Throwback Thursday #5 – failed global warming driven hurricane predictions 10 years after Katrina

Oh the mighty media quoting the mighty scientists…have fallen flat on their face. Here’s a collection of failed predictions in the wake of Hurricane Katrina:

In 2006, CBS’s Hannah Storm Claims Katrina-like Storms Will Happen ‘All Along Our Atlantic and Gulf Coastlines.’ Just five days before Hurricane Katrina’s one year anniversary, CBS news anchor Hannah Storm featured climate alarmist Mike Tidwell on The Early Show to discuss his book, “The Ravaging Tide.” “I think the biggest lesson from Katrina a year later is that those same ingredients, you know, a city below sea level hit by a major hurricane, will be replicated by global warming all along our Atlantic and Gulf Coast lines,” Tidwell said on August 24, 2006. Tidwell then went on to claim that cities all along the coast would be underwater due to increased hurricane activity and intensity “unless we stop global warming.” In a 2009 Washington Post op-ed, Tidwell explained just how far he thought people should go to “stop global warming.” After comparing the current global warming problem to the civil rights movement of the 1960s, he insisted that “After years of delay and denial and green half-measures, we must legislate a stop to the burning of coal, oil and natural gas.”

‘No End In Sight’ For Big Hurricanes, CBS Says Less than a month after Katrina made landfall, CBS anchor Russ Mitchell predicted that there would be “continued high levels of hurricane activity and high levels of hurricane landfalls for the next decade or perhaps even longer.” “For years now, experts have been saying we’ve entered a period of increased hurricane activity that may last a long time.” Mitchell said on the Sept. 22, 2005 Early Show. Later in the broadcast he added, “since 1990, the number of big hurricanes in the Gulf is up again, and there’s no end in sight.” Now, a decade later that prediction looks laughable since there hasn’t been a major hurricane (Category 3 or higher) to make landfall since October of 2005, when Hurricane Wilma struck Florida.

NBC Blames Global Warming for Stronger Hurricanes, Says It’s ‘A Trend That’s Likely To Continue’ In the weeks following Katrina, NBC turned to global warming as the hurricane’s cause. On September 18, 2005, Nightly News anchor John Seigenthaler said, “scientists studying the earth’s climate say we are experiencing stronger hurricanes in this century, a trend that’s likely to continue.” NBC’s chief science correspondent Robert Bazell continued, asking: “Was Katrina a warning of more terrible hurricanes in the next few years?” Bazell admitted “one storm cannot prove anything about climate change,” but claimed the projected ocean temperature rise would cause more severe storms through the end of the century. That NBC report included climatologist Stephen Schneider who said, “humans won’t make the storms, but we can make them a little stronger than they otherwise would have been.”

Looking back, it’s easy to see how wrong the networks were. In 2008, The National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) responded to climate change assumptions about hurricanes saying, “There is nothing in the U.S. hurricane damage record that indicates global warming has caused a significant increase in destruction along our coasts.” As the years passed, the more obvious it was that fewer major hurricanes were hitting land. In April 2015, the American Geophysical Union reported that the United States has been in a nine year Atlantic hurricane landfall drought. A record low. AGU said, “Such a remarkable ‘hurricane drought’ has never been seen before – since records began in 1851 … the last major hurricane – of Category 3 or higher – to make landfall in the U.S. was Hurricane Wilma in 2005.” Research by meteorologists Anthony Watts and Ryan Maue, and environmental studies professor Roger Pielke, Jr. showed the same hurricane drought and an overall slump in tropical cyclone activity throughout the world. Chris Landsea, who is the Science and Operations Officer for the National Hurricane Center at NOAA, tweeted skeptically about a hurricane/climate change link in May 2015:

– See more at:

The reality is this:


And the number is still growing.

Throwback Thursday” is a regular WUWT feature highlighting past claims of climate doom made by scientists, pundits, and alarmist activists…that have not come true. It’s a bit of a take off from the “Throwback Thursday” on Facebook, where people post old pictures from their past, except here, it’s not just the age, it’s the fact that these lousy predictions really do deserve to be “thrown back” into the faces of the people that made them.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
August 27, 2015 12:03 pm

If CBS is concerned for coastal cities and hurricanes, it would provide a 10 year follow-up to its prior stories. Waiting….

August 27, 2015 12:04 pm

The lack of introspection seems ironic from a media that prides itself on being so independent and thorough.

Roy Spencer
August 27, 2015 12:08 pm

Not the media’s fault. They are just reporting what the “experts” say. 😉

Louis Hunt
Reply to  Roy Spencer
August 27, 2015 1:36 pm

But it is the media’s fault which experts they choose to listen to. Not all ‘experts’ get equal treatment.

Reply to  Roy Spencer
August 27, 2015 4:03 pm

Expert … as in ex-spurt: an old drip under pressure.

Reply to  bobburban
August 27, 2015 4:30 pm

LOL, I have always wondered what a “pert” is. Don’t you have to be a “pert” to become an expert?

Reply to  bobburban
August 27, 2015 4:42 pm

I heard it defined as ex: out to a far degree. Spurt a drop of water under pressure. Ergo a “way out drip under pressure”.

Reply to  bobburban
August 27, 2015 8:48 pm

Expert: No longer pertinent.

Reply to  Roy Spencer
August 28, 2015 1:10 am

Of 100 studies published in top-ranking journals in 2008, 75% of social psychology experiments and half of cognitive studies failed the replication test.

