If a hurricane dies in the middle Atlantic, does it make a sound?

Desperate de jour – trying to locate unreported hurricanes prior to the satellite era by looking through old seismometer records in an attempt to prop up the imagined “global warming equals more hurricanes” connection….which we know doesn’t exist and has been debunked time and again. Most recently is was falsified  yesterday with FSU’s ACE graph, showing hurricane levels at a 30 year low.

Seismograph

From a Geological Society of America press release:

Seismic Noise Unearths Lost Hurricanes

Boulder, CO USA – Seismologists have found a new way to piece together the history of hurricanes in the North Atlantic – by looking back through records of the planet’s seismic noise. It’s an entirely new way to tap into the rich trove of seismic records, and the strategy might help establish a link between global warming and the frequency or intensity of hurricanes.

“Looking for something like hurricane records in seismology doesn’t occur to anybody,” said Carl Ebeling, of Northwestern University in Evanston. “It’s a strange and wondrous combination.”

The research is attempting to address a long-standing debate about whether the warming of sea-surface waters as a result of climate change is producing more frequent or more powerful hurricanes in the North Atlantic. It’s a tough question to answer.

Before satellite observations began in the 1960s, weather monitoring was spotty. Ships, planes, and land-based monitoring stations probably missed some hurricanes, which tend to last for about a week or so, Ebeling said. This type of uncertainty poses a problem for scientists, who can’t identify trends until they know what the actual numbers were.

To fill in the historical blanks, Ebeling and colleague Seth Stein are looking to seismic noise, an ever-present background signal that bathes the surface of the Earth. Seismic noise derives its energy from the atmosphere and then gets transmitted through the oceans into the solid earth, where it travels as waves. Seismometers record the noise as very low-amplitude wiggle patterns with much larger, obvious signals that come from earthquakes. Subtle changes in seismic noise frequency and amplitude have long been ignored.

Ebeling and Stein analyzed digital seismograms dating back to the early 90s from two monitoring stations: one in Harvard, Mass., and one in San Juan, Puerto Rico. For this study, the researchers looked at seismograms recorded during known hurricanes in an attempt to see whether patterns produced during hurricanes look predictably different from patterns produced during regular storms or when there are no storms at all.

Their preliminary results suggest that hurricanes do indeed produce recognizable patterns, and the waves generated by hurricanes travel large distances. The Harvard station recorded signals from Hurricane Andrew more than a thousand kilometers away.

“There’s definitely something there that shows this can be workable,” Ebeling said. “This is something new and interesting.”

At least one major hurdle remains before scientists will be able to pull together a complete hurricane history out of the seismic records. For most of the 20th century, seismograms recorded data on rolls of paper. Those records, which contain hundreds of thousands of hours of data, will need to be digitized. Ebeling is looking for an efficient way to do that.

###

ABSTRACT:

View abstract at http://gsa.confex.com/gsa/2009AM/finalprogram/abstract_161903.htm.

EXTENDING THE NORTH ATLANTIC HURRICANE RECORD USING SEISMIC NOISE

EBELING, Carl W. and STEIN, Seth, Earth and Planetary Sciences, Northwestern University, 1850 Campus Drive, Evanston, IL 60208-2150, carl@earth.northwestern.edu

An ongoing debate within the climatological community centers on whether rising sea-surface temperatures due to global warming are changing the frequency or energy of North Atlantic hurricanes. The historical record makes it difficult to answer this question because before the advent of satellite-based observations in the 1960s, storms that did not make landfall may have gone unobserved, making an undercount likely.

To address this issue, we are developing a methodology to improve the record of the number and energy of North Atlantic hurricanes by analyzing their signals on decades of historical seismograms. Seismic noise—signals derived from natural sources and not related to earthquakes—is generated by atmospheric energy and so has been used as a proxy for oceanic wave climate and an indication of decadal-scale climate variability. Hence seismic noise should be usable to detect hurricanes that may have gone unobserved and to estimate their energy. As a first step in developing such a methodology, we are using digital data from the HRV (Harvard, MA) and SJG (San Juan, PR) seismic stations to calibrate seismic noise signals correlated with maximum wind speeds of well-characterized North Atlantic hurricanes and investigate the development of a hurricane discriminant.

Preliminary analysis of seismic noise power shows a variation by about two orders of magnitude between the low noise levels of the summer and the high noise levels between late September and May. Although a hurricane signature is not apparent in raw HRV power data, band-pass filtering of data recorded during hurricane Andrew (August 1992) reveals a signal correlatable with Andrew’s maximum storm wind speed. Because non-hurricane storms also generate signals in this band, we are investigating a discrimination algorithm combining data from the two distant sites.

