
In a widely published Associated Press (AP) article, “Climate change fuels Hurricane Melissa’s rapid intensification to Category 5,” reporter Sibi Arasu claims that “the warming of the world’s oceans caused by climate change helped double Hurricane Melissa’s wind speed in less than 24 hours.” This is highly misleading if not outright false. Scientific data refute claims that climate change is causing more severe or frequent hurricanes.
The story cites the climate advocacy group Climate Central, which claims that climate change is making hurricanes “more likely to intensify quickly, especially near coastlines.” While it is true that warm water fuels hurricanes—meteorologists have known that for more than a century—long-term climate change cannot be blamed for the specifics of a single storm.
Contrary to what the AP says, as Climate at a Glance: Hurricanes explains, there has been no increase in the frequency or intensity of hurricanes over the past century, even as carbon dioxide concentrations have risen. For example, Figure 1 below shows the Accumulated Cyclone Energy, a measure of intensity, over more than 50 years, and there is no increase.

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s Historical Hurricane Tracks database shows that hurricane activity fluctuates naturally, with the 1940s through 1960s being among the most active periods on record—long before modern fossil fuel emissions were significant.
Even the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) acknowledges that there is “low confidence in any long-term trends in hurricane activity.” The IPCC’s Sixth Assessment Report found no detectable increase in either global tropical cyclone frequency or landfall intensity. See the table below from the IPCC report and note the highlighted section on tropical cyclones:

In plain English, data show the number of hurricanes are not increasing, nor are they demonstrably stronger.
Hurricanes need a lot more than just warm ocean water to form. Atmospheric conditions—such as vertical wind shear, mid-level humidity, the difference between air and water temperatures, and steering patterns—determine whether a storm strengthens or weakens. These are chaotic, short-term variables, not predictable climate trends. Also, there is no evidence that climate change impacts any of those other variables. Hurricane Melissa’s rapid intensification was a weather event, not evidence of a new climate regime.
The AP’s article claims that “Atlantic hurricanes are now more than twice as likely to intensify rapidly from minor storms to powerful and catastrophic events,” referencing a Scientific Reports paper. This statistic, when scrutinized, is questionable because it relies on satellite-era observations that began only in the 1970s. Earlier storm intensification rates were harder to measure, making today’s apparent “increase” partly a result of better weather detection technology such as satellites, radar, and continuous monitoring. The statistic also doesn’t account for other factors that impact water temperatures, like El Nino events that warm waters, and reductions in ship emissions that research suggests has contributed to hotter measured ocean temperatures.
The AP uncritically quotes a Climate Central meteorologist who says, “[w]e can’t stop hurricanes, but we can reduce the risk by cutting emissions.” That statement has no basis in science—it’s advocacy. Reducing CO₂ will not meaningfully change hurricane formation in the Atlantic, where natural cycles like the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation (AMO) play a far greater role in modulating storm activity.
The fact that Hurricane Melissa reached Category 5 intensity hardly makes it unique. Historical records show similar or stronger storms in the past—such as the 1935 Labor Day Hurricane, which struck the Florida Keys with estimated winds of 185 mph. That storm occurred during a much cooler global climate period, which disproves both the idea that powerful hurricanes are a modern phenomenon and that they are caused by global warming.
The AP also ignores the fact that surface temperatures in the tropical Atlantic naturally vary by several degrees Celsius over multidecadal cycles. The recent warming period that fueled Melissa is part of a recurring oceanic pattern, not proof of an unprecedented climate trend driving hurricane intensity.
The article concludes by invoking moral urgency—quoting island-nation negotiators who say storms like Melissa “make it more urgent for countries to act on climate change.” But this is emotional rhetoric, not evidence. Hurricanes have battered the Caribbean for millennia. The only thing “unprecedented” is how newsrooms now attribute every storm to climate change while ignoring the long, cyclical record of similar events.
In short, the AP story is a red herring. Warm water helps hurricanes, but that has always been true. There’s no credible long-term evidence of more frequent or intense storms, and no justification for tying one hurricane to global climate change. The data say otherwise.
By turning a single weather event into a climate morality tale, The Associated Press misleads its readers and betrays journalistic objectivity. Hurricanes, even powerful hurricanes like Melissa are meteorology, not ideology. It is long past time for reporters to acknowledge the difference.

