Hurricane frequency and intensity at record low, despite Al Gore

Enough of the Piers Corbyn clap trap and his non peer reviewed "science"!

Icarus

 

You dismiss validated outcomes,but you believe computer models which have been absolutely wrong for the past 12 years.
ENOUGH is right.
Do you realize how amazing it is to predict a hurricane 85 days ahead of time?
The time,the location of origin ,the track?
Its phenomenal.
Your scientists are always wrong on predictions .
Even 4 days out they are wrong much of the time .
But you believe they can program a computer to predict 100 years from today?Even though the first 12 years are wrong you continue to believe the next 88 will be correct?
You are GULLIBLE to put it politely.
If your AGW "scientists" ever predicted anything correctly ,perhaps I would have some respect for the THEORY.
But they have been wrong.Recent temps have not risen although CO2 levels have risen.
The past 10,000 years temps were higher but CO2 was lower.

 

BTW peer review is for unproven hypothesis.

You believe in peer reviewed hypothesis .
I believe in proven observation.
"Observation trumps hypothesis."

 

Only a hundred year storm resulting in widespread record flooding and widespread record rainfall (on top of a record wet month in many areas). No biggie. It's just weather.

I can pretty clearly observe that Piers' web site reads more like a bad eBay auction than a professional's web site interested in actual science.

 

It really depends on the scale; cruder predictions, less contradiction, YMMV

so can we then dismiss Vostok ice cores, since they show this isn't the case and with a few exceptions the temperatures in past 10,000 years were lower then present?

 

Did no one actually go and look at the Accumulated Cyclone Energy figures?

[ame=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accumulated_cyclone_energy]Accumulated cyclone energy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/ame]

While the Pacific has been calmer than usual for 5 of the last 10 years, the Atlantic has been going crazy. 4 of the last 10 years have been classified "hyperactive" in the Atlantic, another 3 "above normal," 2 "normal," and only 1 "below normal."

We've got 5 pages of arguing kicked off by people accepting the faulty premise that hurricane activity is all dying down, when most of it is just shifting from the Pacific to the Atlantic.

 

Well he is a weather man, he doesn't predict in climatic time, and its for pay. We don't know how accurate he is because he cherry picks the data, since it has not been scrutinized. Part of your link says in August he predicted Irene would hit NY/NJ as a catagory 2, and was bigger than the catagory 1 prediction of government meterologist. The storm hit these areas as a tropical storm, 2 levels below your weather man's forecast.
Note the fact that it mainly hit populated areas as a tropical storm, the blame that the storm is bigger than "before warming"

Note the 1938 huricane hit these areas as a catagory 3 huricane. Those claiming these storms are getting much more intense and frequent seem to ignore most of the data and only look at 1970.

All theories are unproven, even relativity. What these theories have is supporting data, and people that decide if the data is being used properly. AGW passes peer review. The theory that anthropomorphic climate change is resulting in more huricanes or more intense huricanes is not supported well in peer reviewed literature. Your guy doesn't even show all the predictions, so how can they be confirmed. The theory that they are more expensive is supported and Huricanes have gotten more expensive, and the universally understood explanation is more property has been built in areas likely to be hit by huricanes. The us and other world governments supports this building by providing insurance to those that are building in areas likely to be destroyed.

 

Modern Storm Activity Is Near A Low Point for The Last 2,220 Years Scientists Establish

CO2 Science

 

Thanks for the pointer, mojo, I don't get to that journal as often as I should.

I like this study because it uses a technique (optically stimulated luminescence) which we should see more of in the future. It works on material that cannot be dated by the more conventional isotopic decay. The uncertainty in the technique is relatively large in this study; I have seena few others report better. Not quite sure why though.


Anyway, the report establishes that local storms at Ocacroke have been more or less intense during 2200 years. Their most recent sampled event was from the year 1880 +/- 20 years. As such, I don't see that it speaks to the question Atlantic whole basin storminess in the last 130 years. Do you?



Thanks also for your implicit support of US funding for Earth system science research (in this case the US Geological Survey). We need more of that, not less.