Reply to  Roy Spencer
August 28, 2015 2:32 am

>>Not the media’s fault.
Never heard of ‘investigative reporting’?
One of the prime functions of the press is supposed to be to act as a guardian of truth and integrity within the political and commercial spheres. And now, since scientists can no longer be trusted, also within the sphere of science. The MSM is not doing its job, if if does not look behind the headlines on the press release.
And if you think about it, this is the whole reason for WUWT existing. If the MSM had done its job from day one, WUWT would only have five or six followers; and the success of WUWT demonstrates that the MSM have been complicit in the AGW scaaam since day one.

Reply to  ralfellis
August 28, 2015 3:38 am

While one of the prime functions of the press may have been to act as a guardian of truth, it’s prime function today is to gain revenue through advertising dollars.
News is entertainment and end of the world stories, death, scandal and tales of tragic woe is what drives news ratings. No one (except on this site) is going to click on or watch a news story of hurricanes no longer being a big deal, most people instead will click on stories about lethal destructive hurricanes, which then gives alarmists their in; The destructive nature and profile of hurricanes are due to [insert favorite climate/CO2 nonsense here] .

Caligula Jones
Reply to  ralfellis
August 28, 2015 7:37 am

Well, you don’t expect the media to pull anyone off the Caitlin Jenner beat to cover lesser important news, do you?

Sun Spot
Reply to  ralfellis
August 28, 2015 10:44 am

Ralph, the media is the problem with cAGW, they are now the plural sectors mouth piece. If they are now beginning to realize they made a mistake, they have been so liberal left wing righteous that they now can’t climb down without looking like the fools they are.

Reply to  Roy Spencer
September 3, 2015 11:38 am

But…But… not peer reviewed.

Roy Spencer
August 27, 2015 12:10 pm

…one thing I remember distinctly as in 2006 EVERY system was going to intensify, like in 2005. It was obvious NHC was fooled into thinking the hurricane climate had suddenly changed. It didn’t happen.

Reply to  Roy Spencer
August 28, 2015 1:16 am

I think Katrina freaked everyone out. The huge red storm maps of Katrina barreling in on New Orleans in the Gulf and the following hurricanes one after another, like Ivan. Especially after the hype of Gore and his book..

Reply to  RD
August 28, 2015 3:27 pm

Katrina wasn’t the first big storm, In the previous 10 to 2o years there had been many storms that were as big or bigger. The only difference was a big storm finally hit a very vulnerable spot.
What mattered is that Katrina hit after the big run up in climate change talk. Prior storms didn’t matter because the public relations climate had not been set up yet.

Reply to  MarkW
August 28, 2015 3:54 pm

The only difference was a big storm finally hit a very vulnerable spot.
What mattered is that Katrina hit after the big run up in climate change talk. Prior storms didn’t matter because the public relations climate had not been set up yet.

What mattered is that Katrina hit a black-democrat-controlled corrupt-city in a black-democrat-controlled-corrupt-county in a black-democrat-controlled corrupt state while a white, republican president was in office when a big run up in climate change talk was needed to destroy that president by the democrat new media.

Lady Gaiagaia
Reply to  RD
August 28, 2015 3:56 pm

The do-nothing Democrat governor and mayor got no blame despite deserving it all, while Bush and Brown got it all, while deserving none.

sysiphus /
Reply to  Roy Spencer
August 28, 2015 6:48 pm

Which, speaking strictly scientifically, Dr. Spencer, means the conjecture of Co2 is incorrect. The failed predictions are innumerable. What is happening in reality, bears no resemblance to the frightnening picture that had been painted.

sysiphus /
Reply to  Roy Spencer
August 28, 2015 6:50 pm

Hurricanes being just one aspect.

NZ Willy
August 27, 2015 12:28 pm

The red trend line is nonsense. Remove it or be haunted by it.

The Original Mike M
Reply to  NZ Willy
August 27, 2015 12:46 pm

I agree and asked about it a few days back, time is represented but in an obscure way.
A scatter plot and correlation factor for elapsed drought days versus global temperature (average for each period) would be more useful IMO.

Reply to  NZ Willy
August 27, 2015 9:32 pm

Agreed !
Firstly a “trend line” is meaningless on frequency histogram.
Secondly, trend lines should be banned from climate discussions unless those that use them explain why they assuming that a linear model is appropriate for the data. Going along with the “trend line” trend simply justifies and reinforces this ignorant practice.
Thirdly it actually obscures what information may be there by distracting the eye and attempting to force a conclusion in the reader’s mind. ( As is the usual intent of this technique).
The graph would be more effective with just the blue line showing the current hurricane drought is “unprecedented”.

August 27, 2015 12:40 pm

There is possibility of hurricane prediction based on the past changes in the Arctic atmospheric pressure
mechanism of the correlation between two is not very clear, but it could be result of the partial up-welling of the conveyor current off the West Africa.

Eyes Wide Open
August 27, 2015 12:44 pm

Just my luck, first US land falling hurricane in 10 years is supposed to hit next week while I am vacationing with family in Florida . . .

The Original Mike M
Reply to  Eyes Wide Open
August 27, 2015 12:49 pm

Bring some sheets of plywood along. comment image

Reply to  Eyes Wide Open
August 27, 2015 2:59 pm

Just my luck, first US land falling hurricane in 10 years is supposed to hit next week while I am vacationing with family in Florida . . .