The climate data they don't want you to find — free, to your inbox.
Join readers who get 5–8 new articles daily — no algorithms, no shadow bans.
0 0 votes
Article Rating
45 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Don S.
October 20, 2009 9:04 pm

Ebeling and Stein, and perhaps the rest of us might just need to pull our respective crania out of our nether regions. How is it that nobody knows anything about anything that happened before they were born? Does nobody read anything anymore? http://www.hurricanehunters.com/history.htm

Norm/Calgary
October 20, 2009 9:21 pm

Let me get this straight, they’re looking to find more/missing hurricanes from the past. Since the 60’s we have a satellite record that if anything would show more hurricanes than the shipping lines. And we are definitely at the lowest ‘ACE’ in 30 years, so are they trying to show hurricanes have decreased relative to pre-satellite days, or that there were as many hurricanes in the old days? How are they going to cherry pick their data to prove AGW causes more and more intense hurricanes, obviously they mean today because the science is settled.

jorgekafkazar
October 20, 2009 9:55 pm

Norm/Calgary (21:21:55) : “Let me get this straight, they’re looking to find more/missing hurricanes from the past…How are they going to cherry pick their data to prove AGW causes more and more intense hurricanes(;) obviously they mean today because the science is settled.”
{sarc} You haven’t been paying attention, Norm. What they will do is construct a “robust” parallel hurricane history based on models and Seismo-vudutology and Mann-o-matic Statistics. Then they will take this new history, and “homogenize” the old hurricane history by removing “false hurricanes” from the official records. Vwallah! “Global Warming has been shown to cause more hurricanes… worse than we thought… QED… nyah-nyah-nyah.” {/sarc}

Imran
October 20, 2009 10:16 pm

Its just amazing. Massaging, creating or just making up information to prove something …… no doubt it will come out … a wild proxy measurement which wlll prove there were less hurricanes in the past …. and will then completely igonore the one robust data set we ave whoch is hurricances whioch ake landfall – particularly the 150 year record of the US Atlantic coast. Which shows there were more hurricanes during some of the past decades.

jorgekafkazar
October 20, 2009 10:32 pm

Just kidding, Imran.

p.g.sharrow "PG"
October 20, 2009 10:48 pm

Come on people where is your wonder? Some kids want to see if they can tease more information from old records. I think Pamela is right, this sounds cool.
More information is always good for us all. It’s how it is massaged later by others that might be a problem.

Tenuc
October 20, 2009 11:52 pm

There is much that still needs to be understood about hurricanes, and if using this proxy produces better historic information then it has to be good for science.
Trying to understand hurricanes and putting things in place to mitigate their destructive effects is much more worthwhile than wasting trillions in a futile attempt to change climate by reducing man-made CO2.

Editor
October 21, 2009 12:17 am

Who wants to bet these idiots will produce a seismic hurrican proxy that insists that there were fewer hurricanes than the actual weather records show? Money on how quickly the IPCC adopts this proxy while ignoring the weather record?

Boudu
October 21, 2009 1:07 am

I agree with Pam and PG. Collecting data is never a bad thing. Biased interpretation is the problem. This study can only add to our overall knowledge.
Kowledge and wisdom, however,are not interchangeable.

Alan the Brit
October 21, 2009 1:35 am

April Fool! What do I know, I just an engineer whoi works to 4 decimal places! (Actually, it’s more like – “that’s near enough”!)

Nick Yates
October 21, 2009 1:56 am

If the warmists believe that warming causes more hurricanes, then perhaps they’d agree that the current 30 year low in hurricane activity is proof that we now have global cooling.

MattN
October 21, 2009 3:13 am

Go ahead and let them find all the old storms they want. That will make the current decrease in activity even more pronounced. What they need to do to help their flimsy case is lose a few old storms…..

Indiana Bones
October 21, 2009 7:22 am

Do I smell grant money looking for something… anything to do?

October 21, 2009 7:28 am

Go ahead and let them find all the old storms they want. That will make the current decrease in activity even more pronounced. What they need to do to help their flimsy case is lose a few old storms…..
Sorry, forgot to add great post! Can’t wait to see your next post!

October 21, 2009 7:39 am

Pfft. Sounds like homeopathic methods with seismic data. A tincture of a tincture of a dataset. If you know what you’re doing, you can maybe find the most powerful current hurricanes, assuming you know where to look, start and end points, and have identified the other signals so you can eliminate them as factors. But *finding* an unknown event from a spotty, noisy record full of other, louder events?
I call horseshit.

October 21, 2009 7:53 am

“Looking for something like hurricane records in seismology doesn’t occur to anybody,” said Carl Ebeling, of Northwestern University in Evanston. “It’s a strange and wondrous combination.”
Is this like looking for temperature records in bristle cones????

October 21, 2009 7:56 am

Since we have current seismic activity on record, can that be matched to the real hurricane activity to prove/disprove this idea??

tty
October 21, 2009 10:54 am

I imagine it would not be too hard to use this proxy to get rid of a lot of hurricanes that did not make landfall. Many hurricanes will only have been reported by one or two ships that just passed on the outskirts of the hurricane (those that were hit dead centre probably did not have any opportunity to report anything afterwards).
“The absence of any seismic record is robust evidence that this storm never reached hurricane strength, it was just a tropical storm”
Easy, particularly since seismographs back in the pre-satellite era were pretty insensitive.

Mike M
October 21, 2009 11:55 am

Something just tells me that the paper rolls and original data will ultimately disappear leaving us with only the ‘homogenized data’ that proves global warming causes more hurricanes.

October 21, 2009 8:13 pm

Has anyone noticed the trend for all the reports coming out of Colorado whether it is hurricanes, or ocean heat, or midge studies or ….
There seems to be an orchestrated theme coming out of there … or is it just me that has noticed this.