Economic Impact Of Hurricanes

[Randolph Kinney]

They're thinking (quite logically)

Yep, they cite the principles of heat and thermodynamics. If storms form due to heat, then to say human emissions which cause global warming don't cause storms, just makes them more intense is a non sequitur. However, you don't understand heat and thermodynamics. Therefore that paradox escapes your mental powers, such as your limitations are.

 

[Pittsburgh Pete]

Sorry that you can't follow the science Randy. But if it helps your fragile ego to mock me as you deny reality, I'm here for you. I'll save you some money on a shrink. rof:speaking of egos that need boosting, I see that Marion the other climatologist on the forum liked your post)

 

[Randolph Kinney]

Sorry that you can't follow the science Randy.

So Pete, you follow science. Do you understand science?

From NOAA

1. Summary Statement
Two frequently asked questions on global warming and hurricanes are the following:

• Have humans already caused a detectable increase in Atlantic hurricane activity or global tropical cyclone activity?
• What changes in hurricane activity are expected for the late 21st century, given the pronounced global warming scenarios from current IPCC models?

In this review, we address these questions in the context of published research findings. We will first present the main conclusions and then follow with some background discussion of the research that leads to these conclusions. The main conclusions are:

• It is premature to conclude that human activities–and particularly greenhouse gas emissions that cause global warming–have already had a detectable impact on Atlantic hurricane or global tropical cyclone activity. That said, human activities may have already caused changes that are not yet detectable due to the small magnitude of the changes or observational limitations, or are not yet confidently modeled (e.g., aerosol effects on regional climate).
• Anthropogenic warming by the end of the 21st century will likely cause tropical cyclones globally to be more intense on average (by 2 to 11% according to model projections for an IPCC A1B scenario). This change would imply an even larger percentage increase in the destructive potential per storm, assuming no reduction in storm size.

https://www.gfdl.noaa.gov/global-warming-and-hurricanes/#summary-statement

Did you understand the above from NOAA? Premature to conclude that humans had a detectable change in hurricanes.

Case close.

 

[Randolph Kinney]

Hurricane Jose

Tropical Storm Jose, which is forecast to re-intensify into a hurricane later on Friday, was about 485 miles southwest of Bermuda as of 11 a.m. ET. The storm is forecast to gradually intensify while moving to the northwest, then north, and at some point, turn northeast parallel to the U.S. coastline.

There are many variables that will affect soon-to-be Hurricane Jose's path, including its intensity, and the steering currents provided by the upper level winds in the vicinity of the storm.

The farther north the storm goes, the more likely it is that upper level winds and cooler ocean waters will take a toll on Hurricane Jose's intensity.

The clearest threat that Jose poses to the East Coast is in the form of high surf, coastal flooding, rip currents, and beach erosion that will batter coastal locations from Cape COD to Cape Hatteras.

http://mashable.com/2017/09/15/hurricane-jose-threatens-east-coast/#RPx26gHFzSqP

Looks like Jose did not respond to climate scientists thinking about intensity. They are not talking about human emissions intensifying Jose. Wonder why? Because Jose weaken from a hurricane status to tropical storm. Jose might increase to hurricane status once more, however, it will weaken again the further north it goes. That breaks any connection or contribution of human emissions intensifying hurricanes in general.

 

[Pittsburgh Pete]

I do understand that you're doing your best to dodge the reality of the situation! You're always good for a laugh (seriously, you were tortured in high school weren't you?)

 

[djd09]

Photos of Houston floods from early 1900s prove natural disasters not caused by so-called “climate change”

Former NASA scientist and climatologist Dr. Roy W. Spencer said that Harvey was simply a natural weather disaster of the variety that has “always occurred and always will occur.” He also takes alarmists like Al Gore to task for “making naturally-occurring severe weather seem unnatural.”

http://www.naturalnews.com/2017-09-...s-not-caused-by-so-called-climate-change.html

 

[Randolph Kinney]

Extremely Intense Hurricanes: Revisiting Webster et al. (2005) after 10 Years

The record-setting twelve-year long hurricane “drought” (no major hurricane landfalls on the US) was just weather. But the Left immediately boldly and confidently declared Harvey and Irma to be caused (or worsened) by anthropogenic climate change.

Ten years ago, Webster et al. documented a large and significant increase in both the number as well as the percentage of category 4 and 5 hurricanes for all global basins from 1970 to 2004, and this manuscript examines whether those trends have continued when including 10 additional years of data. In contrast to that study, as shown here, the global frequency of category 4 and 5 hurricanes has shown a small, insignificant downward trend while the percentage of category 4 and 5 hurricanes has shown a small, insignificant upward trend between 1990 and 2014. Accumulated cyclone energy globally has experienced a large and significant downward trend during the same period. The primary reason for the increase in category 4 and 5 hurricanes noted in observational datasets from 1970 to 2004 by Webster et al. is concluded to be due to observational improvements at the various global tropical cyclone warning centers, primarily in the first two decades of that study.

http://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/full/10.1175/JCLI-D-15-0188.1

Pretty funny. Intensity of storms significantly decreased. So much for that human heat-trapping gas emissions causing or contributing to storms intensifying.

 

[Randolph Kinney]

WINTON CAPITAL SETS UP CLIMATE CHANGE PREDICTION MARKET

One of Europe’s largest hedge funds is looking to move into the gambling industry in the UK, as it sets up a new venue where players can bet on the effects of climate change. The project is hoping to tempt climate scientists to put their money where their models are.

The new “climate prediction market” is the brainchild of Winton Capital, founded by David Harding, and is aimed at finding a market consensus on the levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere and global temperature rises in the future.

The not-for-profit project, which is being funded out of Winton’s philanthropic budget, is hoping to tempt climate scientists to put their money where their models are, and to provide a clear benchmark of the academic consensus at a time of intense interest in man-made climate change.

News of the project comes as the UN General Assembly meeting in New York focuses on the theme of a sustainable planet. Climate change also continues to dominate the political agenda around the world, after President Donald Trump declared he will withdraw the US from the Paris climate accord and roll back regulations on the production of coal.

“With a prediction market, getting the information is the primary objective,” said Mark Roulston, a scientist at Winton who is overseeing the project. “There’s not necessarily a consensus on all the implications of climate change. The idea is to have a benchmark which could track any emerging consensus.”

Under the plan, scientists and experts from around the world will be able to trade contracts based on the atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide and how far temperatures increase, going decades into the future. Winton will act as a market maker and subsidise trading, rather than taking a cut or skewing the odds in its favour.

Robin Hanson, a professor of economics at George Mason University who helped pioneer the use of prediction markets, said there is little incentive for anyone to try to manipulate the market, because that will only make the potential profits bigger for those who predict CO2 concentration and temperature correctly.

On Winton’s market, bets will settle every year, using temperature data from the UK’s Hadley Centre, and the annual average of the concentration of atmospheric carbon dioxide as measured by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration monitoring station on Mauna Loa, Hawaii.

https://www.thegwpf.com/at-last-winton-capital-sets-up-climate-change-prediction-market/

Money will decide whether computer models on CO2 levels (cause) and temperature increase (effect) are significant. Interesting to note that a consensus is not yet achieved on the implications of climate change.