No, no, no. The hurricane next week will hit as a CATEGORY 1 (or maybe only as a tropical storm, it’s early to be certain). It may end up doing a fair bit of damage as it looks like the eye is going to graze the coast just offshore, which is one of the worst patterns as far as beach erosion damage is concerned, but it is unlikely to be even close to catastrophic, and in Florida people will take it seriously but probably not panic as they get hit by cat 1’s or 2’s all the time, more than any other state. It looks like the hurricane MIGHT come north and visit us in NC after that, as we are either 2nd or 3rd most likely to get hit, sticking way out almost into the Gulf Stream as we do. Again, a grazing track would be bad as far as beach damage and storm surge is concerned but:
Last summer I was staying on the NC coast when Hurricane Arthur went literally overhead as a category one. I mean, I went outside into the eye (dead calm after being hit by 60-80 mile per hour winds for four hours) and went back in as the next four hours of 60-70 mile and hour winds the other direction whacked us. It knocked down some trees, took shingles off of roofs, took out electrical power for hours to as long as a couple of days, hurt no one, and caused almost no expensive property damage. There was noise about it being a category 2 — apparently a single weather station on Cape Lookout recorded a single burst around 100 mph — but trust me, it was category 1 — no other station or time including ones right by the eye registered anything over around 80.
That’s not to say you should take the hurricane lightly. Hurricanes can and do spawn tornadoes in their wind/rain bands and a tornado can ruin your day real fast. If it hits at the wrong time (e.g. high spring tide) the additional storm surge can be very damaging. No hurricane should be taken lightly. But the top article is about category three or higher storms storms with sustained winds over 110 mph (or higher). These are “wrath of god” hurricanes that can lift you straight up into the air from the wind alone and can blow a house over. Category three hurricanes sometimes lift small boats completely out of the water and drop them inland. Category five hurricanes (157 mph winds and up) can strip and scour the land of anything higher than a shrub — trees, houses, all gone. The storm surges and rainfall (which do a lot if not most of the damage from flooding) are commensurately greater as well. Sandy did a lot of damage as a wussy category one because it was very large for category 1, slow moving, and amplified a spring tide.
No category three or higher hurricanes have hit in almost ten years (ten years in October IIRC). Damn few category threes or fours have hit the US mainland at all — they aren’t COMMON in the open ocean, but they tend to slow down from interaction with the land as they get near shore. Only three fives, a handful of (all famous!) fours, a smattering of threes. Some of them, like Floyd, were category 4 or 5 at peak out in the Atlantic somewhere and came ashore as a one or two, but STILL did catastrophic damage because of the rain they dropped. Floyd dropped over a foot of rain on central NC in a matter of hours, and caused “500 year” (estimated to occur once in 500 years) flooding of all the major river basins in the state, killing over 50 people and leaving thousands of square miles of farmland and people’s houses underwater as rivers swelled from a couple of hundred feet wide to ten miles wide overnight (remember, you can’t take any hurricane lightly!)
The deadliest hurricane on record in the US was the great Galveston hurricane back before there was weather prediction in 1900. It killed over 8000 people (nobody knows exactly how many, estimates range up as high as 12000). It was the deadliest weather disaster in US history. Its damage was only $150 million in 1900 dollars, but it would be tens of billions of dollars in modern currency. The damage and death toll were because a) nobody knew it was coming; b) it came ashore and peaked as a category 4 at landfall at night; c) it produced a huge storm surge that caught most of Galveston’s citizens at home and with nowhere to go, if they thought to run at all before it was too late; d) at the time, Galveston was a “Disney World” sort of place with a railroad track that ran parallel to the coast out over the water. The hurricane knocked down the track right away, and proceeded to drive the steel track inshore with every wave so that it literally sliced the houses off at the base, eventually becoming a mass of tangled steel that twisted in with house debris that rolled and built up like a snowball, getting thicker and more filled with metal, timber, and crushed human bodies as it went, all night long. The next day, Galveston was erased, as were most of its inhabitants. It took them nightmarish weeks to untwist and untangle the wreckage, in hot, moist Gulf conditions. Many bodies rotted before they could be recovered. Others were simply gone, swept out to sea.
So category 3, 4 and 5 are all baaaad. Even with modern day warning, even with far safer construction, winds over 110 mph and storm surges as high as 20 feet, you do NOT want to do what we did and try to ride out a cat 3 storm under the eye in a house whose back yard has a dock facing straight into the ocean.
As far as frequency goes. In 1954, there were three category three storms to hit the US, Carol, Edna, and Hazel, in span of a month and a half. I remember Hazel (well, not really) because my mother (as she reported it) literally raced the hurricane from the coast home to Raleigh — pregnant with me. People have short memories — Carol did $400+ million of damage — in 1954! Nobody knows what Edna did, as it hit New England (which might as well have been wilderness at the time — not enough people or property to build up a big toll if there had been any counting). Hazel did $281 million.
Hurricane Fran — my personal favorite — came ashore in NC in 1996 as a category 3 storm. Once again, the eye passed almost over my head (but not quite — it passed maybe 40 miles east of where I live as a by then category 1 storm). Not as bad a hurricane as Hazel, in other words. Nevertheless it did $3.2 billion in damage, killed 27 people. We were without power (or refrigeration, or air conditioning) for a week, and it was two days before we could actually get out of our neighborhood as five foot thick pin oaks were scattered like matchsticks across the roads, usually with power lines twisted around them. We live around 150 miles as the crow flies from the coast, note well.
So be joyful. Every year without a major making landfall is a blessing. Hurricanes are one of the most devastating experiences in nature, making up with their breadth what they sometimes give up to tornadoes with their peak winds.

