Brief Note by Kip Hansen — 21 August 2024
It is Hurricane Season in the northern hemisphere. In the United States, this is a concern almost exclusively of the U.S. Atlantic and Gulf Coasts. There have been hurricanes landfalling on the Pacific Coast – but very rarely.
Every news outlet has been repeatedly telling us that NOAA’s National Hurricane Center has predicted “an extremely active hurricane season” for the Atlantic Basin.
For more than a decade, my wife and I spent hurricane seasons on our sailing catamaran in the Northern Caribbean, when we felt confident, or on the southern Atlantic Coast of the United States, during those hurricane seasons when we felt less confident. We were hit only once in 12 years, and that was, as you may have guessed, not in the Caribbean but rather up north in Beaufort, North Carolina by Hurricane Florence.
Tropical storms and hurricanes that spin out into the Atlantic, without landfall, are of little concern except to shipping. Like many things, the real trouble occurs at the interfaces of differing dynamical systems, such as where the land meets the sea.
The sailors among you will realize that sailboats can’t outrun hurricanes. Even motoring, sailboats are generally limited in speed. So, during hurricane season, we plan ahead so that we find ourselves within a easy passage to a safe-ish hurricane hole.
The big question for sailors and mariners of all types is “Where will we be safe if and when a big storm arrives?”
Here is one way to look at that question: from NOAA “Continental United States Hurricane Strikes 1950-2023”
[ Click to view larger image in a new tab/window ]
This NOAA-produced map shows all landfalls of all hurricanes on the East and Gulf Coasts of the United States since 1950. Each of the five categories is shown by a different colored dot. Note that I have changed the Cat 2 color to pink, making it easier to distinguish from Cat 5 – both had been red originally and I have added the thick dark red line along the coast where hurricanes have not hit in the 74 years since 1950.
In the image above, there are a couple of odd, maybe ‘lucky’, short stretches on the south-facing Gulf Coast and the west coast of Florida.
Then there’s East Coast of Florida and Georgia:
The middle “unhit area” includes Cape Canaveral with the Kennedy Space Center. The northern section is most of the coast of the state of Georgia.
And then up the coast to the Delmarva Peninsula all the way to Maine.
In the close-up, you can see I missed a bit of ‘coast not hit’ there on the southern shore of Massachusetts—only Hurricane Edna, Cat 2, hitting on Cape Cod’s south shore in 1954.
Some of the this is due to geophysical factors of geology (the shape of the shoreline itself) and prevailing wind/weather/ocean current patterns. Some of it must be just “not hit yet.”
Notice that the Jersey Shore, that long stretch of barrier islands from Sandy Hook, NJ south through Atlantic City, an almost continuous barrier island/sand bar nearly totally covered with homes and businesses, including Atlantic City, which last suffered a direct hit from a hurricane in 1903, “the first and only known North Atlantic hurricane to make landfall in the state of New Jersey since records were kept starting in 1851.” Note that former-Hurricane Sandy did strike the Jersey shore in 2012 as a tropical storm – or “Super Storm Sandy”.
Does any of this history mean that the “never hit” areas will be hurricane safe later this year? Or next year? Or in the next decades? No, I don’t think so, but I’m willing to hear from those with more knowledge about what drives hurricanes.
Geography seems to protect the eastern-facing shores of Massachusetts and Maine – which, however, do bear the brunt of Nor’Easters, which occur in the opposite season (September through April) from hurricanes.
One last thing: Tracks of all the known Tropical Storms and Hurricanes:
[ Click for larger image in new tab/window ]
Now isn’t that an interesting picture? Where tropical cyclones originate and where they go – and where they don’t go.
# # # # #
Author’s Comment:
I offer no speculation, no theories, no hypotheses, not even any opinions. Only when I am acting as a Captain do I concern myself with hurricane tracks – which means I only look out about five days in advance, which is the limit of hurricane track prediction to any great accuracy – even then, their average prediction of point of landfall is only accurate to about +/- 150 miles. Any further in advance and it is mostly useless.
Edward Lorenz and Dave Fultz’s dishpan experiments showed quite clearly that these cyclonic storms are chaotic in origin and nature.
Thanks for reading.
# # # # #
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Fun anecdote. My father was from 1948-late 1950 the XO of the 409th Typhoon chasers based on Guam. They flew heavily instrumented B-29s thru Pacific typhoons in the early days of trying to understand tropical cyclones.
