Comments
Multi-Decadal Variability of Atlantic Hurricane Activity: 1851-2007
Another new study has been published that fails to support alarmism about hurricane activity and ‘global warming.’ The ‘in press’ paper is entitled: ‘Multi-decadal variability of Atlantic hurricane activity: 1851-2007,’ by Petr Chylek and Glen Lesins, Journal of Geophysical Research-Atmospheres (doi:10.1029/2008JD010036) (2008).
The Abstract states:
An analysis of Atlantic hurricane data (HURDAT), using a hurricane activity index that integrates over hurricane numbers, durations and strengths during the years 1851-2007, suggests a quasi-periodic behavior with a period around 60 years superimposed upon a linearly increasing background. The linearly increasing background is significantly reduced or removed when various corrections were applied for hurricane under-counting in the early portion of the record. The periodic-like behavior is persistent in uncorrected HURDAT data as well as in data corrected for possible missing storms. The record contains two complete cycles: 1860-1920 and 1920-1980. The 2004 and 2005 hurricane seasons were unusual in that two intense hurricane seasons occurred in consecutive years. The probability for this happening in any given year is estimated to be less then 1%. Comparing the last 28 years (1980-2007) with the preceding 28 years (1953-1980) we find a modest increase in the number of minor hurricanes (category 1 and 2), however, we find no increase in the number of major hurricanes (category 3-5). The hurricane activity index is found to be highly correlated with the Atlantic Multi-decadal Mode (AMM).
October 8th, 2008 at 12:14 am
The hole in the southern hemisphere atmosphere does not close anymore. Direct global warming. Fact. Cyclic bologna cannot hide it.
Import water from off planet earth (places other than from planet earth. No not: Mars, Orion Belt, moon of planet earth. Gov already looked there and there is not any water or atmosphere):
how many cubic miles of water every year to keep even with the current increased yearly loss of atmosphere to planet earth?
How many cubic miles of water to close the hole (when processed and placed as atmosphere)?
The costs?
All of us are not stupid.
Your answers are?
October 8th, 2008 at 1:34 am
Your question and reasoning seem muddled. What does this have to do with the fading attempts to link hurricanes and ‘global warming?’
If you are referring to the SH Ozone hole, when was it ever closed? There are many factors involved, weather temperature, 11-year solar cycle, UV light. And there is this:
Chemists poke holes in Ozone theory
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v449/n7161/full/449382a.html
Extract:
As the world marks 20 years since the introduction of the Montreal Protocol to protect the ozone layer, Nature has learned of experimental data that threaten to shatter established theories of ozone chemistry. If the data are right, scientists will have to rethink their understanding of how ozone holes are formed and how that relates to climate change.
Long-lived chloride compounds from anthropogenic emissions of chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) are the main cause of worrying seasonal ozone losses in both hemispheres. In 1985, researchers discovered a hole in the ozone layer above the Antarctic, after atmospheric chloride levels built up. The Montreal Protocol, agreed in 1987 and ratified two years later, stopped the production and consumption of most ozone-destroying chemicals. But many will linger on in the atmosphere for decades to come. How and on what timescales they will break down depend on the molecules’ ultraviolet absorption spectrum (the wavelength of light a molecule can absorb), as the energy for the process comes from sunlight. Molecules break down and react at different speeds according to the wavelength available and the temperature, both of which are factored into the protocol.
So Markus Rex, an atmosphere scientist at the Alfred Wegener Institute of Polar and Marine Research in Potsdam, Germany, did a double-take when he saw new data for the break-down rate of a crucial molecule, dichlorine peroxide (Cl2O2). The rate of photolysis (light-activated splitting) of this molecule reported by chemists at NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, California, was extremely low in the wavelengths available in the stratosphere — almost an order of magnitude lower than the currently accepted rate. “This must have far-reaching consequences,” Rex says. “If the measurements are correct we can basically no longer say we understand how ozone holes come into being.” What effect the results have on projections of the speed or extent of ozone depletion remains unclear.
Astract of original paper:
http://pubs.acs.org/cgi-bin/abstract.cgi/jpcafh/2007/111/i20/abs/jp067660w.html
The people likely to be ‘stupid’ are those that believe that we can predictably control or influence the weather/climate by attempting to manipulate atmospheric CO2.
November 26th, 2008 at 1:14 pm
I don\’t normally leave comments! But what you said here makes one think! Would you mind if I placed a link back from my blog?
November 26th, 2008 at 5:30 pm
Feel free!