While we wait for wacky antagonist Greg Laden to make a decision on whether he’ll chip and and help the relief effort, here are some useful bits of information that help put this storm into the perspective of “worst ever” claims, and opportunistic claims about it being a product of global warming, like Greenpeace is doing:

But, when you look at the science for tropical cyclones in the region, such claims don’t even begin to hold up. These two papers show the reality from data – no trend, either in landfall or in total frequency/intensity of storms:
Kubota, H. and Chan, J.C.L. 2009. Interdecadal variability of tropical cyclone landfall in the Philippines from 1902 to 2005. Geophysical Research Letters 36: 10.1029/2009GL038108.
“Despite global warming during the 20th century the number of tropical cyclones annually making landfall in the Philippines did not experience any net change. All variability was merely oscillatory activity around a mean trend of zero slope”
This is also backed up in Weinkle et al., 2012:
From currently available historical TC records, we constructed a long-period global hurricane landfall dataset using a consistent methodology. We have identified considerable interannual variability in the frequency of global hurricane landfalls; but within the resolution of the available data, our evidence does not support the presence of significant long-period global or individual basin linear trends for minor, major, or total hurricanes within the period(s) covered by the available quality data.
Therefore, our long-period analysis does not support claims that increasing TC landfall frequency or landfall intensity has contributed to concomitantly increasing economic losses.
Weinkle et al. Figure 2 A and C show the lack of trend:
Note that the WPAC represents the area including the Philippines:
It seems abundantly clear then that any claim trying to tie Typhoon Haiyan to a pattern of increased frequency of storms supposedly driven by “global warming” is patently false.
The news of Typhoon Haiyan is being bandied about in COP18 When Seth Borenstein doesn’t write articles for AP, here is the sort of balanced reporting you get: (h/t to Ryan Maue)
Typhoon Haiyan overshadows UN climate talks
http://bigstory.ap.org/article/typhoon-haiyan-overshadows-un-climate-talks
And, the Washington Post points out something that puts the tragedy of Haiyan in perspective:
Most weather experts expected reports of horrific damage and high loss of life given the intensity of the storm and geography of the affected areas, but not many were prepared when Philippine officials estimated that as many as 10,000 people may have died in Tacloban City alone when Haiyan struck.
If this death toll estimate holds up, however, it wouldn’t even put Haiyan in the top 35 deadliest tropical cyclones on record.
The most recent credible death toll report on Haiyan is 1,774:
Figures from the National Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Council showed the number of dead stood at 1,774, radio dzBB’s Paulo Santos reported.
Here is the top 35 list of Deadliest Cyclones from Weather Underground:
Better awareness, and better warnings thanks to technology combined with evacuations helped make Haiyan less of a tragedy than it could have been, though in the case of Tacloban, topography was the biggest factor in evacuations according to WaPo:
Mass evacuations of this sort are just not possible in some regions of the world, and this was certainly true of Tacloban and its surroundings. Many people in Tacloban were evacuated to sturdier buildings within the city itself, but due to the fact that the city lies on an island that is mostly mountainous, moving people out of the city and into other areas wasn’t possible.
For those that wish to help, see the Red Cross graphic on the WUWT sidebar, or follow this link: http://ushare.redcross.org.ph/






Wikipedia update: The article on this typhoon is now reporting it as “unofficially the strongest recorded tropical cyclone to make landfall”. A slight improvment from yesterdays wording.
Martin Wright, Auckland, New Zealand. says:…
Sorry to keep posting here, but this is really getting me upset. While posters like Martin keep using ambiguous terms like “intensity”, none of the CAGW guys will actualy point to a specific metric. Please Mr. Wright, can you tell us what metric you used to come to your “intensity” conclusion. I have reviewed several metrics and have yet to see a single one that suggests Typhoon Haiyan is anything but typical. (wind speed, central pressure, storm surge, diamiter, cost in terms of either human life, or property damage…) So please Mr. Wright, enlighten us!
PS, please don’t think I am uncarring, I feel deeply for the people who lost loved ones. However, using this as a cheep tool to advance the CAGW cause drives me nuts.
By the way, surface temperatures in New Zealand and Australia continue to climb.
Unsurprising, as the Southern Hemisphere is moving into summer. Get back to us next May or June.
I’m pleased that the death toll is far lower than the estimated 10k+. But still too high. And this is likely to grow far higher if the immediate response doesn’t improve dramatically in very short order.
***
Jeff in Calgary says:
November 13, 2013 at 6:38 am
Martin Wright, Auckland, New Zealand. says:…
OK, I realise you are likely just a troll
***
Here’s some choices:
http://www.politicsforum.org/images/flame_warriors/
I don’t think there have been enough dumb or smart ships over the centuries to be able to say which TC was baddest arsest. Also, my understanding is, our hurricane hunter planes don’t do freebies for other countries and this one was not measured using that method.
And this is likely to grow far higher if the immediate response doesn’t improve dramatically in very short order.
What does this mean, TomB?
After the cyclone I experienced there was an immediate response, but the dead were still dead and they died during the cyclone.
You cannot move a large number of people very quickly and cyclones/tropical storms are beyond our control.
Richard I assume you are not writing from Leyte. Corpses still haven’t been buried and the Philippine government has failed to respond effectively to this massive tragedy. A government has a moral responsibility to protect its citizens. The Philippine government failed dismally with tragic consequences. The government authorities were HOURS late in their warnings and instructions to evacuate and to move people. Now bodies rot in the streets while a corrupt government cant even mobilise vehicles to distribute food. The Filipinos deserve much better than this. And they deserve our compassion, prayers and support.
Martin Wright, Auckland, New Zealand. says:
November 13, 2013 at 1:43 am
I don’t know how you managed to miss all the discussion on this blog of the strength of this typhoon as well as the frequency of all tropical cyclones. Those whom you ought to doubt are the CACA advocates who made blatantly false claims about Yolanda in order to push their agenda, not Anthony Watts, who tried from the start both to discover the scientific facts of the case, while also facilitating contribution toward relief of the disaster in the PI.
There is an update on wind speed reporting here:
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/11/13/deconstructing-the-hype-on-super-typhoon-haiyan-yolanda/
Martin Wright
It is “poor taste” in whatever moral universe you inhabit to speak what is to you the inconvenient truth about the causes of unnecessary suffering? You make misinformed attacks on the integrity and honesty of Anthony Watts in the cause of a morally bankrupt warmist movement? Mate, you call yourself an “ordinary” bloke. In Australia we use the word “ordinary” sometimes as a pejorative. Your self description in that sense fits perfectly.
A government has a moral responsibility to protect its citizens
May I suggest that you take up the task of ensuring that all governments fulfill this moral responsibility you have allocated to them. I hope that Rosinante will put up with you.
Mate I have bet on slower and more broken down nags than Rosinante. I am sure we will get on just fine.