Nothing Unprecedented about The Sea Surface Temperatures for Hurricane Florence’s Storm Track

Bob, I get the idea that there was also nothing unusual about the high pressure ridge north of those SSTs that supported Florence in developing, or the wind shear that thankfully destroyed her. I think Florence was a good lesson in normally chaotic weather.

Looking at the reports and real time videos at the time of landfall show wind forces against palm trees, metal signs, people, etc. I saw no more than 50 knot sustained winds.

Photos of the wind damage around the area of landfall after Florence passed all show tropical storm force at best.

Offshore buoys in the direct path of landfall show sustained winds in the 50 knots range.
Florence passed directly over NDBC buoy JMPN7 and recorded maximum sustained winds of 56 knots. That buoy has anemometer height of 10 meters. Plots of winds at that time show both leading and trailing eyewall winds, and the calm eye.

Weather stations everywhere along the land path of Florence confirm that Florence never had sustained winds reaching hurricane threshold of 64 knots on the Saffir-Simpson scale.

The only reason people think Florence was a hurricane at US landfall is because the National Hurricane Center declared it. The evidence shows that Florence did not have sustained winds reaching that level.

When I Google “climate change”: 1/1/2016 at 7:50 AM Chicago Time – I found 169,000,000 results; 9/21/2017, 10:19 AM -194 million results. And if you think that these millions provide real millions of new ideas, you are wrong. All information are repeating only three main ideas:
Idea #1. Al Gore in 1980th was a Chairman of Senate Committee, where under influence from James Hansen – scientist from NASA, name carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gasses, which trapped infrared radiation from the earth surface, as reason for global warming. They are using names of scientists – John Tyndall, Samuel Pierpont Langley, and Svante Arrhenius to promote their ideas. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John Tyndall John Tyndall put the different gasses in the closed tubes and studied how they absorb different infrared radiation. His main reports of the 1860s were republished as a 450-page collection in 1872 “Contributions to Molecular Physics in the Domain of Radiant Heat.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_climate_change_science By the late 1890s, American scientist Samuel Pierpont Langley had attempted to determine the surface temperature of the Moon by measuring infrared radiation leaving the Moon and reaching the Earth. The angle of the Moon in the sky when a scientist took a measurement determined how much CO2 and water vapor the Moon’s radiation had to pass through to reach the Earth’s surface, resulting in weaker measurements when the Moon was low in the sky. This result was unsurprising given that scientists had known about infrared radiation absorption for decades. A Swedish scientist, Svante Arrhenius, used Langley’s observations of increased infrared absorption where Moon rays pass through the atmosphere at a low angle, encountering more carbon dioxide (CO2), to estimate an atmospheric cooling effect from a future decrease of CO2. He realized that the cooler atmosphere would hold less water vapor (another greenhouse gas) and calculated the additional cooling effect. He also realized the cooling would increase snow and ice cover at high latitudes, making the planet reflect more sunlight and thus further cool down, as James Croll had hypothesized. Overall Arrhenius calculated that cutting CO2 in half would suffice to produce an ice age. He calculated that a doubling of atmospheric CO2 would give a total warming of 5-6 degrees Celsius. At the same time, John Tyndall, Samuel Pierpont Langley, and Svante Arrhenius did not pay attention on behavior of different greenhouse gasses in real atmosphere.
NO ONE OF THEM!
No surprise Arrhenius made huge mistake but these mistaken ideas of Svante Arrhenius became a dogma for today theory about greenhouse effect.
Idea #2. Some of their opponents, also, promote that greenhouse gasses are responsible for climate change and claim that not human activities, but an eruption of the volcanoes and other natural sources of greenhouse gasses are responsible for climate change.
Idea #3. The SCIENTISTS FROM Heartland Institute oppose the greenhouse gasses theories [please, read book: [Craig Idso and Fred Singer, Climate Change Reconsidered: (200 Report of the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change NIPCC), Chicago, IL: The Heartland Institute, 2009]. In Chapter 5. Solar Variability and Climate Cycles they provide alternative theory of climate change: “variation in the sun’s output and magnetic fields, mediated by cosmic ray fluxes and changes in global clouds cover play a larger role in regulating the earth’s temperature, precipitation, droughts, monsoons, and other climate features, than any past or expected human activities, including projected increases in GHG (greenhouse gases) emissions.” Page 207. “…electrons released to the atmosphere by galactic cosmic rays act as catalysts that significantly accelerate the formation of ultra-small clusters of sulfuric acid and water molecules that constitute the building blocks of clouds condensation nuclei.” Page 208.
If changes of temperatures in different part of earth will depend on greenhouse gasses, WHY THESE CHANGES ARE SO DIFFERENT (IN 38 TIMES) in South Hemisphere and Arctic?

WHY ALL OF THESE SCIENTISTS ARE WRONG?