Reply to  rgbatduke
August 27, 2015 4:45 pm

Oh there was weather prediction. Read “Issac’s Storm”. The Cubans knew it was headed into the Gulf and the Weather Bureau in Washington ignored them.

John F. Hultquist
Reply to  rgbatduke
August 27, 2015 11:12 pm

Report of FL with already saturated ground. They will need to roll up their pants.

Richard Keen
Reply to  rgbatduke
August 27, 2015 11:28 pm

rgb, thanks for the trip down memory lane. I do remember Hazel, and being let out of school at noon so the buses could get us home before there were trees down all over the place. That was in Philadelphia, and on our block tall oaks were flattened across our street in both directions. Hazel remains the northernmost Cat 4 landfall in US history. Since it couldn’t have been due to global warming back in ’54, it had to be caused by atomic testing. At least that’s what the academic wiseacres were saying the time, and such claims were an easy way to get your name in the paper without killing someone.
And as for Carol, my reminisces somehow snuck into a WUWT article on blizzards,
When those two storms were over I knew I wanted to be a meteorologist, before the age of eight.
So 1954 was an epochal hurricane season. All three of those storms hit North Carolina. Then there were three more the next year – that’s six hitting the same state in two years!

Reply to  rgbatduke
August 28, 2015 1:27 am

The hurricane next week will hit as a CATEGORY 1 (or maybe only as a tropical storm,
I’ve experienced tropical storm warnings and 80 mph winds in the mountains of western NC after Ivan. Significant storm for all from Fl, to Gulf to NC mountains. Big wind and flooding. Sporty no doubt.

Steve Reddish
Reply to  rgbatduke
August 29, 2015 3:28 pm

Just checked the predictions for Erika’s expected path 3 times per day over the previous 3 days. Each prediction had Erika immediately heading off toward Florida even though it was not headed that way at the moment. Not a prediction that Erika would change course, but that it was currently (at the time the prediction was made) on course to hit Florida. The track on the map would head WNW, while Erika was noted as heading due W. Of course, within a few hours, Erika would move out of alignment with the mapped track. It would be replaced with a new track heading WNW off to Florida even though Erika was still proceeding W.
It looked like wishful thinking or scaremongering was in play.

Reply to  Eyes Wide Open
August 27, 2015 5:10 pm

“…supposed to hit next week…” If it makes it that far. There is an old frontal boundary between it and land. Hurricanes typically don’t fare very well when they tangle with them. The transition to extra-tropical is not always a smooth process, plus there it dryer air behind that frontal boundary. Watching the “news” head yammering about Hispaniola, I wonder, would the mountain range create a dry pocket of air in the path of the storm as it draws air in across the mountain range and wrings the moisture out?

Reply to  Eyes Wide Open
August 28, 2015 3:31 pm

Each subsequent track has the storm getting weaker and weaker. In the most recent one it’s a TS when it hits Florida, and only a tropical depression by the time it reaches Orlando. If it keeps dropping at this rate, it will only bring clouds and a few breezes by the time it hits on Tuesday.

Jan Christoffersen
Reply to  Eyes Wide Open
August 28, 2015 5:15 pm

Just checked NOAA’s hurricane website and Erika has disappeared (5:15 pm PDT}. Huh?

Steve Reddish
Reply to  Jan Christoffersen
August 29, 2015 3:32 pm

Just checked the predictions for Erika’s expected path 3 times per day over the previous 3 days. Each prediction had Erika immediately heading off toward Florida even though it was not headed that way at the moment. Not a prediction that Erika would change course, but that it was currently (at the time the prediction was made) on course to hit Florida. The track on the map would head WNW, while Erika was noted as heading due W. Of course, within a few hours, Erika would move out of alignment with the mapped track. It would be replaced with a new track heading WNW off to Florida even though Erika was still proceeding W.
It looked like wishful thinking or scaremongering was in play.
(this was supposed to go here, not above)

August 27, 2015 12:46 pm

Latest edition of Pop Sci has a brief article on hurricanes. According to “climate scientists” the absence of hurricanes the past ten years is just dumb luck. However, the presence of hurricanes is 100 percent man caused climate change.

The Original Mike M
Reply to  Nicholas Schroeder
August 27, 2015 1:07 pm

The Baushke’s built a car in 1894 and POOF! … it warmed the planet and flattened Galveston only six years later with USA’s first hurricane evah!

August 27, 2015 12:52 pm

There was a time not so long ago that every thunderstorm out in the Atlantic seemed to turn into a hurricane and we had them coming from all directions here in North Carolina. Obviously there are cycles to these things and some time in the future we will return to more hurricanes per year. Just like a lot of other cycles in nature.
It would be great to understand their “real” causes and prepare better. And maybe it will happen. But in the meantime, prior predictions of mayhem have not materialized but I’m sure when the spigot gets turned on again, our chicken little friends will be on TV and the Internet telling us how doomed we all are.

