Record Cold, US and Europe: Global Warming?

[shunyadragon]

Better long term assessment of Atlantic hurricanes. As far as the Atlantic Hurricanes the evidence is not conclusive;

Source: https://www.gfdl.noaa.gov/global-warming-and-hurricanes/

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 IPCC models?
In this review, we address these questions in the context of published research findings. We will first present our main conclusions and then follow with some background discussion of the research that leads to these conclusions. “Detectable” change here will refer to a change that is large enough to be clearly distinguishable from the variability due to natural causes. Our main conclusions are:

Likelihood Statements
The terminology here for likelihood statements generally follows the conventions used in the IPCC assessments, i.e., for the assessed likelihood of an outcome or result:

Very Likely: > 90%,
Likely: > 66%
More Likely Than Not (or Better Than Even Odds) > 50%
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 mid-range scenario). This change would imply an even larger percentage increase in the destructive potential per storm, assuming no reduction in storm size.

There are better than even odds that anthropogenic warming over the next century will lead to an increase in the occurrence of very intense tropical cyclones globally–an increase that would be substantially larger in percentage terms than the 2-11% increase in the average storm intensity. This increase in intense storm occurrence is projected despite a likely decrease (or little change) in the global numbers of all tropical cyclones. However, there is at present only low confidence that such an increase in very intense storms will occur in the Atlantic basin.

Anthropogenic warming and accompanying increase in atmospheric moisture content will likely cause future tropical cyclones to have substantially higher average rainfall rates than present-day tropical cyclones, with a model-projected increase of about 10-15% for rainfall rates averaged within about 100 km of the storm center by the end of the 21st century.

Sea level rise–which very likely has a substantial human contribution to the global mean observed rise according to IPCC AR5–should be causing higher storm surge levels for tropical cyclones that do occur, all else assumed equal.

© Copyright Original Source

By my memory, the trend of occurrence and intensity of hurricanes and tropical storms are not the best evidence for global warming, but there are trends I can reference.

Next the Pacific and Indian Ocean.

[Tassman]

Al Gore is probably one of the biggest hypocrites of the climate change narrative...

Blood And Gore: Making A Killing On Anti-Carbon Investment Hype

Surprise! Al Gore and his carbon credit huckstering partner David Blood, both principals at Generation Investment Management (GIM), warn in their October 30 Wall Street Journal op/ed feature of peril to fossil fuel investments due to “The Coming Carbon Asset Bubble”. They argue that such “unwise and increasingly wreck less” investment strategies pose three broad risks which will cause carbon assets to become “stranded” and lose economic value: through direct government carbon regulation; as a result of market-share losses to “already competitive” renewable technologies; and due to “sociopolitical pressures” causing carbon-intensive businesses to lose their “license to operate”.

Marketing Climate Alarm:

Of course this carbon regulation is posited upon saving the Earth based upon a “consensus within the scientific community that increasing the global temperature by more than 2oC will likely cause devastating and irreversible damage to the planet.” And where it comes to promulgating and capitalizing upon carbon-climate-crazed sociopolitical pressure, you would be hard-pressed to find two better authorities.

Gore and Blood, the former chief of Goldman Sachs Asset Management (GSAM), co-founded London-based GIM in 2004. Between 2008 and 2011 the company had raised profits of nearly $218 million from institutions and wealthy investors. By 2008 Gore was able to put $35 million into hedge funds and private partnerships through the Capricorn Investment Group, a Palo Alto company founded by his Canadian billionaire buddy Jeffrey Skoll, the first president of EBay Inc. It was Skoll’s Participant Media that produced Gore’s feverishly frightening 2006 horror film, “An Inconvenient Truth”.

In 2007, following an investigation of the movie, Sir Michael Burton, a judge in London’s High Court, ruled that it can be shown in secondary schools only if accompanied by guidance notes for teachers to balance Mr. Gore’s “one-sided” views. Judge Barton pointed out that its “apocalyptical vision” was politically partisan, and not an impartial analysis. He stated: “It is built around the charismatic presence of the ex-vice president Al Gore, whose crusade is to persuade the world of the dangers of climate change caused by global warming…It is now common ground that this is not simply a science film- although it is based substantially on science research and opinion, but it is [clearly] a political film.”

Larry Bell, the author of this piece, is not a climate scientist. He's an architect. His credentials:

• Professor of Architecture at the University of Houston.
• AIAA, ASCE. Registered Architect and urban planner.
• Master of Fine Arts, University of Illinois.
• Bachelor of Architecture, University of Illinois

Qualifications in Fine Arts and Architecture are not a good educational background for declaring climate change a hoax. More to the point, his view is in direct opposition to the scientific consensus that earth's climate is warming.

https://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/

I prefer to trust the majority of qualified scientists, who do not consider global warming a hoax, rather than an unqualified conspiracy theorist who does

[seer]

Better long term assessment of Atlantic hurricanes. As far as the Atlantic Hurricanes the evidence is not conclusive.