Your map explains why Guam. Lots of typhoon activity in the vicinity.
And it also looks like the region around Japan also typically has stronger hurricanes than the eastern-seaboard of the USA.
Rud and Clyde ==> The U.S. Media is, maybe understandably, very U.S.-centric when it come to hurricane reporting, as if only the Gulf Coast and Florida really matter.
In the larger view, the South China Sea, the East China Sea and the Philippine Sea have many more and stronger hurricanes, usually called “cyclones” over there.
I thought that their preference was for “typhoon.”
Yes, that is the term used in the west Pacific and Indian Oceans. The more general term applicable anywhere is “tropical cyclone.”
Fascinating post Kip.
As an initial observation (much more work on my part required but I’m sure it’s to do with convergent zones and cells), I note, but didn’t previously realise, that tropical cyclones form generally at sea and in bands at certain latitudes above and below – but not that close to – the Equator. In this – counter-intuitively – they mirror the location of major arid regions on the land-masses.
Back to the text books for me I feel. Thank you for sparking my interest.
Coriolis effect is weak at the equator I’ve read
Coriolis force, or acceleration, depending on viewpoint, is zero exactly at the equator.
They may form from a disturbance that originated on land, but they cannot form on land for two reasons: 1) their fuel is water vapor latent heat (not sensible heat) thus require ocean below, and 2) their large scale of organized flow is dissipated too readily over land by surface friction.
There have been tropical depressions form over land in northern Australia. It occurs when the land is inundated and plenty of water to evaporate. They can persist for a long time and travel a long way but central pressure never much below 990hPa.
magesox ==> Yes, but did you notice that they (generally, one or two exceptions) DON’T form in the Southern Atlantic, between Africa and South America — or, for that matter, close to the western coast of South America.
The Amazon rain forest stays moist enough to dominate the regional convection. Note in the attached how the CAPE is spread across the Amazon basin.
If the trees of the Amazon were replaced with solar panels, the South Atlantic would get cyclones.
“If the trees of the Amazon were replaced with solar panels, the South Atlantic would get cyclones.”
try not to give the climate/insane any ideas on how to further save us.
Water evaporation + convection + condensation nuclei (fine dust or salt crystals) + Coriolis + long ocean run = tropical storm / hurricane / cyclone bands.
Substitute long flat land run for long ocean run, and you get Tornado Alley.
Story Tip.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/08/20/bayesian-superyacht-sicily-sinking-missing-mike-lynch-live/#1724162195147
Normal for what exactly? The year round average? In other news, August is hotter than January.
Yes, Eric, the FT were first off the mark blaming climate change for the sinking this morning. Absolutely disgusting in my view, especially as the bodies of the owner and his daughter haven’t even been found yet.
Never yet a personal tragedy go to waste seems to be the warmist mantra here.
Bayesian sinking blamed on Climate Change — what’s the probability of that? (Too soon?)
Rick ==> The sinking is Bayesian-ly blamed….
From the one photo I’ve seen, sloop rigged with a 230+ ft mast. I don’t know who designed the vessel, but I think that s/he should have suggested a schooner rig.
Speaking as former collegiate big boat national champion ( at Annapolis in identical Liders 44’ yawls) agree. Sloop rig on a boat that big is not a sound design. Worse, they remained at anchor with the retracting keel retracted while knowing the storm was coming.
Thanks Rud, I hadn’t seen the latest news about the circumstances.
[Not to boast (too much), my ‘National Championship’: West Wight Potter 19, in 1986 at San Francisco. Went there again in ’89, just a ‘First Place’. Oh well.]
I recall a record of a storm in Acts 27:14.
It had occurred often enough for it to have earned a name (at least among the locals).
Gunga ==> Well, more strictly, the “Euroclydon“. “In chapter 27 in the Book of Acts 27:14 it may specifically refer to the name of the Gregale wind from the Adriatic Gulf, which wrecked the apostle Paul’s ship on the coast of Malta on his way to Rome”. The original word in Greek may have been “Euraquilo”.
“The precise name is doubtful, but “the Euraquilo” is more easily explained as a compound of Greek euros, “east wind,” and Latin aquilo, “northeast wind,” hence, euraquilo, “east northeast wind.” This agrees with the experience of navigators in those waters.”
