So feast your eyes on this:

Is this a Monty Python skit or something? I cannot figure out how the usual suspects don’t stop and say, wait a minute, maybe I should look and make sure that there is not a counter argument. It is because they do not care a lick about that, they care about getting a message out that at the least should be questioned and most likely is just a means to a political end.

So we have the usual suspects promoting Laura as why we need the new Green Deal.

Now first of all, this crowd is like someone who hides, never makes a forecast, then comes out of the woods when the obvious is happening. No different than the out of shape fan that thinks he could play the game if he had gotten the breaks. In terms of extreme events, that’s what these people are. Oblivious like many fans to the amount of work a pro athlete actually has to do, (or the ultimate insult, believing they are in some kind of war and they are the heroes. If it is a war, it’s a phony one) they are know little about the many things going on that lead to what they try to use as examples of why they know better and we should all bow down and follow them.

Now here is my first question: Why is it, April 7th, did a known skeptic as to whether co2 is now the climate control knob, moi ( that is very different from saying it has nothing to do with anything, in a linked atmosphere all things must be looked at, but it’s a question of attribution) put out this map OUTLINING HOW THIS SEASON WOULD TURN OUT, INCLUDING IN CLOSE DEVELOPMENT! (note the blue is major hurricane Laura).

It’s the nonsense, not the climate, that is reaching extremes 1

Where were any of these people, not with numbers of storms (who cares if they are out in the middle of nowhere),but showing the why before the what of the season? (no co2 btw was used in the development of this forecast). Anyone can say, 20 storms or whatever but how strong they may get or where they may go is what is important.

So let me ask this 2cnd question, as I did in a previous blog, did any of these people simply look at the phase of the MJO, IN THE SAME PHASE AS THE RAPID IN CLOSE DEVELOPERS HARVEY AND MICHAEL? Why did it take 11 days for Laura to come across before “exploding” the way it did? How come not faster, like some of the major long tracked hurricanes of the past that are legendary.

How is it that this decade is tied for least major hurricane hits of any decade in NHC records since the early 1900s. The 1970s and 1980s had 4 each, which is where we are this decade.

Some storms mentioned in the article: Florence. Why DID IT WEAKEN FROM A MAJOR TO A CAT 1? It slowed down, water upwelled, the upward motion pattern in the western Atlantic became less favorable, and surface pressures were lower than average over much of North America. All may be indirectly linked to warming, but some had negative affects on the storm.

How about Katrina, why did it not hit as a 5 as Camille did in 1969? The point is it weakened, hitting as a 3. And by the way the aforementioned Camille in 1969 took 11 days like Laura to cross the ocean, then exploded into a cat 5, outdoing Laura by a whole category. Camille ranks 2cnd strongest SLP ( 1969). The 1935 Labor day hurricane, another storm that exploded in 36 hours, is first with the lowest pressure ever record on land in western hemisphere. Celia 1970, the last 24 hours into Corpus Christi went from a 1 to a borderline 4. I can go on and on, but I doubt any of the Green new Dealers know anything about these.

As far as this statement from the article:

“That kind of rapid intensification — to use the scientific term for it — used to be rare. In recent years, it has become more common. And that change is a useful summary of how climate change is… affecting hurricanes,” reports the Times.

The person has not looked or simply accepted what they are being told. More cat 4 and 5 storms? We are seeing more out at sea. How is it the decades of the 30-60s averaged 9 major hits/decade. The last 3 in the warm era, around 6? You don’t think if we had the kind of satellite and recon we do today there would not have been stronger storms see?. What is it magic that many of those storms hit near their peak, none of them weakened? (we did not have the kind of recon we do now, and besides, planes were doing other things in 1944, like defending our way of life. )In fact the 1944 Great Atlantic hurricane was the first time recon was used on a storm! What about all the storms before? The plane sustained much structural damage. It was 1 of 2 MAJOR HURRICANES to hit the US in 1944, by the way, the other being one of those “rapid deepeners” referred to as becoming more common in the article. In fact, this phenomena was taught to us at Penn State in the NINETEEN SEVENTIES! Notice the 1944 Great Atlantic track, how it bent to the northwest and the storm intensified:

It’s the nonsense, not the climate, that is reaching extremes 2

Look at the one that hit later in the season,

The bend and then the rapid intensification:

It’s the nonsense, not the climate, that is reaching extremes 3

Dorian, bend then boom:

It’s the nonsense, not the climate, that is reaching extremes 4

Andrew bend then boom:

It’s the nonsense, not the climate, that is reaching extremes 5

Hurricane Michael, bend to the northwest and intensification follows:

It’s the nonsense, not the climate, that is reaching extremes 6

Why? Because one of the known rapid intensification parameters is when a tropical feature “busts” thru a trough. The trough bends the track, and once it gets through it is under the anticyclone that is a known to any hurricane follower for intensification. The storm can ripped apart by the trough, but if it makes it thru look out. Its like a tailback busting an 8 man front, its on its way. This is nothing new. It has been happening since we were observing these storms. But when people want to push an agenda, they decide to make their point, they will not even bring up the counter, knowing most people don’t have the time to research these things. So then they push their conclusion, we need the green new to save us.

What is the goal to go back to 9 hits a decade when co2 was much lower?

Laura was 17th strongest SLP wise. I don’t think it is in a New Years bowl if there is one for hurricanes . But it is part and parcel of the pattern we identified back in March and April and should surprise no one.

Laura, Harvey, Camille, 1935 Celia, and the list can go on and on are long tracked waves that for 90% of their lives DID NOT have conditions favorable, and then wound up in the right place at the right time for intensification. But that is nature, not man, or anything man can correct.

Here is another thing. One of the metrics we look at to judge intensity is the ACE index:

The measure of total seasonal activity used by NOAA is the Accumulated Cyclone Energy (ACE) index.

We have had 15 storms this year with a total ACE/storm, which tells us how much total wind energy the storm is producing OF 3 PER STORM! Now I want you to look at this chart of the top 10 total ACE seasons, with my rough calculations at the right of ACE/storm.

It’s the nonsense, not the climate, that is reaching extremes 7

Chart from Wikipedia, with my calculations( some rounded)

Lets look at the years in ranking. 1926,1893,1961,2004,tie 2017,1950,1933,1998,1995,2005

Now lets take the 5 in the pre AGW ERA ( started in 1988 when James Hansen, Al Gore, etc had their congressional hearing telling us all how the earth was burning up. The average of the 5 that occurred when co2 was much lower was. 16.4

The top 5 of the modern era? 12.4.  Only ONE of the top 5 in the modern AGW era exceeded the average of the pre AGW era.

What can we conclude?

  1. There were more storms before, we didn’t see them, so the numbers are skewed up. But then again maybe if we did see them, we would have had planes in them to see how strong, how long they were
  2. We are naming more storms now than we were before because we see them. This year is so classic, and such a thumb in the eye of the storms are getting stronger crowd, as we are averaging a laughable 3/storm
  3. Storms were stronger before, no matter what the number
  4. You cant simply conclude, when there is competing evidence to the contrary, that storms are getting stronger now
  5. These people that push this obviously don’t look at things like this, or at the very least, they would let you know about the opposite argument. (which of course is a mark of free, open minded debate)
  6. Above all, who cares unless they are hitting with more ferocity, which they are not. If we use 3,4,5 and create an impact scale based on the total category at landfall, this decade has 17. 1891-1900: 27 1911-1920. 27. 1921-1930 20. Now watch this: 1931-1940 28. 1941-1950 34. 1951-1960: 32 1961-1970 24. All those whipped what has happened this decade. Even the vaunted 2001-2010 decade with 22 does not rank In the pre AGW top 5 and the previous decade is at 20. All of this is linked to the warm cycle of the Atlantic btw which in this current cycle, which started in the mid 90s, has not mustered a competitive decade to multiple decades before

Now I am going to give you an example of something I have never seen, but I have to look more. I am using this to make a point about how the majesty of the weather lends it to swings all the time, if one just looks. I have been tweeting about this for a week, the double hit of typhoons within 4 days not only on the South Korean coast, but very close to the city of Busan which has almost 3.5 million people living in it. That is about 8 times the size of New Orleans. The first one passed just to their west. The second may pass just to their east. But have we heard boo from the climate alarmist about it? No. Why? BECAUSE THEY DON’T LOOK OR CARE ABOUT IT TILL IT HAPPENS, BECAUSE THEN THEY CAN USE IT. So what I love to do is put it out there way in advance, then wait and see who will use it first. Its why I keep showing our map from the pre- season. They draw attention to a forecast that they had no idea was out there, explaining what they were going to see, before they even saw it! They help me to get my message out! Cause everytime they say something, I can point back to a forecast that said this is what to look for and its all using natural ideas. But they don’t really care about anything except whatever their agenda can use. But here I am “feeding” them extreme information, but even that is a trap for them. How so? Because while we saw this double shot of typhoon madness, there are 2 factors that must be considered. 1) Both of them would have hit much weaker than their peak intensity ( which has been happening a lot in the warm era in Asia and the US, opposite of what you are being led to believe). So I can counter there. 2). The western Pacific is on pace for a record low ACE season. There lowest on record is 109. The average is a bit over 300. To put that in perspective, its 3 times more active on average than the Atlantic basin. And as mentioned many times, while we are on pace for 20 plus NAMED STORMS, the ace index per storm is a top 5 lowest on record, at 3 per storm.

While I have you here, might as well talk other extremes. California is frying and there are likely to be more rolling blackouts as the heat rolls on. But a record cold event is likely to happen early next week in the rockies and plains (this week if you are reading this on Sunday, I am writing this Thursday night) Denver, which is legendary for weather flips, may have one of its greatest ever. This is a tool we show at called a meteogram. It has highs, lows, precip. , snow.

It has a high near 100 on Sunday, then 7 inches of snow Tue pm into Wed with temps in the 30s. Goes from 15-20 above normal to. 40-45 below normal.

I added both of those things just in case more articles show up on all these matters. They are there to see and if one knows what nature is capable of, one understands why it CAN happen and why, sometimes, it does.

And by the way, If you LOVE the weather try out site out. Seriously. My real passion is weather, its just that I use climate to help me, but on our site its weather, Weather, weather, with all sorts of great maps so you can see this stuff coming (and get opinions on it). I normally don’t put in plugs, but love knows no bounds and our site on is for the Love of the Weather. And I talk a lot of weather there, and want to show you some linkage here.

You know what, its getting so when they open their mouth, I just link to about 5 blogs I have done rather than curing insomnia with long boring stories like this, though I love to tell them.