Comments on: Hurricane season 2007 is near the record low of 1977

By: The Foundry » Blog Archive » The Liberal War on Science

The Foundry » Blog Archive » The Liberal War on Science — Wed, 07 May 2008 14:54:06 +0000

[...] the scientist’s model predicted a very active 2007 hurricane season only to be greeted by the actual reality of a historic low. Never mind that actual observation of the Earth’s temperature has actually fallen over the [...]

By: Hurricane season 2007 nears record low of 1977 « FYI

Hurricane season 2007 nears record low of 1977 « FYI — Sun, 06 Jan 2008 06:47:07 +0000

[...] October 25, 2007 in Ah, the press, Planetary Emergency? Tags: global warming Florida State University’s COAPS (Center for Ocean-Atmospheric Prediction Studies) says that hurri… [...]

By: sean

sean — Sun, 11 Nov 2007 17:49:47 +0000

That's a pretty short timeline, too short to draw any meaningful conclusions about anything. Plus, this season isn't even over yet. Taking a longer view, an inactive year nowadays would have been considered a normal or fairly active year 100 years ago. see Frequency Of Atlantic Hurricanes Doubled Over Last Century

By: mau gosto » Blog Archive » Eu e o Aquecimento Global

mau gosto » Blog Archive » Eu e o Aquecimento Global — Sun, 11 Nov 2007 14:25:26 +0000

[...] 2) O aquecimento global não agravaria catástrofes climáticas. Pelo contrário, deveria evitá-las. Nada a ver culpar o aquecimento global pelo Katrina ou coisa do gênero. Se duvida, toma, uma prova. [...]

By: SteveSadlov

SteveSadlov — Mon, 29 Oct 2007 17:47:05 +0000

Has this lobe of the “figure 8″ hysteresis loop completed? Are we now going through the great 1976 – 1977 climate shift in reverse?

By: politicalpartypoop.com » Blog Archive » Global Warming leads to more frequent and more intense hurricanes, LOL!

Mon, 29 Oct 2007 17:16:30 +0000

[...] Hurricane season 2007 is near the record low of 1977 – Liberal media and Al Gore pissed! Florida State University’s COAPS (Center for Ocean-Atmospheric Prediction Studies) says that hurricane season 2007, which ends November 30th, is looking well below normal, in fact they are calling it “historic inactivity”.According to COAPS: “Unless a dramatic and perhaps historical flurry of activity occurs in the next 11 weeks (ACE is based on calendar year, not traditional June-November hurricane season) , 2007 will rank as a historically inactive Tropical Cyclone year for the entire Northern Hemisphere. During the past 30 years, only 1977, 1981, and 1983 have had less activity to date (Jan-December). For the period of June 1 – October 19, 2007, only 1977 experienced LESS tropical cyclone activity.” [...]

By: Evan Jones

Evan Jones — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 03:17:44 +0000

“So. Global Warming leads to more frequent and more intense hurricanes, huh?”

Call it an outlier. (Or maybe some other kind of liar.)

By: David Smith

David Smith — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 03:10:30 +0000

Larry the minimum requirement for a named storm is a 35 knot wind for 6 hours, which I believe equates to a PDI of 0.4

By: Top Posts « WordPress.com

Top Posts « WordPress.com — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 01:30:42 +0000

[...] Hurricane season 2007 is near the record low of 1977 [image] Florida State University’s COAPS (Center for Ocean-Atmospheric Prediction Studies) says that hurricane […] [...]

By: alpha0r

alpha0r — Thu, 25 Oct 2007 22:16:54 +0000

I know that they changed the forcast mid-year. I simply mean if we can not determine what will happen in one year how do we know what will happen in 100?

By: Larry Grimm

Larry Grimm — Thu, 25 Oct 2007 22:13:49 +0000

There’s a discussion over at Climate Audit about the effects of storms on the Southwest’s weather and the relationship to fire dangers. It’s pretty good and a couple of responders are dead on the money. Whether wet or dry, we get the fires. My home is in Santa Clarita. The only difference this year from our 2004 fires is a dang better response. Given the few deaths in the San Diego fires, it appears that the response is also much better down there.

Question: Does the PDI relate to a named storm? Asked another way, do they have a cut off point in regards to storm intensity where they don’t name a storm?

By: henry

henry — Thu, 25 Oct 2007 19:55:34 +0000

Has that median/mean been increasing? Because as with all things AGW, it’s always “observe the trend”…

Also, just to hit the mean, we only need 1 more hurricane with 1/2 of Dean’s strength.

By: Stan Needham

Stan Needham — Thu, 25 Oct 2007 19:15:04 +0000

Predicted 13-16 named storms, actual was 13.

In all UN-fairness, Matt, they were “naming” storms that were so weak they wouldn’t normally have been named, just so their prediction wouldn’t appear to be so far off.

One of the problems with relying on data online… it’s easily changed.

John, reminds me of the headline on MarketWatch a week or so ago. At 8AM it said “Stocks to open higher”. When, an hour and a half later, stocks opened lower, the headline was changed to “Stocks to open lower”. IIRC, the same economic data was used to explain both headlines — not at all unlike what we frequently see in the Climate debate. Ya just gotta chuckle and say (my 13-year-old granddaughter’s favorite phrase) WHATEVER!

By: John

John — Thu, 25 Oct 2007 18:31:10 +0000

Found an article that mentioned the change in forecast…

http://www.tbo.com/news/metro/MGB8V9B065F.html

By: John

John — Thu, 25 Oct 2007 18:29:14 +0000

I believe that NOAA prediction was updated mid-year and they dropped their estimated number of hurricanes from something much higher (18+ ?) to 13-16. One of the problems with relying on data online… it’s easily changed.