The Bayesian
Its 72-metre/236ft mast is the world’s tallest aluminium mast.
Displacement: 535tons
Draught Maximum: 9.83m/32ft. Min draught 4.05m/13ft.
That mast must have acted almost like a sail in the strong wind, particularly if the boat was on minimum draft.
We’ve all seen the devastation of a direct hit of a tornado; a waterspout can be just as lethal because of the mass of water + kinetic energy.
Normal for what exactly?
Normally they would use the 30-year ‘climatology’; the average sea surface temperature for the region as measured over the past 3 full decades (1991-2020, in this case).
Idle Eric ==> I follow all marine disaster stories, including this one. They are all “way to close to home” for me — “there but for fortune” sort of thing. Been out there (Caribbean, not the Med), been way too close to but not hit by water spouts, fought for 14 hours through a horrific full gale off of Cape Fear, and in the end, lived to tell about it.
No sailing vessel should ever sink in bad weather. when properly battened down, all ports closed, entryways secured, pumps working, a sailing vessel should be able to withstand any weather, particularly at anchor and not driven aground.
We must wait for the final report on causes, probably not until the vessel has been raised.
The Bayesian had an incredibly tall mast, aluminum. Lots of lightening and maybe a water spout.
There was another vessel close-by, within 500 feet, which is closer than I would have wanted to be in that weather. This vessel, the Sir Robert Baden Powell rescued those who made it into a life-raft.
St Paul’s shipwreck Acts a 14 day storm
27 On the fourteenth night we were still being driven across the Adriatic[a] Sea, when about midnight the sailors sensed they were approaching land. 28 They took soundings and found that the water was a hundred and twenty feet[b] deep. A short time later they took soundings again and found it was ninety feet[c] deep. 29 Fearing that we would be dashed against the rocks, they dropped four anchors from the stern and prayed for daylight. 30 In an attempt to escape from the ship, the sailors let the lifeboat down into the sea, pretending they were going to lower some anchors from the bow. 31 Then Paul said to the centurion and the soldiers, “Unless these men stay with the ship, you cannot be saved.” 32 So the soldiers cut the ropes that held the lifeboat and let it drift away.
33 Just before dawn Paul urged them all to eat. “For the last fourteen days,” he said, “you have been in constant suspense and have gone without food—you haven’t eaten anything. 34 Now I urge you to take some food. You need it to survive. Not one of you will lose a single hair from his head.” 35 After he said this, he took some bread and gave thanks to God in front of them all. Then he broke it and began to eat. 36 They were all encouraged and ate some food themselves. 37 Altogether there were 276 of us on board. 38 When they had eaten as much as they wanted, they lightened the ship by throwing the grain into the sea.
39 When daylight came, they did not recognize the land, but they saw a bay with a sandy beach, where they decided to run the ship aground if they could. 40 Cutting loose the anchors, they left them in the sea and at the same time untied the ropes that held the rudders. Then they hoisted the foresail to the wind and made for the beach. 41 But the ship struck a sandbar and ran aground. The bow stuck fast and would not move, and the stern was broken to pieces by the pounding of the surf.
People and animals have normal temperatures. Places don’t.
Any thoughts on the obvious dislike by hurricanes of the equator. Something about a very small Coriolis force, maybe?
Correct. They cannot form near the equator because of the lack of coriolis force to set them spinning and organizing.
The coriolus force, or effect, has no bearing on the creation of hurricanes or typhoons, but it DOES set the spin direction. They don’t form within 5 degrees of the equator.
The equator is spinning under the sun at 1000 MPH. (24000 miles in 24 hours) The poles are spinning at 0 MPH. The jet streams occur between the equator and the poles. It is where the air speeds are greatly different that these storms occur, which helps get them spinning. The air nearest the equator is always the warm pool of air, spinning counter-clockwise looking down at the north pole. That pool of air is rotating in place on the surface of the earth. The jet streams represent a disruption that can set off the storms.
The data on hurricane strikes Shirley extends back to at least 1900. Why the 1950 cutoff?
I didn’t see a hurricane “Shirley” listed. Shirley you meant to say “surely”? 😎
Besides, NOAA if made such a graphic going back to to 1900, it would have been very cluttered.
(Maybe they’ll do another for 1900 to 1950?)