John S
August 27, 2015 12:53 pm

After another unproductive season for the fearmongers it will be discovered that AGW actually causes fewer hurricanes. ‘we realize we left out an important factor and now we know that fewer hurricanes are a sure evidence of global warming. All scientists agree.’
Or ‘the hurricanes are hiding at the bottom of the ocean, they are actually bigger and stronger than ever’

Bruce Cobb
August 27, 2015 12:54 pm

A whopper of a hurricane making landfall in the US in the next couple months or so would be great for the upcoming climate clownfest. Maybe if they pray to Gaia…

Steve Case
Reply to  Bruce Cobb
August 28, 2015 7:12 am

And you can bet they are praying for a big one to hit.

Mark from the Midwest
August 27, 2015 1:09 pm

Remember that Katrina would not have been a memorable event except for the fact that the 9th Ward of New Orleans is at zero feet above sea level and the Industrial Canal has an average elevation of 12 feet. Last time I checked my fact-o-meter it told me that water, given half a chance, will run downhill.
Most of the damage was man-made, and 100 years in the making, due to the hubris of humans who believe that they can reliably apply controls to nature.

Reply to  Mark from the Midwest
August 27, 2015 2:02 pm

Mark, they would have you believe that the entire world consists of only the 9th ward…..Katrina hit Mississippi, not NO….and did catastrophic damage in Mississippi and all along the gulf coast….no one in the media covered it

Gunga Din
Reply to  Latitude
August 27, 2015 2:16 pm

Politics was also involved. The governor of Louisiana didn’t ask for the feds help in “a timely manner”. The feds (Bush) couldn’t legally send help until it was asked for. An opportunity to blame Bush that was too good to pass up.
(Please note I said “involved”. I don’t mean it was the only factor in the media coverage.)

Tom in Florida
Reply to  Latitude
August 27, 2015 7:00 pm

Yes, even though Katrina came ashore down to a Cat 3 it still carried the storm surge of the Cat 5 it was in the Gulf. And that surge hit Miss head on. Several years later I encountered a gentleman who had his house vanish but still had not settled the insurance because FEMA claimed it was blown away by winds and therefor private wind insurance should pay but the private wind insurance company (State Farm as I recall) insisted it was storm surge that destroyed the house so FEMA Flood Insurance should pay. There was no evidence left to determine what really happened.

Reply to  Latitude
August 28, 2015 2:46 am

Hmm – looks like if you move the building-line back by 300m, everyone would be fine. It kinda suggests that these disasters are led by greed and vanity – the need to have the closest condo to the shore, and the need for developers to sell that valuable land to the gullible.
I have to say that this is one area where socialist systems often work better than capitalist ones. A decent socialist administration would say “ok, nothing closer than 500m from the shore”; whereas a capitalist system often results in a development free-for-all driven by cash. I went to a large lake in Virginia once, only to find that the public access to the whole lake was just a slipway some 10m wide!! Everything else was private. Whaaa?? Crazy country.

Reply to  Latitude
August 28, 2015 3:39 pm

ralfellis, you seem to suffer from the belief that a socialist system would actually listen to the experts.
The only difference between a socialist system and a capitalist one would be that under the capitalist system, the richest people get to have their houses right on the beach. Under a socialist one, the people with the beach houses would be limited to those who had the most political pull.
BTW, we already do have a socialist system in many aspects, as those who build their houses in such areas are not paying for their own insurance, they are being subsidized by the rest of us.

Reply to  Mark from the Midwest
August 28, 2015 8:02 am

It was the debris from the buildings that stopped the surge

August 27, 2015 1:15 pm

Anyone who frets about not enough hurricanes hitting the US is a sociopath and should seek counseling.

Gunga Din
Reply to  KTM
August 27, 2015 1:37 pm

I’m not sure “fret” is the right word.
The “settled science” predicted more and stronger hurricanes but it didn’t happen.
Those a bit unsettled by that fact also appear to be unfazed. They prefer we forget what they said rather than “fret”.
They only fret when we don’t forget, which is the point of “Throwback Thursday”.

Warren Latham
August 27, 2015 1:25 pm

Thank you (again) AW ! Splendid article.
A brilliant “throw back” article which I hope will puncture all the Parisites’ balloons.
These “AW” throw-back articles need to be publicly and globally launched (by ALL electronic means) just before the Parisite Goon-fest.
Perhaps at the end of each “throw-back” piece there could be a simple QUESTION (aimed at the public) such as … “Do you really know what carbon-dioxide is ?” … followed by a FEW SHORT FACTS.
I’m sure that a meteorologist, a scientist and a geologist would be able to phrase such facts appropriately.
Thank you again.
PS: A cool / cold (not really warm) summer here in England.

Louis Hunt
August 27, 2015 1:29 pm

Just as I suspected, Hannah Storm was born Hannah Lynn Storen. She changed her on-air name to Storm back in the 80’s. Apparently, she wanted people to think of her as a mutant superhero or something.

Reply to  Louis Hunt
August 27, 2015 2:59 pm

Related perhaps to Tempest Storm?

Reply to  Nicholas Schroeder
August 27, 2015 9:37 pm

For those who say “Tempest who?”

Karl W. Braun
Reply to  Nicholas Schroeder
August 27, 2015 11:51 pm

Or Gale Storm, perhaps.

David Chappell
Reply to  Nicholas Schroeder
August 28, 2015 12:25 am

But more probably to Teacup Storm

Reply to  Nicholas Schroeder
August 28, 2015 4:54 am

Tempest…..One of the greatest video games back in the day! (Sorry….couldn’t resist)

Peter Miller
August 27, 2015 1:33 pm

I wish I could remember where I saw this:
‘Scientist’ and ‘doctor’ are both respected terms and honourable occupations, but if you put the word ‘climate’ in front of the first and ‘witch’ in front of the second you get a totally different, but similar, meaning.

