Search
Close this search box.

Search Results for: hurricane

New Report: Global hurricane activity NOT getting worse – ‘Neither increasing in number nor in intensity’

https://mailchi.mp/63a419a0c272/global-hurricane-activity-not-getting-worse-new-report-confirms-201571?e=0b1369f9f8 London, 16 April – The Global Warming Policy Foundation has today published its periodic review of global hurricane activity. The author, climate researcher Paul Homewood, says that official data is absolutely clear: hurricanes are neither increasing in number nor in intensity. Homewood says: “The observational data published by meteorological agencies in 2023 has confirmed once again that there are no upward trends in global hurricane activity since reliable records began in the 1970s.” And Homewood calls on journalists to start reporting these undisputed facts to the public: “While scientists are quite clear that we are not seeing any increase in hurricanes, the public have been scared into thinking that tropical storms are getting worse. Unless the mainstream media starts reporting empirical facts rather than misleading spin, it will continue to haemorrhage credibility and public trust.” Paul Homewood: The 2023 Hurricane Season (pdf) Contact Paul Homewood e: [email protected]

Watch: Morano rebuts Elon Musk’s call for ‘carbon taxes’ to fight ‘climate change’ – ‘Paying more taxes to the government will not make hurricanes less frequent’

Watch: Morano on @tntradiolive rebuts @elonmusk on his call for 'carbon taxes' to fight 'global warming' Morano: 'Paying more taxes to the government will not make hurricanes less frequent." "It's a shell game of nonsense that's going to outsource more jobs, wealth, & energy… pic.twitter.com/nfW47fPHCT — Marc Morano (@ClimateDepot) February 6, 2024 For Morano’s full analysis go to: https://tntradio.live/shows/unleashed-with-marc-morano/ Rough Transcript: Morano: The breaking news is one of the world’s wealthiest men now says if we pay more taxes to the government, we can control climate change. Yes, Elon Musk, the X / formerly known as Twitter, owner and extraordinary Tesla and all the other Neuro link and his space programs and everything else has now put his huge brain power to climate change and is claiming that a carbon tax is the way we solve climate change. I can assure you it’s not paying more taxes to the government, will not make hurricanes less frequent, will not stop Florida from going half underwater if that’s what the earth and nature decided to do. Let’s take a look at what Elon Musk actually said and will break it down. Elon Musk video clip played Morano: Elon Musk is fascinating because he says really intelligent things and then really dumb things. And this is one of the dumb things. I go to a man named Spencer Morrison, a National Economics Institute in Canada. And this is my favorite all time analysis. See: ANALYSIS: CARBON TAXES INCREASE GLOBAL CO2 EMISSIONS. PERIOD. Carbon taxes increase global CO2 emissions, period. Good night. Good night, everyone. ♪ Ba da da da da ♪ It’s that simple. I don’t understand what Elon Musk is claiming.  First of all, any industry that gets a bigger tax is going to pass that on to consumers. So all he’s basically saying is that every socioeconomic group and it disproportionately harms the poor and the lower income, is going to be paying more for energy because no business is going to be paying more. We will all just absorb these costs. I won’t pass that on because I’m saving the planet. This is a carbon tax. We’ve got to solve climate change. This is what he actually thinks, but this is back to Spencer Morrison. The logic shows that the West’s carbon taxes invariably increase global CO2, as does the empirical evidence. And it’s incredible because if you look at carbon taxes, all they’re going to do is make our energy more expensive, burden our innovation, burden our projects, burden financing, and it just means more reliance on countries that will never have a carbon tax. And that includes China, India, Brazil, the Middle East, Russia, and all these other countries joining the BRACs and all that. It makes no sense. Why do I do it? And the other thing is once you give the government a new to, you also said in this in his claim The Elon Musk that we would reduce, You know, other taxes to compensate. Oh, that’s something great. So let me let me guess revenue neutral off We’ve solved the problem. We’re gonna have a revenue who can comply. We’re not raising taxes. This is revenue neutral now You were giving the government an entire new class category and authority to tax your inner introducing a new tax to the powers of government. Now, you could temporarily reduce some other taxes, but they’re going to go back up and this tax, and I love the other people who say, well, we’re going to limit it to this, that, and we’re going to guarantee it doesn’t go higher. Oh, really, is that like the income tax in 1913 was only one, two percent, and only on the wealthy? It’s never going to change, right? Let’s introduce this whole new authority and taxes at the end of the day. then it’s all going to be solid and done. Now, this is medieval witchcraft and it’s alive and well with the owner of X in Twitter. I don’t understand how this man, Elon Musk, could make these asinine claims. It just absolutely makes no sense. Carbon taxes increase emissions. It’s a shell game of nonsense that’s going to outsource more jobs, wealth, energy. energy production, and strategically, it puts us at a national security disadvantage. I want Elon Musk to rescind this and someone has a talk to him. And the other thing is, it’s medieval witchcraft, as I said, because what is our end game, what do you have carbon taxes? So let’s see, if a hurricane hits Florida, right? An average hurricane that they say is unprecedented because it hit some 50 miles an hour, some 50-mile stretch of beach that it never had that category three hurricane, I think. Are we going to then ratchet up the carbon tax? Three years because of that hurricane, it was really bad. Oh my gosh, there was a drought over in California. We’re gonna have to really ratchet up the carbon tax. You gotta pay your fair share. We gotta make this happen. What does that remind you of? It reminds me a lot of COVID. COVID cases are up. You’re not wearing your mask. You’re not getting the vaccine. You stay-at-home orders. We’re gonna have to cancel school longer. There we can’t. go back to, we’re going to punish you further. Churches can’t open. The cases are up. That’s because people aren’t following the rules. Carbon taxes are gonna have to go up when the weather doesn’t meet the preferred objectives. And are we gonna have any criteria for when, like, okay, finally, we’ve solved climate change? It’s going to be tied to CO2 emissions. I mean, to hell with this and Elon Musk on this. this. He is an important figure. He’s done great stuff on X slash Twitter, but he could not be more wrong on carbon taxes. And I say, go to hell if that’s your opinion. And he needs to, actually; I would like to see him. I hope there’s enough pressure brought to bear in this first week of February 2024 that he is forced to retract it and say how dumb this was. But this is one of those things where many people just say, ” oh, you know, if we actually work it through some carbon taxes, we could, oh, yeah, that would make sense. I used to say that when I worked in the Senate, environment, public works, well, the most logical way, the least damage is carbon. And it’s probably true, the least damage to the economy. I mean, at least the taxes, you get taxes, a tax as opposed to layer and layer of regulations, environment, social governance, and all the identity politics, mixing in and the corporate government collusion, all that stuff. I mean, a carbon tax is the least offensive probably of a lot of these options, but what’s our endgame? We’re not going to tax our way into a better climate, okay? This is just asinine and all you’re doing is giving the government a massive new authority to tax.

Analysis: ‘Hurricanes have not become more intense’ since 1980 based on ACE or Accumulated Cyclone Energy combining frequency & intensity

https://rogerpielkejr.substack.com/p/global-tropical-cyclones By ROGER PIELKE JR. This post is co-authored with Ryan Maue, whose Weather and Climate Substack I highly recommend. —RP Excerpts: In 2012, Jessica Weinkle, Ryan Maue and I published in the Journal of Climate the first climatology of global landfalling tropical cyclones of at least hurricane strength. Since then, Ryan and I have updated the time series every year. Landfalling hurricanes (also called typhoons or cyclones) are an important subset of tropical cyclones because these storms cause the most damage of any type of extreme event, with most of these losses occurring in the United States. The figure below shows total global landfalling hurricanes and major hurricanes, 1970 to 2023. The graph starts in 1970 because that is when reliable information is available globally, however several basins have records that go back further in time. Updated from Weinkle et al. 2012. The figure below shows the same data with linear trends for minor (Saffir/Simpson Categories 1 and 2) and major (S/S 3+) hurricanes. Updated from Weinkle et al. 2012. You can see that since 1970 there is no trend in landfalls of minor hurricanes and an upward trend in major hurricanes. Might this be the consequence of human-caused climate changes? We can get a sense of the meaningfulness of a trend that starts in 1970 by looking further back in time for the Western North Pacific and North Atlantic which together saw 67% of all global hurricane landfalls from 1970 to 2023. The combined landfalls of minor and major hurricanes for these two basins is shown below and there is no trend in either category. Updated from Weinkle et al. 2012. Below is the same data, but starting from 1970, and you can clearly see that major hurricane landfalls increase over this shorter period, in contrast to beginning the analysis in 1950, when data for these two basins is first available. Updated from Weinkle et al. 2012. In technical terms, detection of change has not been achieved — which is fully consistent with the scientific consensus of NOAA and the IPCC. Without detection there can be no attribution under the IPCC framework for detection and attribution. Given the large interannual and decadal variability in tropical cyclones, data are easily cherrypicked (intentionally or unintentionally) to identify spurious trends. The figures below show the distribution of global landfalling storm counts for major and total hurricanes for the period 1970 to 2023, showing large variability. Updated from Weinkle et al. 2012. Landfalling hurricanes are of course just a subset of tropical cyclones, as many storms stay out to sea. Ryan has just updated his excellent figures on global tropical cyclone activity. The figure below shows running 12-month sums of all hurricanes and major hurricanes since 1980. … Finally, from the excellent data maintained by Phil Klotzbach at Colorado State University, we can look at yet another set of metrics — Accumulated Cyclone Energy (ACE, which combines frequency and intensity) and ACE per hurricane. These figures are shown below, and you can clearly see no trends in these metrics since 1980. Over this time period and according to these metrics, hurricanes have not become more intense. Source: CSU. The final bar is the 1970-2023 average. For full article go to: https://rogerpielkejr.substack.com/p/global-tropical-cyclones

Wrong, ABC News, Data Refutes Strengthening Hurricanes Claim

https://climaterealism.com/2023/10/wrong-abc-news-data-refutes-strengthening-hurricanes-claim/ By H. Sterling Burnett The mainstream media, among them ABC News, Reuters and the New York Times, ran prominent stories claiming new research shows that Atlantic hurricanes have now become much more likely to strengthen into powerful hurricanes in a short period of time than in the past due to climate change. This is false. Whatever factors the studies researchers say are making powerful hurricanes more likely to quickly form, must be being counteracted by other factors because data shows that powerful hurricanes are actually on the decline. As ABC News reports in an article, titled “Climate change making Atlantic hurricanes twice as likely to strengthen from weak to major intensity in 24 hours,” a new study in Science Direct claims warming oceans are making rapid powerful hurricane formation more likely to form. “Tropical cyclones in the Atlantic basin may now be more than twice as likely to strengthen from a weak hurricane or tropical storm into a major hurricane in just 24 hours due to climate change and warming waters, a new study suggests,” says ABC News. “Hurricanes are also now more likely to strengthen more rapidly along the East Coast of the U.S. than they were between 1971 and 1990, the paper, published Thursday in Scientific Reports found.” Warm ocean temperatures are a necessary, but not a sufficient factor for hurricane formation. Data indicate, regardless of ocean heating, hurricanes have not formed more frequently during the period of the study or since, and powerful hurricanes, Category 3 and above, have actually declined over the periods of comparison. As a result, even if warming oceans make the rapid formation of powerful hurricanes more likely, confounding factors, evidently not accounted for in the study, have been suppressing the actual formation of powerful hurricanes. Data presented in more than 100 previous Climate Realism posts, here, here, here, and here, for example, clearly show that hurricane trends are relatively flat over the past 50 years of modest warming, and the trend in powerful Atlantic hurricanes is downward (see the figures below) Figure 1: Global Hurricane Frequency (all & major) — 12-month running sums. The top time series is the number of global tropical cyclones that reached at least hurricane-force (maximum lifetime wind speed exceeds 64-knots). The bottom time series is the number of global tropical cyclones that reached major hurricane strength (96-knots+). Adapted from Maue (2011) GRL. https://climatlas.com/tropical/ Figure 2: Figure: Last 50-years+ of Global and Northern Hemisphere Accumulated Cyclone Energy: 24 month running sums. Note that the year indicated represents the value of ACE through the previous 24-months for the Northern Hemisphere (bottom line/gray boxes) and the entire global (top line/blue boxes). The area in between represents the Southern Hemisphere total ACE. https://climatlas.com/tropical/ In point of fact, as discussed in Climate at a Glance: Hurricanes, even the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) admits to finding no increase in the frequency or severity of hurricanes. Also, the United States recently went through its longest period in recorded history without a major hurricane strike, and recently experienced its fewest total hurricanes in any eight-year period. And what’s true for the Atlantic hurricane basin is true for the other major hurricane basins as well. There has been no increase in the number or intensity of tropical cyclones since 1972 as the planet has modestly warmed. Indeed, for some basins the data suggests tropical cyclone frequency has actually declined over the past century. What do the scientists mean when they say conditions are making it “more likely” or “twice as likely” for powerful hurricanes to form, when fewer powerful hurricanes are, in fact, forming? It’s like a casino claiming they’ve made it more likely than ever for gamblers to win, even as casino goers lose greater amounts more frequently: quite frankly, the claims and the facts just don’t line up. One might think, considering the IPCC’s pronouncements about finding no evidence human caused warming is causing an increase in hurricane numbers or severity and the copious publicly available data which underpins the IPCC’s assessment, the media might finally get the hint on hurricanes. Journalists should display a bit more skepticism concerning the latest novel, unverified study claiming hurricanes are getting worse due to global warming. Sadly, this is not the case. The media follows the narrative that purported human caused climate change is causing worsening weather, in this case hurricanes, regardless of facts demonstrating otherwise. For the mainstream media with regard to climate change, their motto seems to be, “damn the facts, full speed ahead with the climate crisis narrative.”

Wrong, ABC News, Data Refutes Strengthening Hurricanes Claim

https://climaterealism.com/2023/10/wrong-abc-news-data-refutes-strengthening-hurricanes-claim/ By H. Sterling Burnett The mainstream media, among them ABC News, Reuters and the New York Times, ran prominent stories claiming new research shows that Atlantic hurricanes have now become much more likely to strengthen into powerful hurricanes in a short period of time than in the past due to climate change. This is false. Whatever factors the studies researchers say are making powerful hurricanes more likely to quickly form, must be being counteracted by other factors because data shows that powerful hurricanes are actually on the decline. As ABC News reports in an article, titled “Climate change making Atlantic hurricanes twice as likely to strengthen from weak to major intensity in 24 hours,” a new study in Science Direct claims warming oceans are making rapid powerful hurricane formation more likely to form. “Tropical cyclones in the Atlantic basin may now be more than twice as likely to strengthen from a weak hurricane or tropical storm into a major hurricane in just 24 hours due to climate change and warming waters, a new study suggests,” says ABC News. “Hurricanes are also now more likely to strengthen more rapidly along the East Coast of the U.S. than they were between 1971 and 1990, the paper, published Thursday in Scientific Reports found.” Warm ocean temperatures are a necessary, but not a sufficient factor for hurricane formation. Data indicate, regardless of ocean heating, hurricanes have not formed more frequently during the period of the study or since, and powerful hurricanes, Category 3 and above, have actually declined over the periods of comparison. As a result, even if warming oceans make the rapid formation of powerful hurricanes more likely, confounding factors, evidently not accounted for in the study, have been suppressing the actual formation of powerful hurricanes. Data presented in more than 100 previous Climate Realism posts, here, here, here, and here, for example, clearly show that hurricane trends are relatively flat over the past 50 years of modest warming, and the trend in powerful Atlantic hurricanes is downward (see the figures below) Figure 1: Global Hurricane Frequency (all & major) — 12-month running sums. The top time series is the number of global tropical cyclones that reached at least hurricane-force (maximum lifetime wind speed exceeds 64-knots). The bottom time series is the number of global tropical cyclones that reached major hurricane strength (96-knots+). Adapted from Maue (2011) GRL. https://climatlas.com/tropical/ Figure 2: Figure: Last 50-years+ of Global and Northern Hemisphere Accumulated Cyclone Energy: 24 month running sums. Note that the year indicated represents the value of ACE through the previous 24-months for the Northern Hemisphere (bottom line/gray boxes) and the entire global (top line/blue boxes). The area in between represents the Southern Hemisphere total ACE. https://climatlas.com/tropical/ In point of fact, as discussed in Climate at a Glance: Hurricanes, even the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) admits to finding no increase in the frequency or severity of hurricanes. Also, the United States recently went through its longest period in recorded history without a major hurricane strike, and recently experienced its fewest total hurricanes in any eight-year period. And what’s true for the Atlantic hurricane basin is true for the other major hurricane basins as well. There has been no increase in the number or intensity of tropical cyclones since 1972 as the planet has modestly warmed. Indeed, for some basins the data suggests tropical cyclone frequency has actually declined over the past century. What do the scientists mean when they say conditions are making it “more likely” or “twice as likely” for powerful hurricanes to form, when fewer powerful hurricanes are, in fact, forming? It’s like a casino claiming they’ve made it more likely than ever for gamblers to win, even as casino goers lose greater amounts more frequently: quite frankly, the claims and the facts just don’t line up. One might think, considering the IPCC’s pronouncements about finding no evidence human caused warming is causing an increase in hurricane numbers or severity and the copious publicly available data which underpins the IPCC’s assessment, the media might finally get the hint on hurricanes. Journalists should display a bit more skepticism concerning the latest novel, unverified study claiming hurricanes are getting worse due to global warming. Sadly, this is not the case. The media follows the narrative that purported human caused climate change is causing worsening weather, in this case hurricanes, regardless of facts demonstrating otherwise. For the mainstream media with regard to climate change, their motto seems to be, “damn the facts, full speed ahead with the climate crisis narrative.” Share Facebook H. Sterling Burnett H. Sterling Burnett, Ph.D., is the Director of the Arthur B. Robinson Center on Climate and Environmental Policy and the managing editor of Environment & Climate News. In addition to directing The Heartland Institute’s Arthur B. Robinson Center on Climate and Environmental Policy, Burett puts Environment & Climate News together, is the editor of Heartland’s Climate Change Weekly email, and the host of the Environment & Climate News Podcast.

Meteorologist Ryan Maue debunks hurricane ‘intensification’ claims from Wash Post

  Meteorologist Dr. Ryan Maue: “Quite the media rollout for new research paper claiming to link climate change with Atlantic hurricane intensification rates. Unfortunately, the paper does not prove the climate change causation link. Comparing Atlantic storms from two 20-year periods: 1971-1990 vs. 2001-2020, simply conflates very well-known multidecadal variability in the Atlantic, e.g. inactive (1970-1994) vs. active period (since 1995) with climate change. This was hashed out in the literature almost 20 years ago and reiterated since then to an accepted consensus. It’s not clear why this research paper omits such well-known and understood Atlantic basin-scale changes over the past 5-decades. ” Meteorologist @RyanMaue cleans up fresh climate BS spread by WaPo manure-ologist @islivingston. No… a new study does not show that Atlantic hurricanes are intensifying more rapidly. No aspect of hurricane activity is outside the range of natural variability, per NOAA.… pic.twitter.com/N8gDr4hT1n — Steve Milloy (@JunkScience) October 20, 2023  

No, BBC, Hurricane Hilary Was Not Unprecedented

Climate analyst Paul Homewood: “Hilary is a very similar event to the 1939 tropical storm, El Cordonazo, which followed a similar path and dumped similar amounts of rain…The claims about record rainfall are bogus as well. The BBC focus heavily on “record rainfall” in Palm Springs, but even that is a fake claim.

The 1939 storm was much more devastating, with 5” in Los Angeles…And the devastation from Kathleen in 1976 was even greater…Rainfall from Hilary has not reached anything like the 375mm (14.76″) recorded in 1976.” 

‘Nonsense’: Claims Hurricane Idalia underwent ‘unprecedented’ climate fueled ‘rapid intensification’ debunked

Climate Analyst Paul Homewood: “There have been suggestions that the rapid intensification of Idalia was somehow unprecedented. This is nonsense. Idalia went from a tropical storm, with winds of 60 kts (69 mph), to a Cat 3 hurricane at landfall, with winds of 125 mph, in the space of about 32 hours.

image

But that was nothing compared to the 1935 Labor Day Hurricane, by far the strongest to hit the US. This went from a tropical storm to a Cat 5 , with winds of 185 mph, all in the space of less than two days. We must also remember, of course, that we now have satellite updates every six hours, plus frequent hurricane hunter flights, to give us almost hourly data for these bigger storms. In 1935, they had little idea what was happening out at sea, and so often had no idea how quickly storms intensified. 

Hurricane Idalia is NOT ‘unprecedented’: ‘No different to dozens of other hurricanes which have hit USA in past’ – Similar to at least 46 other US landfalling hurricanes’ – Only ‘unprecedented’ for landfall in that small 50 mile stretch of coastline

Hurricane Idalia is NOT ‘unprecedented’: ‘No different to dozens of other hurricanes which have hit USA in past’ – Similar to at least 46 other US landfalling hurricanes’ – Only ‘unprecedented’ for landfall in that small 50 mile stretch of coastline

Climate analyist Paul Homewood: “Hurricane Idalia made landfall as a Cat 3. There have been 46 other US landfalling hurricanes with 949 MB (millibar) and lower. The bottom line is that Idalia was no different to dozens of other hurricanes which have hit the US in the past.
The media is claiming that “Idalia is the strongest hurricane to strike the Big Bend area – especially near Cedar Key – in 125 years, dating back to an unnamed 1896 storm. That stretch of coastline is, of course, tiny, about 50 or so miles long.” 

For more results click below