It helps if you’ve seen the movie “Airplane”. Also: “Seems I picked the wrong week to give up…” and “I speak jive.” (Great movie, maybe second only to “Blazing Saddles”.)
Sciences that involve physics typically use a “Before Present” (BP) time structure. BP is also known as Before Physics – referring to the alteration of the proportions of carbon isotopes in the atmosphere due to nuclear weapons testing.
The cutoff has been established as Jan 1, 1950
Dave ==> No idea — you’d have to ask NOAA NCEI. The first image is from:
https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/access/metadata/landing-page/bin/iso?id=gov.noaa.ncdc:C00694
It offers: “For questions about the information on this page, please email: ncei.info@noaa.gov”
The image is a poster offered in .pdf format.
Seems an odd decision, as point of landfall is always obvious (at least on the scale shown).
There is certainly a regional effect that controls probabilities of a storm hit affected by wind patterns, high/low pressure areas, and ocean currents. Any part of the eastern coast of North America is subject to a potential hurricane hit. Powered ships can generally maneuver out of the way of an oncoming storm, provided the captain is accessing up date sat weather data and is not an unnecessary risk taker, and the ship’s power does not fail. Unfortunately a few years ago when the El Faro went down all those “but fors” seemed to converge on one unlucky crew.
Generally, if one is in a sailing vessel and a big cyclone is coming, the best one can hope for is to sail into and get firmly tied down in a reasonably protective “hurricane hole” … one that won’t necessarily protect the vessel from the wind but can protect the vessel from getting run ashore or getting pounded to pieces on a reef. But even then, if the eye of a strong hurricane passes right over your vessel, it’s likely to be a not good outcome.
A couple of years ago Hurricane Ian came ashore here in Southwest Florida, the eye passing over Sanibel Island, Fort Myers Beach, and Cape Coral before heading inland on a northeasterly track and then to the north up the Florida peninsula. The shoreline in this part of Florida has extensive barrier islands that provide some protection, but we still lost a huge number of vessels to the storm, even well inland along the Caloosahatchee River in Fort Myers.
Hurricanes in the Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico generally move toward the north or west, and the highest winds are usually on the “right” side of the storm viewed from its direction of movement, usually on the north or east side. If a sailing vessel is too far out to reach a safe harbor, it may be best to sail as far southwest as possible, to be in the lesser winds on the “left” side of the storm.
Hurricane Ian’s damage was particularly severe in Fort Myers, because the wind near the eyewall was out of the southwest, the direction toward which the Caloosahatchee River flows, so that the storm surge was driven upriver. Many of the sailing vessels damaged by Ian were floated off their moorings (with no one aboard) in the storm surge, then drifted and ran aground in downtown Fort Myers, sometimes being smashed against houses or buildings.
Duane ==> Quite right on most points. The ship and crew of the El Faro were sacrificed to the almighty dollar and a Captain reportedly fearing for his job if he bucked his superiors and took the safer, but longer, route west of the Bahamas.
Fort Myers/Cape Coral was a mess and nothing to be done about it. Had close friends right in the path, my friend Ken work the ferries to Sanibel. No loss of life of those I knew, and their home suffered only minor damage.
It is possible to survive a direct hit, even tied up in a marina. I have only done it once, direct hit of the eye of Florence. I have to say being in the eye, in the middle of the night, was a strange experience.
The Atlantic hurricane season is defined as June 1 to November 30
As of August 20, 43.9% of that interval has passed.
So, what is NOAA’s batting average:
Predicted
Named storms: 17 to 25, to date 5 (29.5% to 20.0%) under by 2.4 to 5.9 storms
Hurricanes (1,2): 8 to 13, to date 2 (25.0% to 15.4%) under by 1.5 to 3.7 storms
Maj Hurricanes (3,4,5) 4 to 7, to date 1 (25.0% to 14.2%) under by 0.75 to 2.0 storms
The under quantity of storms is based on the predicted range multiplied by the % elapsed interval minus the number of actual storms in the category.
Seems “Climate Change” is really wreaking havoc.
Climate change – specifically global warming – is inhibiting hurricane development … https://wattsupwiththat.com/2024/04/08/global-warming-inhibits-hurricane-activity-as-indicated-by-decreasing-tropical-cape-values/
John ==> There are a lot of ways to look at Atlantic Hurricane data. Read yours with interest.
