Global warming's effect on hurricane strength disputed in new report

highwayman

highwayman

New Member
Not easy to admit when you have messed up...



http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/lo...ming,0,3801546.story?coll=sfla-home-headlines
MIAMI -- Scientists linking the increased strength of hurricanes over recent years to global warming have not accounted for outdated technology that may have underestimated storms' power decades ago, researchers said in a report published Friday.

The research by Chris Landsea of the National Hurricane Center challenges two studies published last year by other respected climatologists.
Click to expand...
 
You know the definition of expert doncha? Someone that progressively knows more and more about less and less until they finally know everything there is to know about nothing at all.
 
Scientists linking the increased strength of hurricanes over recent years to global warming have not accounted for outdated technology that may have underestimated storms' power decades ago, researchers said in a report published Friday.
Click to expand...

Therein lies the problem, people just don't understand what the scientists says.
 
*rewording
Everyone except the scientist himself might misunderstand what the scientist is saying.
 
May, might, perhaps, could...a short list of words that makes science useless.
 
The new study doesn't conradict the earlier ones:

Emanuel analyzed records of storm measurements made by aircraft and satellites since the 1950s. He found the amount of energy released in these storms in both the North Atlantic and the North Pacific oceans increased, especially since the mid-1970s.

His study was published last year, along with another Science piece that linked a double in Category 4 and 5 hurricanes since 1970 to the rise of ocean surface temperatures.

Landsea said he did not dispute global warming was occurring or that it could influence hurricanes; he said it simply was not proven by the storm information available.
 
spike said:
Landsea said he did not dispute global warming was occurring or that it could influence hurricanes; he said it simply was not proven by the storm information available.[/I]
Click to expand...
Doesn't that mean they don't really know? That data is incomplete?
 
spike said:
The new study doesn't conradict the earlier ones:

Emanuel analyzed records of storm measurements made by aircraft and satellites since the 1950s. He found the amount of energy released in these storms in both the North Atlantic and the North Pacific oceans increased, especially since the mid-1970s.

His study was published last year, along with another Science piece that linked a double in Category 4 and 5 hurricanes since 1970 to the rise of ocean surface temperatures.

Landsea said he did not dispute global warming was occurring or that it could influence hurricanes; he said it simply was not proven by the storm information available.
Click to expand...


Tom Brokaws buddies say that we're in the middle of high cycle for hurricanes & that no one hurricane can be blamed upon el nino (see:global warming).

Interesting that they continue to use the name "Katrina" in reference to horrific hurricanes. It was a Cat 3. Hardly Andrew in scale. The problem with New Orleans was the levees broke (as had been predicted) because of insufficient strength.
 
Saying it was human error only applies to political discussions, not scientific ones. You don't expect them to maintain one position through out, do you?
 
Our technology base is seemingly doubling every decade whilst the interpretive arrogance is tripling. Our understanding of weather, astronomy, vulcanology, climatology is based upon most fragmentary snapshot of history. Its almost like trying to hash out the entire scope of the Egyptian empire based upon one shovel load of pottery shards.
 
chcr said:
Doesn't that mean they don't really know? That data is incomplete?
Click to expand...

Sure, according to this scientist. Just pointing out that they weren't contradicting.
 
In other news, scientists today disputed the data about the Earth not being flat because the scientists who first brought about the theory about the non-flatness of the Earth did not have access to today's technology such as airplanes, satellites and the shuttle. This is not to say that the earth is flat, but that it is not as flat as we originally thought it was...er...were.
 
MrBishop said:
In other news, scientists today disputed the data about the Earth not being flat because the scientists who first brought about the theory about the non-flatness of the Earth did not have access to today's technology such as airplanes, satellites and the shuttle. This is not to say that the earth is flat, but that it is not as flat as we originally thought it was...er...were.
Click to expand...
Sorry Bish, none of that stuff is necessary to demonstrate that the earth is a sphere. Eratosthenes, a mathemetician and the librarian at Alexendria demonstrated it conclusively in the third century BC. He also calculated the circumference, tilt of the earth's axis, distance to the moon and distance to the sun with remarkable accuracy for the time. ;) Flat-earthers have known they were wrong for at least 2300 years.
 
unclehobart said:
Some Egyptian and Babylonian evidence goes back a thou or two farther than that.
Click to expand...
True enough, I just like Eratosthenes. Besides, most historians think he did all this with basically a stick and a protractor.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top