Tell that to JimL who blamed this last hurricane season on AGW

By my memory, the trend of occurrence and intensity of hurricanes and tropical storms are not the best evidence for global warming, but there are trends I can reference.

Next the Pacific and Indian Ocean.

How can you quantify any of this? How many hurricanes are average? Average compared to what?

[shunyadragon]

Tell that to JimL who blamed this last hurricane season on AGW

I do not listen to JimL. I follow more academic sources. Your source was 2015 and only addressed a short term 'drought' in hurricanes in the Atlantic, and did not address the issue of climate change. My sources will address global trends and longer term trends. There are some factors of tropical storms that indicate an impact of climate change, but again not enough information yet for the indication of a 'strong' influence of global warming on tropical storm frequency and strength.

If the current long term trend continues there will be stronger support for the relationship between climate change and tropical storms.

Actually the major evidence for climate change is other 'long term' changes since the industrial revolution such as the consistent increase in CO2 in the atmosphere, and the resulting changes in climate.

How can you quantify any of this? How many hurricanes are average? Average compared to what?

Average compared to long term data, and not short term selective data. The sources I will cite will address this and the associated problems.

[Cow Poke]

Larry Bell, the author of this piece, is not a climate scientist. He's an architect. His credentials:

• Professor of Architecture at the University of Houston.
• AIAA, ASCE. Registered Architect and urban planner.
• Master of Fine Arts, University of Illinois.
• Bachelor of Architecture, University of Illinois

Qualifications in Fine Arts and Architecture are not a good educational background for declaring climate change a hoax. More to the point, his view is in direct opposition to the scientific consensus that earth's climate is warming.

https://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/

I prefer to trust the majority of qualified scientists, who do not consider global warming a hoax, rather than an unqualified conspiracy theorist who does

Did Al Gore's predictions of doom come true? And I don't believe he was 'declaring climate change a hoax". I believe he was exposing Al Gore for the scam artist he is.

[shunyadragon]

Did Al Gore's predictions of doom come true? And I don't believe he was 'declaring climate change a hoax". I believe he was exposing Al Gore for the scam artist he is.

Al Gore is not a scientific source.

[Cow Poke]

Al Gore is not a scientific source.

And I never claimed he was. In fact, if you actually read the thread instead of just defaulting to your standard "you're wrong", you'd find that my complaint is that Al Gore did climate science great harm with his alarmist horse crap.

And your lack of defense of Gore seems to suggest you might agree.

[seer]

Average compared to long term data, and not short term selective data. The sources I will cite will address this and the associated problems.

What long term data? A hundred years? Two hundred? A thousand? Ten thousand?

[shunyadragon]

And I never claimed he was. In fact, if you actually read the thread instead of just defaulting to your standard "you're wrong", you'd find that my complaint is that Al Gore did climate science great harm with his alarmist horse crap.

And your lack of defense of Gore seems to suggest you might agree.

i question why Al Gore keeps being referred to in these discussions when everyone here and in academic science does not accept him as an academic source on climate change.

[Cow Poke]

i question why Al Gore keeps being referred to in these discussions when everyone here and in academic science does not accept him as an academic source on climate change.

Let me type really slowly.....

It is one of the reasons that climate skeptics have a hard time buying into the science. The "fear factor" has a backlash.

[shunyadragon]

What long term data? A hundred years? Two hundred? A thousand? Ten thousand?

Your whipping a dead horse. As I said tropical storm data is NOT at present a major indicator of climate change. The sources I will cite will go into this. The elephant in the room is you cited a very short term old study on a hurricane 'drought' that did not mention climate change. What's up with citing this not relevant source?

[demi-conservative]

Dear libs, also progs:

Every year less people care about human global warming, also 'sky is falling!!!!!!!!'

Mwahahahahaha.

XOXOXO
Conservatives

[demi-conservative]

i question why Al Gore keeps being referred to in these discussions when everyone here and in academic science does not accept him as an academic source on climate change.

He, also other idiots cried wolf so many times. You libs, also progs, liked that...until bigtime backfire

XOXOXO

[Mountain Man]

How can you quantify any of this? How many hurricanes are average? Average compared to what?

You gotta watch out for the alarmist bait-and-switch: they say "average", but they really mean "correct" or "ideal", as if whatever arbitrary range they base their average on is an objective measure. Then they'll say, "Such-and-such is higher or lower than average," implying that whatever they're talking about is wrong and needs to be corrected. It's even more fun when the "average" is based on fabricated data. It's quite the scam all around.

[shunyadragon]

Let me type really slowly.....

It is one of the reasons that climate skeptics have a hard time buying into the science. The "fear factor" has a backlash.

Let me type really really slowly . . .

Everyone needs to refer to and understand academic sources and not the yellow journalism from the extreme views from AL Gore to Breitbart nonacademic sources.