This article supports my findings … https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.adl2142
Why would someone give you a down vote for providing a link to a study? The only reason I can think of is that they don’t like information that contradicts their beliefs.
Correct. Climate alarmists don’t like it when someone explains how global warming (and increasing CO2) are actually good for earth — and actually help decrease hurricanes and tornadoes. I have these discussions all the time on X (@_ClimateCraze).
CaP Allon has this in today’s Electroverse:(Story tip)
This emerging Atlantic Niña may also be negating the 2024 hurricane season. While NOAA et al had almost gleefully predicted a “blockbuster” and “climate change-fueled” season, this unprecedented Atlantic cooling looks to be tempering storm intensity.
Sparta ==> Hurricane seasons generally don’t get really hot until a little later in the season.
And are not evenly spread across the 1 June to 30 November period.
So the peak is not the midpoint. Copy that.
It’s not a linear curve – in fact, there is no equation for the shape. The midpoint of the peak isn’t until September 10th, so it’s not possible to make an over/under calculation right now.
A bad assumption on my part that the peak did not correspond to the interval midpoint.
NOAA does the best they can using their models which are calibrated on historical data. But they build certain assumptions into their models including the past effects of the la nina side of the ENSO cycle … but despite predictions of an imminent la nina taking hold in June or July, we seem now to be stuck in between el nino and la nina, and just when la nina actually occurring, and how strong it is, at this point is still just an informed guess.
Weather is always subject to uncertainty, of course. Climate has nothing to do with ENSO, even if the warmunists always claim that a warm east Pacific means “climate change”, and when it is a cool east Pacific and results in more Atlantic cyclones, it’s still climate change.
“Heads I win, tails you lose” is the motto of the warmunists.
I am aware of how predictions were made in the past. Of late, NOAA seems to be on the climate apocalypse bandwagon, sadly. Not all of NOAA, though.
And NOAA has to predict on the high side, especially given how litigation eager society has become.
Yes, they forecasted a much higher than average season. This site gives the dates upon which tropical storms and hurricanes would normally occurred.
https://www.nhc.noaa.gov/climo/
By August 22, 5 named systems would have happened. That’s tomorrow, and we have had five. By August 26, two hurricanes would have occurred. That’s five days away, but the NHC said they expect no tropical storms over the next seven days. We have seen two hurricanes.
This may indeed end up a very active season, but it hasn’t begun, yet. A lot of dry, dusty air from Africa is over the areas that typically spawn tropical storms, and wind shear exists in places. But we already know that if their predictions don’t materialize they will simply blame climate change.
Having 5 when the historical record predicts 5 does not support the hypothesis that a higher than normal activity is upcoming.
The hurricane season is not linear wrt storm production, and note the word ‘may ‘ in the last paragraph. The hypothesis will not be disproven until the end of the season. My only thoughts were, if the season is going to be active, it hasn’t started, yet. Interpret that as you like.
I’ve no insight regarding your question.
However, a few years ago while searching for information, I came across Hurricane Catarina – “the only hurricane-strength storm on record in the South Atlantic Ocean. Catarina made landfall on Southern Brazil at peak intensity, with the equivalent of Category 2 hurricane-force sustained winds, on 28 March 2004.”
As Rodney Dangerfield might have said: Catarina gets no respect.
Catarina Doesn’t even show up in the “Every G. D. Storm that ever existed” map that Kip posted as a finale.
They should have named it Hurricane “Hold my Beer”
John ==> The original image used for All Tropical Storms comes from this page. There is a search engine to find individual storms. I didn’t find it useful for my purposes.
By the way, there are two C’s in the word “cyclone”.
Steve ==> Someone (me?) has a typo?
E-gads! That’s one of my (very few) weaknesses….somehow my ability to catch typos deserts me when I’m creating graphics.
Ten points to you, sir!
I refer to my typos as having been caused by “stupid fingers.”
Some here could benefit by reading:
Tropical wave – Wikipedia
and
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/African_easterly_jet
John ==> Thanks for the link. That’s what NOAA NHC is talking about when it says “tropical wave“.
I arrived on Bermuda a year or so after Emily hit the island. Many homes were still without all utilities or still damaged. The US was blamed by the islanders because they thought they didn’t get enough warning. Emily reformed near Bermuda and hit early in the morning.