Salvatore Del Prete
August 27, 2015 1:33 pm

Soon we will be talking about the downward falling global temperature trends and show how the media said it will be getting warmer.

Reply to  Salvatore Del Prete
August 27, 2015 2:22 pm

After the big scary El Nino spike coming before the end of 2015.

August 27, 2015 1:36 pm


2. Error in the Old Elevation: Due to regional subsidence, the previously published elevations were inaccurate. We don’t really know the true elevation of the monument used for design and construction. This was caused when NGS performed local leveling and adjusted those measurements to marks that were assumed to be stable. Because the marks held fixed were in fact subsiding, the fixed elevations were inaccurate which caused all elevations in the local network to become obsolete. This amount of error is unknown.
3. Subsidence: Southern Louisiana is sinking due to many factors. This process causes our vertical control to become inaccurate as the elevations change, unless monitored. Until now, long level lines would have had to been performed every few years at the cost of $1500/mile from a stable region, such as Pensacola FL, to monitor the movement of the control network. GPS and Continuously Operating Reference Stations (CORS) can now be used to monitor the changes and is currently being used by the New Orleans District.
Because we do not know the amount of error that existed in the benchmarks, we can not derive the amount of subsidence that has occurred between construction and today.
It’s important to understand that the amount of change in elevation does not reflect the amount of settlement or subsidence.
The change in Datum is a change in where we measure from to establish elevations on structures, benchmarks, etc. The datum shift from NGVD29 to NAVD88 is not constant. The datum surfaces are not parallel and therefore vary with the location. A datum change does not change the relationship of the levee heights to the water. Please see the explanation below………
It is not a simple problem !!!!!!!!!!!!

Dave Wendt
August 27, 2015 1:42 pm

“Tidwell said on August 24, 2006. Tidwell then went on to claim that cities all along the coast would be underwater due to increased hurricane activity and intensity “unless we stop global warming.””

DD More
Reply to  Dave Wendt
August 27, 2015 3:12 pm

Add the first part of her statement – “that those same ingredients, you know, a city below sea level hit by a major hurricane,
Wiki list cities below sea level and except for Death Valley and the Salton Sea area, not known hurricane haunts, that only leaves – New Orleans, Louisiana, USA [−2 m (−7 ft)]

Gunga Din
Reply to  DD More
August 27, 2015 3:28 pm

Doesn’t New Orleans have a zoning commission?
And where has the EPA been? They come down on private citizens for draining wetlands. You’d think they’d jump at the opportunity to target an entire city.
(Maybe that would displace too many illegal voters?)

Reply to  DD More
August 28, 2015 3:43 pm

Most of NO wasn’t below sea level when it was built. Subsistence, not rising seas are the problem down there. Though the 6 inches or so of rise over the last 100 years hasn’t helped.

August 27, 2015 1:42 pm

Given the uncertainties surrounding Erika right now, this article seems to be tempting fate. Joe Bastardi has had a bit to say on this one; see for example.

Gunga Din
Reply to  Neil
August 27, 2015 1:55 pm

Tempting fate? How? If Erika becomes a nightmare she’d be 9 & 8 & 7 & 6 & 5 & 4 & 3 & 2 & 1 year(s) too late for “the settled science” to have been right. (And she would have needed to have had lots of brothers and sisters.)

Reply to  Neil
August 28, 2015 8:54 am

The latest update from NOAA shows that Tropical Storm ERIKA is not expected to even reach Cat1. There is no fate to tempt here. The MSM is exagerating this because it is the first storm in a very long time.

Reply to  Neil
August 28, 2015 3:45 pm

What uncertainties are you talking about? Erika was never expected to get above a category 1, even under the best of circumstances.

Dave Wendt
August 27, 2015 1:48 pm

Tidwell said on August 24, 2006. Tidwell then went on to claim that cities all along the coast would be underwater due to increased hurricane activity and intensity “unless we stop global warming.”
Whoops! I meant to comment that this prediction can’t really be considered much of a failure, because, as has been pointed out here numerous times, we “stopped global warming” long before this prediction was made and ever since that point. Of course, what we actually did to make it stop is not quite evident

Richard of NZ
Reply to  Dave Wendt
August 28, 2015 11:19 am

If I remember correctly a few years ago the winner of a U.S. popularity contest claimed that “This is the time that the planet starts to heal and the oceans cease to rise”.
Obviously the voters in specifically U.S. popularity contests hold all the cards.

Lady Gaiagaia
August 27, 2015 1:54 pm

How come NBC and CBS haven’t moved their offices away from the Atlantic seaboard?

August 27, 2015 1:57 pm

This is very much worth a read.
Esp this. The email exchange between Chris Landsea and the IPCC.
Basically he writes he won’t sacrifice his “real science” for the political motivation of the IPCC.

August 27, 2015 3:27 pm

I thought Murdoch was a warmist. If this true (what he said)
“and pointing a finger at climate change “alarmist nonsense.””, This would be very significant for the downfall of AGW

August 27, 2015 3:29 pm

Maybe ten years ago I believed that climate change was as settled as a new field can be, but then I heard “higher temperatures means more energy implies more frequent, worse extreme weather events”.
It striked me as simplistic, almost childish, physics “de cuisine” or “de comptoir” (as in “philosophie de cuisine” or “propos de comptoir” – it’s the kind of “science” you hear in a bar).
I wondered how a scientist could propose such a “demonstration”. I began to have doubts about the settled science.

