Scott Mandia aka Supermandia crows in his Twitter feed this AM:
The graph from Weather Underground’s Masters of Disaster, Dr. Jeff Masters, follows. But there’s only one problem – one very important storm is missing from the list.
Hurricane expert Dr. Ryan Maue immediately points out:
And, then adds a reference list. But, watch how Supermandia put his foot in his mouth just like media did on confusing what units typhoon wind speed is reported in:
Source: https://twitter.com/AGW_Prof/status/400661282543513600
185 mph equals 160 knots, anyone who knows how to use Google can do this conversion easily by simply typing in this in the Google search box: 185mph to knots
You get this:
https://www.google.com/search?q=185mph+to+knots&ie=utf-8
And there are other confusing elements to the wind speed story. More on that later. Adding to the confusion, tt is also important to note that there have been THREE super typoon Joans, one in 1959, one in 1970, and one in 1997, plus a minor storm named Joan in 1964.
Supertyphoon Joan in 1959 was far stronger (160knots) than the one in 1970 (150knots) which Masters referenced in his list.
Related articles
- Some historical perspectives on Typhoon Haiyan-Yolanda (wattsupwiththat.com)
- Climate Craziness of the Week: A note to ‘Supermandia’ – Mother Nature doesn’t even need Kryptonite to squish you like a bug (wattsupwiththat.com)
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
the stupid hurts…almost as much as the crookedness
I appreciate Scott’s response to being corrected. That is the correct way to respond. Thanks for the post.
When I worked at the JTWC back in the 1980s, we had sat pics of Super Typhoon Pamela in 1976. From the northeast quadrant to the southwest quadrant it measured nearly 2500 miles. The eye was close to 50nm in diameter. It went off the Dvorak scales, but estimates put it above what hit the PI. Pamela never made landfall (we can thank God for that). And it was not mentioned in this piece.
So what was the max speed anyway? I can only find reference to 150mph.
Mandia looks good at the end, How hard was that?
I have a much used book by Hubert Lamb entitled’ Historic Storms of the North Sea British Isles and Northwest Europe.’ In it storms back to the 1500’s are noted together with synoptic charts.
The typhoon data all seemed to relate to post 1950 which is hardly extensive.
If someone will link me to credible typhoon data post 1850 and the same info for pre 1850 events I will try and draw up a chart and determine whether the post 1850 one are larger than those that went before.
Can anyone supply the information, or are we all discussing only the most recent 60 year slice of typhoon history which proves nothing whatsoever about their strength relative to historic events.
tonyb
Mandia made a mistake and acknowledged it. What’s wrong with that? It happens to all of us. Making a blog post out of it just makes you look bad.
James,
Mandia has made a MAJOR, long running mistake in his promotion of climate alarmism.
When he acknowledges that mistake, I’ll pay more attention.
Yes, when someone doesn’t know something, and when shown the right way, says thanks and acknowledges that he learned something, that is good. Kind of 180 degrees from Michael Mann and his cronies. So props to Mandia.
Props also to Ryan Maue and the others, who say we need a comprehensive, long term, peer reviewed paper to know if 195 is the tops. It might be, or it might be tops only within the last several decades, or it might not be tops at all (given that Camille broke the wind speed indicator at 190 mph).
Anyway, Haiyan was obviously extremely powerful. On thing that iis important to me is whether we had storms this powerful in, or coming out of, the Little Ice Age. There is certainly evidence of powerful major storms in that period, but to determine wind speed isn’t possible, it would only be possible to guessestimate based upon how big storm surges were, back in the day, and to compare if possible to Haiyan’s and Camille’s.
That is basic science that could be done. Ryan????
climatereason says:
November 13, 2013 at 11:00 am
Check Steve Goddard’s site. He has some info that may be of use.
Yes, props to Mandia. Is this worth a blog post?
Since when is there such a thing as a “Super Typhoon”? I thought a typhoon was a typhoon. Next we need a “Super Duper Typhoon” moniker for the first storm that clocks (unofficially, as always) 196 mph. And what moniker comes after that?
Gosh, I read now on Wikipedia that “Super Typhoon” (coined by Hong Kong Observatory) is indeed a typhoon with winds of 100 knots. The US JTWC requires 130 knots for that classification.
Maybe Super Mandia would know.
(Probably the super was used to link it to superstorm Sandy and to the warmist meme of more severe storms.)
A large portion of my extended family (my in-laws) are from the island that was hit by the typhoon. Naturally I was reading the newspapers from the Philippines and so I learned that the Philippines government said the typhoon made landfall at 146 mph. (converted from kph)
God damn it. What does it take to get such a simple thing straight?
Jeff Masters is terrible.
The death toll of ~2500 is a fair indication the actual winds were a lot lower than 195 mph. Looking at the photos, many relatively insubstantial (by US standard) buildings are still standing. I believe the guesstimates of 10,000 deaths was based on the expectations that 195 mph would literally flatten the city of Tacloban, and it clearly didn’t. Many houses still retain most of their roof. The damage I see in photos might be consistent with 150 mph winds. My subjective impression only.
Has Mandia corrected the graphic?
No.
Has anyone addressed the 150 mph vs 195 mph discrepancy?
Have they addressed the differences between Haiyan (estimated by satellite) and the other large storms like Camille, TIp, and Allen (measured with aircraft)?
Mark Stoval said;
God damn it. What does it take to get such a simple thing straight?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Nothing!!…but the truth, clearly those with agenda’s find it hard to speak this simple thing
Hanlon’s Razor says “Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.”
Of course, when they team up together, anything can happen.
Check out this page – nifty interactive photos of before/after aerial photos. Not nearly so nifty on the ground, I’m sure.
http://mobile.abc.net.au/news/specials/typhoon-haiyan-photos-before-after/
When malice and stupidity conjoin, there’s usually the Devil to pay.
As it would appear from most reports that it as geography and storm surge that killed most of the casualties then the actual wind speed could look kinda moot.
I do wish that people would stop using this terrible event to promote THEIR particular AGW view (in either direction).
I also wish that everybody would get their facts straight before speaking out, but that is always going to be a futile wish.
My thoughts go to those still suffering the outcomes.
I’m happy Mandia acknowledged his error. And I love WU because the weather data is always so good. But Masters is really walking off the train with his promotion of climate alarmism.
Wow! I read this post and already the apologists for Mandia are here in full force. They were even faster than the Greg Laden Posse.
Madman2001, James, pokerguy, Tim Walker. When will you ever come out and admit Mandia was wrong about ANYTHING?