From Wiki:”By 0600 UTC, Emily had re-attained hurricane intensity and at 1145 UTC, the center passed directly over Bermuda with winds of 85 mph (137 km/h).”
Hurricane Dean hit Bermuda while I was there but seemed weak. We stored our tiny cars in a warehouse. The M70 Subaru I owned would have been blown away.
Hurricane Gabrielle passed close by and drew many folks to go watch the estimated 25 ft high swells break on the rocks of the NASA tracking station.
mkelly ==> Hurricane Ernesto hit Bermuda — again. Reuters reports minor damage, there are YouTubes of tourists enjoying the tumult and excitement.
I experienced Hurricane “Bob” in 1985. Then there was another “Bob” in 1991. I never understood why there were two until I found this on Wikipedia…
It’s like retiring the jersey number of a great ball player.
Kevin ==> There is a list of “retired” hurricane names here.
Good article, Kip. Figure 2 sure shows these storms will not form within about
of the equator.
Very interesting.
I can’t seem to find a definition of a hurricane “hit.” Is it where the eye comes ashore, or is it the entire region out to where the wind speed is still 74mph? Or further than that?
When the eye of the storm first crosses a land mass.
WO ==> NOAA definition is:
“Landfall — The intersection of the surface center of a tropical cyclone with a coastline. Because the strongest winds in a tropical cyclone are not located precisely at the center, it is possible for a cyclone’s strongest winds to be experienced over land even if landfall does not occur. Similarly, it is possible for a tropical cyclone to make landfall and have its strongest winds remain over the water.”
Thanks. (That search engines, given three different prompts, still did not pull that up, is quite damning…)
I was afraid that this was the definition – which makes “hits” rather a useless measure. Much better would be per capita, inflation adjusted, economic damage out to the edge of the storm. (Although would that edge be defined by wind speed or rain fall? A lot of inland damage isn’t from wind, but from flooding.) This definition would at least allow “same-same” comparisons over time to say whether things are getting worse, staying about the same, or getting better. Particularly in places like Florida where the population ballooned over the last century.
Why is South America spared cyclone tracks on the map?
Geoff S
Geoff ==> Well, the map is pretty huge compared to the little lines of the individual tracks.
There was one tropical cyclone that formed just offshore of Brazil — Hurricane Catarina.
“an extraordinarily rare South Atlantic tropical cyclone, the only hurricane-strength storm on record in the South Atlantic Ocean.”
But is it lack of past observation apparatus and observers, or a meteorological effect that makes cyclones unelikely?
Geoff s
The “larger image” of all known storm tracks is unfortunately not any higher resolution. It’s just blurry. Do you have a better one?
The eye of Erin-1995 went right over our house. No damage other than one recently-planted palm tree needed to be straightened back up.
I see from your map that we were just south of a no-hit zone. Frances and Jeanne both caused damage to our house, but also to many homes and businesses in the no-hit zone north of us. I worked in Cape Canaveral (the town) in 2004 and the building where I worked had an air-conditioner blown off the roof. That’s pretty-far into the red.
My point is that your readers shouldn’t consider those no-hit zones to be safe areas for their sailboats. There’s lot’s of damage potential far from where the hurricane-force wind field hits.
You also asked about why there are no-hit zones. I don’t know about the space coast one, but it makes sense that the concave shoreline in North Florida and Georgia makes it less likely to be hit by a storm coming off the ocean since at that latitude they generally stop trending westward.
It’s that pesky plant food again-
Major US lake reaches 100% capacity second year in a row after prolonged drought: ‘Didn’t always seem like a possibility’ (yahoo.com)
Doomed I tell ya! We’re all doomed!
I’ve waited my whole life for a repeat of the 1938 Hurricane, or Carol in 1954, to flatten the forests on hilltops in New Hampshire, and it never has happened. This doesn’t mean it won’t happen. It just means it is a good thing I didn’t hide in my cellar for the last seventy years fearing what might happen. Worry is generally a waste of mental energy.
If it does happen it will be foolish to blame Global Warming, but some will do it, despite the fact we have records of rare but tremendous hurricanes hitting back in the 1600’s. Which reminds me. Aren’t we suppose to hear from Bill McKibben around about now?
From this website, twelve years ago:
Hurricane Warning; McKibben Alert – Watts Up With That?
Clearly it’s safest to sail the equator