Gunga Din
Reply to  simple-touriste
August 27, 2015 3:34 pm

Such “settled science” is kept afloat by the sea of green politics can produce.

Reply to  Gunga Din
August 27, 2015 5:09 pm

“This package is sold by weight, not by volume. Some settling of contents may have occurred during shipping and packaging.”
[Does not include tax, title, and license…. But your mileage may vary. .mod]

August 27, 2015 3:40 pm

Good call Anthony. But the ABC’s science expert (?) Robyn Williams is in error by more than 99 metres in his SLR estimates following his 2007 interview with Andrew Bolt.
But a number of the recent PR SLR studies forecast just 6 or 7 inches of SLR by 2100. IOW not even as high as the SLR over the previous 100 years.
So where is their post 1950 hyped up CAGW?

Reply to  Neville
August 27, 2015 3:47 pm

And if the Royal Society believe in their precious models so much this RS graph shows no SLR problems for the next 300 years. This is the graph of all the models for SLR.

Michael Jankowski
Reply to  Neville
August 27, 2015 4:57 pm

It’s here
Expert: We’re ‘locked-in’ to 3 feet sea level rise
“…According to the latest from NASA, however, the projections the panel made for a rise in global sea levels of 1 to 3 feet may already be outdated.
According to Steven Nerem of the University of Colorado, we are “locked into at least 3 feet of sea level rise, and probably more…”

Reply to  Neville
August 27, 2015 9:45 pm

Are you sure that the ABC didn’t quote a different person, e.g., the American Robin Williams not Robyn Williams? Of course the ABC could have quoted Professor Irwin Corey, the world’s greatest expert. I suspect that either of them would have been more quote worthy.

August 27, 2015 4:47 pm

Straight line trend? Looks like a U shaped curve to me.

August 27, 2015 5:01 pm

These hurricanes are just hiding somewhere (deep ocean?) to come back all at once one day and hit us sinners.

Rick Morcom
August 27, 2015 5:05 pm

Is there a similar graph for north-east pacific typhoons? The tropical cyclone page has a graph for global ACE (which seems pretty stable), as well as Australian land-falls, but it’s easy to get the impression that south-east Asia has had a lot of Cat 3+ storms in the last few years.

August 27, 2015 5:16 pm

Reblogged this on Climatism and commented:
Progressive media, CNN, BBC et al have blasted the airwaves with Katrina 10 year anniversary catastrophe footage.
On repeat, most likely in an attempt to make up for the *record* 10 year absence of any significant landfall Atlantic hurricane. This despite record rising ‘CO2’ and against all expert ‘scientific’ predictions.
A positive climate stat not mentioned anywhere by the leftist press.
Confirmation bias to push the global warming agenda is nothing new from climate change sympathetic media I guess …

August 27, 2015 5:32 pm

I live in Pass Christian Mississippi. I am originally from New Orleans. In my nearly 60 years I’ve experienced a hurricane or two or three or four….lost count actually. I quite happy with the nearly 10 year break in major hurricane hitting the USA. 2004 and 2005 were some tough years for people living along the coast. I wonder if Al Gore is going to crawl out of his cave and make another fictional movie about how the world is going to come to an end because we all heat and cool our homes, drive around in CO2 belching cars, or even just exhale. If find it amusing that all the lies the global warming the sky is falling folks has not come to pass. Anyway, here is to another decade of no major hurricane landfalls.

August 27, 2015 5:52 pm

All the hype after Katrina was to draw attention away from the failed response by FEMA and the fact that for the first time in this country’s history, military force was used on citizens instead of the national guard.

Reply to  Dawtgtomis
August 27, 2015 6:22 pm

What on earth are you going on about?

Reply to  Dawtgtomis
August 28, 2015 3:49 pm

There was no failure by FEMA. FEMA is required by law to be on site within 3 days after being requested by local authorities. They were on site after 2 days. Bush requested that the Democrat governor or the Democrat mayor make a formal request for aid prior to Katrina hitting. Both failed to do so.
The failure was 100% the result of state and local authorities.

Mike Maguire
August 27, 2015 6:05 pm

There is no accountability. Whether they are forecasting the next decade or projecting the next century. Whether they are predicting global temperatures, sea levels, crop yields, polar bear numbers, butterfly’s or whatever. You can say whatever you want, exaggerate, claim/show it’s worse than we thought, use assumptions, use theories, use models, there is no limit with regards to what you can find if you have a funded study and are creative.
Not only does this apply to projections going out for the next 100 years, you can even rewrite climate history so that it matches up with your belief system.
Incredible that increasing CO2, which is greening up the planet seems to be only causing bad weather and bad climate, hurting crop production, threatening so many creatures, destroying life, ruining human health.

Mike Maguire
Reply to  Mike Maguire
August 28, 2015 4:37 am

And of course this also pertains to hurricanes.

August 27, 2015 6:32 pm

I wouldn’t mind if they linked this trend to global warming and higher CO2 levels – as long as they made the point these should be credited for saving us from more hurricanes. You can’t blame extreme weather on CO2 unless you also credit good weather to CO2.