The earth is a lucky planet with two types of the greenhouse gasses:
1. Which are lighter than nitrogen and oxygen – methane, water vapor.
2. Which are heavier than nitrogen and oxygen – carbon dioxide, nitrogenous oxide, ozone, and many others even heavier greenhouse gasses. Please, compare their molecular weight: methane – CH4=16, water vapor – H2O=18, nitrogen – N2=28, oxygen – O2=32, carbon dioxide – CO2=44, nitrogenous oxide – N2O=44, ozone – O3=48…
The molecular weights of gasses are playing the crucial role in nature:
1. A smoke from a chimney of power plant in not windy condition is going up ~ 500 meters after that is a horizontal, despite a temperature in an oven ~1,000 degrees C. It is cooling with height and, as it full mostly with molecules of heavy gasses, forces of a buoyancy can’t lift it.
2. At the same time, the billions of molecules of water vapor are making any parcel of air lighter, than other parcels with lesser numbers of molecules of water vapor, and forces of the buoyancy are lifting it up. When with a height air in a parcel is cooling, part of a water vapor condensed, released energy, which heats air in this parcel and recreates the convection forces. Step by step all molecules of all gases in this parcel together with their kinetic, latent and trapped infrared radiation energy are coming to upper troposphere, where energy is going to space easy, than from ocean (land) level.

The properties of water:
– As water vapor is lighter than most molecules in air they help transport huge amount of energy of all gasses from an ocean (land) level to the upper troposphere and helps cool the atmosphere, despite water vapor is a greenhouse gas. (Methane is doing the same).
– These properties cover 1/3 of the earth by clouds, which reflect to space direct sun radiation. Properties of water cover all Antarctica, most of Arctic, most of the mounts on the earth, and huge territories in the winter time by ice and snow. These ice and snow also reflect to space huge energy of direct sun radiation.
PROPERTIES OF WATER HELP COOL THE ATMOSPHERE, DESPITE WATER VAPOR IS A GREENHOUSE GAS.
How after understanding roles of these properties of water we can agree with scientists about specific role of greenhouse gasses on the earth; about their claim that water vapor and methane even more powerful greenhouse gasses, than carbon dioxide?
Exactly opposite in South Hemisphere less continents and more evaporation of water vapor and it cool South Hemisphere more than North Hemisphere.
REASONS FOR CLIMATE CHANGE AFTER YEAR OF 1800 (Industrial Revolution):
1. A population of the earth in 1800 was 1 billion, today more than 7.3 billion. To feed the growing population mankind activities created around the world 4,000,000,000 acres of fields of potato, corn, wheat, etc. (area ~ equal of two areas of the USA). These fields were created instead of the former forests and the virgin steppes. It reduces evaporation of water from a soil over all continents with arable land, reduces the humidity in the air and the probabilities of rains – a real cooling mechanism in the nature.
2. As we use mostly a fossil fuel for our energy needs, a black carbon and a dust from it cover a fresh snow, which reduces a reflection back to the space of the direct sun radiation.
Human activities using mostly fossil fuel to create all changes in the world. Of course it increase amount of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gasses in the atmosphere.
But they are only indicator of human activities in wrong directions: fields evaporated less water vapor, than what was before 1800 year – forests and steppes instead of fields.
SCIENTISTS FROM Heartland Institute the same as majority of scientists ignore changes on continents, which created by human activities. IN A DRYER AIR OVER ALL CONTINENTS additional electrons couldn’t create more “condensation nuclei”.
Response of the earth to any sun activities in our times will be different than in medieval times.
Only two gasses – water vapor and methane in reality could help people to influence the weather and the climate change, by accelerating or decelerating of movement of energy in the atmosphere to different places on the earth.
Solar cells, windmills are useless in our attempt to influence the climate.
Let look at graph, which illustrate Temperature anomaly in Global Temperatures from 1880 till today. (All pictures are taken from Wikipedia).
Despite it show global warming in result, it is not so important. Please, pay attention on really interesting – it showing sharp warming and the same sharp cooling, which occur one after another. Why is it? Is it influence of precession of earth orbit? Or, maybe so fast in both directions are changing amount of greenhouse gasses in the atmosphere? Or we have so fast and regular changes in core of the Earth, which some scientists trying to use for explanation of all changes of climate on the earth? Or, maybe it is close to changes of sun activities?

What kind of mistake we have in science of climate change;
We are repeating in millions of articles that greenhouse gasses are responsible for climate change. It is wrong.
1. Molecule of water vapor is lighter than most gasses in air. Billions of these molecules are making any volume of air lighter, than any other, where less molecules of water vapor in the same atmospheric condition. In result this volume of air is going UP to clouds level. It happen around all surface of the earth: billions of water vapor molecules help transport to upper troposphere huge energy of all gasses.
2. In clouds molecules of water vapor condensed in water droplets. Clouds reflect back to space direct sun radiation. The same are doing snow and ice.
It means, that properties of water are cooling the atmosphere, despite water vapor is a greenhouse gas.
All theory that greenhouse gasses are responsible for climate change is deadly wrong.
If author of this article, the same as posters, which discuss it, will understand properties of water, they will easy fight any weather and climate disasters.
Please, ask me additional questions and I will show you how we can do it.

I watched land fall on the weather channel interactive and Florence never attained sustained winds over 50 mp, though gusts hit 75mph. This was Wilmington where the eye wall went through. Not even a cat 1 though plenty of damage and sorrow caused.