|
Karen, Chris Landsea was the hurricane expert
for the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and was due to give the
paper on hurricanes at the next Assessment Report. Trenberth (mentioned in the links you
gave) gave a Press Conference – surrounded by some other scientists
– on the Global Warming/hurricane connection. Landsea and his team at NOAA who have
been studying hurricanes occurring back to the mid-18th century was properly affronted. He pointed out that none of the
scientists at the Press Conference had produced any research on this subject,
nor were they discussing any new research. My reading of this peculiar Trenberth announcement is that
the higher echelons of the IPCC had decided that the GW/hurricane bit would be
a good scare to throw at the Great Unwashed (that’s us). Anyway, Landsea resigned, saying: “I personally cannot in good faith
continue to contribute to a process that I view as both being motivated by
pre-conceived agendas and being scientifically unsound.” It should be noted that the IPCC
assessments in 1995 and 2001 also concluded that there was no global warming
signal found in the hurricane record. So what has changed over the last four
years? I rather think it is a need to get
something scary and sexy for the 4th Assessment Report due to be
published in 2007 – with lots of prior publicity to fright the populace. Hence, Landsea’s remark of “pre-conceived
agendas”. They know what they want, so experiments that
“prove” their contention will abound. (They have a history of not issuing
anything that might be prejudicial to their advocacy.) Also, their “peer-reviewing”
where they apparently review each other rather than send it out for independent
appraisal is a disgrace. They are a peculiar
‘scientific’ organization. However, let me do some Futuring. I expect the left will fall behind the
Global Warming/hurricane message – particularly as it could lead to
getting rid of fossil fuel power production and putting us all on bicycles. (I
approve of this, but not by using cudgels on people.) The right will be bound to defend themselves against the left and will act accordingly. Meantime real scientists will carry on
real science using actual observation – rather than doing simulations on
computers. (“Always check a ‘research’ news story for the
word ‘simulation’”.) That’s the easy one. Now, for two to watch for. It will be said that hurricanes do more
damage than in the past, and that will be true. But this is not the fault of hurricanes.
It’s because the sparse population of the past has been replaced by
mansions on every square yard. It’s been estimated that had the Great Miami
hurricane of 1926 occurred now (after an adjustment for inflation and taking
account of the vastly increased population) it would have caused $77.5 billion
damage. At that time it caused $100 million
damage, so to the undiscerning eye it wasn’t a patch on current
hurricanes. And undiscerning eyes are what the propagandists look for as
information is transferred from the eyes to the mouth and is bruited around as
truth. The other point about US hurricanes which is if special interest to us, is where their
force is measured. The hurricane people measure a hurricane’s category at
landfall. Perhaps because scientists (such as Landsea) have
landfall pressure measurements going back to the middle of the 19th
century. Pressure is a measurement of intensity. So watch for a change to measuring
hurricane intensity out at sea. Out in the But, Category 5 hurricanes in the Gulf
are more sexy than a Rita at landfall as a Category 3. So, expect a shift to measuring hurricane
intensity out in the ocean and much mention of low pressure out there, and
emphasis on the heated water (caused by GW) causing greater intensities. So, watch for “the most damaging
and deadliest hurricane ever”. And watch for millibars out in the For the record, the three category 5 (at
landfall) hurricanes in the twentieth century took place Maybe I should predict what won’t be
emphasized. Gerry Bell, the lead scientist for NOAA's
and fellow forecasters predict that ferocious storms will occur for the next
several decades. They cite a natural ocean cycle called
the Atlantic Multi-Decadal scale,
which causes weather in the tropical cool,
windy phases and warm periods with slack winds, spawning frequent,
strong hurricanes. These phases are driven by two massive
weather patterns that control monsoon
rains over the Amazon and Africa, said The continent-sized patterns last for
decades and "are so dominant, they
control ocean temperature and wind conditions," If you are really interested in the truth
of US hurricanes rather than the politics, check out " Harry ******************************** of 818 352-4141 ******************************** From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Karen Watters Cole We are rolling loaded dice on global climate change, playing
a dangerous game. Further, it is economically less expensive to enact
precautionary measures to reduce damage to the environment rather than deal
with the consequences of doing almost nothing, risking incalculable cost in
loss of life and treasury. You can split the difference between the naysayers and
extreme climate change prophets like Jan Lundberg, who predicts widespread
depopulation and societal havoc before a new world order is restored, and still
take meaningful, practical and immediate action. The first step is to acknowledge
that the preponderance of scientific evidence says that climate change is
occurring, and action is required now, not in the future when options are more
limited. kwc So who is right about the role of global
warming? In fact, two recent studies of
hurricanes, by different scientists using different methods, claimed to detect
a big rise in hurricane intensity around the world over the last several
decades. But the authors of both analyses acknowledged that more data would be
needed to confirm a link to human-caused warming. The murkiness arises because the relationship between long-term
warming of the climate and seas is only perceptible in statistical studies of
dozens of storms, not in the origin or fate of any particular storm.
Independent |
_______________________________________________ Futurework mailing list [email protected] http://fes.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