August 27, 2015 8:33 pm

Another kind of Throwback Thursday, comments entertaining:
Nutters always go to ground when the games nearly up. Bring on the ferrets. The sad twerp was even on Newsblight tonight frying a couple while whinging ad nausiam about meat production. Only to be told to get a move on and get off ASAP. A total hoot!

August 28, 2015 12:16 am

Thinking logically, if AGW primarily causes warming at poles then the temperature gradient between equator and poles will decrease in a warming world. This might be expected to reduce the energy in weather systems.
So a reduction in hurricanes would be consistent with a warming world.
But its not scary is it?

Arthur Clapham
August 28, 2015 1:17 am

My Father’s oft quoted ‘May God preserve us from expert’s’ in the 1950s still stands today!

August 28, 2015 3:22 am

climatologist Stephen Schneider who said, “humans won’t make the storms, but we can make them a little stronger than they otherwise would have been.”

Who knew that humans did not create storms, luckily we have climatologists like Stephen Schneider to remind us. Apparently though we can make them a “little” stronger. Did that mean storms with 100 MPH winds were no going to be 101 MPH? And how would you ever test the prediction “stronger than they otherwise would have been”? Who knows, like much of climate science, vague, meaningless statements are the order of the day.

August 28, 2015 3:37 am

General rule of thumb. In any field of endeavour when you see these words embedded in a sentence, “…in the future X will happen…” you can safely dismiss the claim as nonsense. The fact of the matter is that few crystal balls that actually work presently exist, and none for climate or economics.

August 28, 2015 4:55 am

Reblogged this on gottadobetterthanthis and commented:

I ask everyone to look at the facts. Examine the data.
The fact is, if climate is changing for the worse, the real world does not show it.
Good comments in this one. RGB’s comments are worthwhile.

August 28, 2015 6:39 am

“Good job Brownie, good job”. I wonder if CNN still has that photo opp of Bush and Brown in the hanger. Meanwhile, people were pleading for help on their rooftops. And the government had no information on the people at the convention center (not the superdome) when it was on every news channel in the country. They were actually sending rescue workers home.
All we need is for ONE hurricane this year, next year or the next to hit the US and it will prove them right. A 100% increase in hurricane activity. I can see the headlines now. Underlying this dramatic increase in hurricane activity will be the root cause: Man made global warming .

Reply to  rishrac
August 28, 2015 3:52 pm

FEMA did it’s job, and did it well.
It was the local and state authorities who failed to do there jobs.
It has always been the job of state and local authorities to manage for the first 2 to 3 days after a disaster hits. If you want to blame someone, blame mayor Nagin for failing to use the hundreds of school buses he had available to him to get those people out of low lying areas.

Steve Oregon
August 28, 2015 7:08 am

Fresh junk………..
NASA says dramatic sea-level rise is ‘locked in,’ West Coast could take hit in next 20 years

Mike Maguire
Reply to  Steve Oregon
August 28, 2015 7:28 am

Overlooked by many but clearly adding to sea level is groundwater extraction……….that makes it into the oceans.

August 28, 2015 10:28 am

The blue line looks like a border line. This article needs a sentence headline saying what the graph says in order to make it worth sharing with the many who lack savvy for graphs.

August 28, 2015 10:49 am

The latest projections have Erica as a tropical storm when it makes landfall in Florida. It’s not projected to become a hurricane at any point.
The drought of land falling hurricanes continues.

Reply to  MarkW
August 28, 2015 11:03 am

Judging by numbers on this chart
lots more of energy to be picked up in the Gulf. Its SST is 32.9C just a fraction behind the Arabian sea (off Pakistan’s coast) currently the world’s highest at 33C.

Reply to  MarkW
August 29, 2015 2:40 am

Florida due to tropical storm is threatened by flooding.

Steve A
August 28, 2015 2:40 pm

What ever happened to Ryan Maue’s contributions to this site?

Lady Gaiagaia
August 28, 2015 3:47 pm
Lady Gaiagaia
Reply to  Lady Gaiagaia
August 28, 2015 3:53 pm

Notable hurricanes from the depths of the LIA:
Among the most famous are the storm that inspired Shakespeare’s Tempest, which also almost wiped out the Virginia colony, and the Great Colonial Hurricane of 1635, soon followed by another almost as great.

Lady Gaiagaia
Reply to  Lady Gaiagaia
August 28, 2015 3:55 pm

And in the next, still cold century:

Reply to  Lady Gaiagaia
August 28, 2015 4:01 pm

The (few) survivors of the many Spanish gold fleet vessels that sunk across the Caribbean during those years between 1492 and 1780 can also attest to the frequency and severity of hurricanes.

Lady Gaiagaia
Reply to  Lady Gaiagaia
August 28, 2015 4:06 pm

Any scientific, dispassionate, non-polemical reading of Atlantic storm history would conclude, as physics would suggest, that a colder planet is a windier planet.
The highest wind speeds in the solar system occur on the coldest planets, the colder, the windier. Winds are worse during glacial intervals than interglacial.
In the 1970s, “extreme weather” was blamed (correctly) on the Big Chill between 1945 and the late ’70s.

Gareth Phillips
August 29, 2015 2:39 am

Don’t predict catastrophe, but on the other hand don’t predict the absence of serious problems either. I wonder if anyone predicted a rebound in Arctic ice?

August 29, 2015 2:28 pm

The cyclone is coming to Hawaii.comment image

%d bloggers like this: