves me wrong. Or unless someone here can come up
with a very good refuation of each and every one of my points.

Am I stubborn? Hardly. More like scientifically analytical. My theories
are not God-given truths, they are merely chemically verifiable
manifestations of my analysis.

[stormchaserCP]

Some years ago, there was much more difference in opinion within the meteorological community concerning the reality of anthropogenic (human-induced) global warming. Now, there is a strong consensus that CO2 emissions have already measurably increased the global average temperature, and that the rate of this increase will accelerate, with total warming on the order of 1-5 C over the next century. When so many experts are telling us the same thing, we should take them seriously, and realize our own opinions are far less informed.

However, as for the influence of said warming on hurricane activity, there is an enormous amount of debate over this within the community. Some argue that the observed warming of the oceans is not sufficient to noticeably enhance tropical activity. Others say that an increase in both frequency and intensity of storms can be attributed to the warming. Still others say only intensity. Since there is no strong consensus on this question, it would be difficult for anyone of us to form a well-founded opinion on the matter.

There is one thing that nearly everyone agrees on: we have indeed entered into an active portion of a multi-decadal cycle. Given this, it would be very difficult to distinguish the effect of this natural cycle from any potential effect of anthropogenic global warming, especially since we have observed only one or two such periods in our history of record-keeping, and so do not have a clear idea of their potential impact.

I also think that most everyone would agree that if/when the earth's oceans have warmed by, say, 2-3 C, then certainly tropical activity will significantly increase in both frequency and intensity.

[terstorm1012]

A little right now, for all the reasons Tampa BayHurricane stated.

In a century though...much more. 7 billion humans and everything they do to sustain themselves has to have some effect, somewhere, eventually...and thats all I am saying.

[Terrell]

I think Some is feasable, but more observation is needed to be sure. Warmer waters do mean more intense hurricanes (for the ones that actually form) all other thing being equal, but the big question is how much of this warmer water is natural, and how much is caused by greenhouse gases released into the atmosphere?

[JohnTK5]

Why don't we just pump a ton of cooling gases like Sulfur Dioxide to lower the temperature. I am not saying use Sulfur Dioxide but a gas which is reasonably safe to breath and lowers temperatures.

[goodlife]

None at all

[milankovitch]

Why don't we just pump a ton of cooling gases like Sulfur Dioxide to lower the temperature. I am not saying use Sulfur Dioxide but a gas which is reasonably safe to breath and lowers temperatures.

It would have to be a gas although I suspect an aerosol that reflects incoming solar radiation (UV or visible spectrum otherwise it's a GHG), since there are no gases that unabsorb terrestiral IR. Injecting SO2 into the atmosphere which oxidizes in the presence of water vapor to produce sulfuric acid aerosols is currently a pretty effcetive way we reduce the Earth's temperature. However, industrialized nations and eventually developing nations should reduce their emissions because of the nasty effects it has like acid rain. The only proposal that I know of along the lines your suggesting is to use boats with fans to pump sea salt aerosols into the atmosphere, not that I recomend it. Curbing emissions is probably the best way to combat increasing CO2. Unfortunately CO2 emission would have to be reduced to a fraction of what it is today to stabalize concentrations.

[FunkMasterB]

Why don't we just pump a ton of cooling gases like Sulfur Dioxide to lower the temperature. I am not saying use Sulfur Dioxide but a gas which is reasonably safe to breath and lowers temperatures.

You're familiar with the tale of "The Old Woman who Swallowed a Fly?"