Anthony Watts is a senior fellow for environment and climate at The Heartland Institute. Watts has been in the weather business both in front of, and behind the camera as an on-air television meteorologist since 1978, and currently does daily radio forecasts. He has created weather graphics presentation systems for television, specialized weather instrumentation, as well as co-authored peer-reviewed papers on climate issues. He operates the most viewed website in the world on climate, the award-winning website wattsupwiththat.com.
Originally posted on ClimateREALISM
Why do the mainstream media get away with publishing such garbage..?
When there is no punishement, there is no change in behavior.
A US health insurance company declared to no longer cover 100% of anesthesia costs on a Friday in december last year.
The next Monday they did a 180.
What happened was that in the meantime a CEO of another health insurance company got shot.
And while noonee exactly knew what happened,
the board knew this very well.
If there is punishment then even the profession with the highest rate of psychopaths becomes instantly enlightened.
In Poland some cultural enrichers did what they do best – they raped a woman.
Polish men in return almost killed those guys and devasted their shelter.
Poland has no 500% + rape increase as western European countries have.
In Israel it is kind of a sport to spit at Christians.
They don’t do this with muslims as the chance to end up with serious injuries and a knife in the belly is very high.
You see – consequences and punishment work with all cultures,ethnicities,professions etc.
In the UK we have made the process the punishment. That way behaviour in some at least can be changed and without clogging up the courts.
“In Israel it is kind of a sport to spit at Christians.”
Can you document that? I kinda doubt it.
Because, being ‘the mainstream media’, they can, and any other views are driven into small corners of the internet (like this one) & called ‘fake news’.
The main problem is the lack of critical thinking by the people who read & believe the mainstream crap.
Because too few people have the courage to challenge it. Especially those who should know better, in government, academia and science. They see mountains of $$$ coming their way if they play along.
Because there is no widespread, trusted, source of accurate information.
They don’t. Every day there are less people watching and reading their stuff.
The Climate Liars are desperate for grist for the upcoming COP30 mill.
“Climate change fuels Hurricane Melissa’s rapid intensification to Category 5,” reporter Sibi Arasu claims that “the warming of the world’s oceans caused by climate change helped double Hurricane Melissa’s wind speed in less than 24 hours.”
——————————-
Forgive me if I am wrong here, but I have always thought (based on what others have said) that climate change is a result or conclusion that one draws from analyzing meteorological data, not a cause or fueler of anything.
If this is true, then it is a red light that the article’s author and his interviewee really don’t know what they are talking about regarding hurricanes and climate. I am a bit surprised that media outlets actually get away with this so much.
Oh, they very much know what they are talking about, which is why we are adapting the expression “Climate Liars.”
Well according to “climate scientists,” the warming of the climate will cause the weather to become “more extreme.”
Of course, “climate scientists” ALSO told us that the cooling of the climate will make the weather “more extreme” during the 1970s “global cooling” crisis.
One of the specific scientists (the late Steven Schneider) was on BOTH bandwagons.
They had it right the first time, the cooling of the climate INCREASES temperature differentials, both tropics vs. high latitudes and poles AND day vs. night. Warming DECREASES those same temperature differentials.
It is higher temperature DIFFERENTIALS that make for more violent weather, not a higher “average” temperature.
So they are either lying (or just plain wrong and not smart enough to understand they are wrong, take your pick) or what we are expected to believe is that the climate of 1945 (when the global cooling trend of three decades began) was PERFECT, and any departure from THAT will make the weather “more extreme.”
Doesn’t sound credible, dose it?
It does to MSN and BBC.
At 500hPa a lot of air from the north was feeding the Melissa system before hitting Jamaica.
The warming of the worlds oceans was not caused by Humans releasing CO2 into the atmosphere. There is no mechanism for CO2 to do that.
So we are left only with scare stories about natural occurrences. Hurricanes are obviously increasing in strength due to them. It is after all, the null hypothesis.
It’s either that, or Divine Intervention
To my mind the word attribution has been tortured into meaning something altogether new: settled science – here’s the results. Even the BBC – and we all know what they’re like – has been rather mute on Melissa; which begs the question, why is Jamaica (a colonially oppressed nation) not so important to Auntie?
Settled science – here’s the results:
“Hurricane Melissa, which struck Jamaica as one of the most powerful storms ever recorded, was made four times more likely because of human-caused climate change, a rapid analysis said Wednesday.
Warming caused mainly by burning fossil fuels increased both the likelihood and intensity of the devastating Category 5 hurricane, the study by scientists at Imperial College London found.
“Jamaica had plenty of time and experience to prepare for this storm, but there are limits to how countries can prepare and adapt,” said Ralf Toumi, director of Imperial College’s Grantham Institute, which was responsible for the paper. – NDTV
And pushing it further…a strange edit in Sky News
Yesterday…
“Researchers at Imperial College London estimated that in a world without climate change, a weaker hurricane would have been about 12% less damaging. – Sky News
Today…
“In a cooler world without climate change, a Melissa-type hurricane would have made landfall in Jamaica once every 8,000 years, they said.”
Not so settled?
“a rapid analysis said”
A bit too rapid.
It was a forgone conclusion…
Easy when they have pre-determined the outcome.
A 12% reduction would still have been devastating.
Absolute nonsense. I seem to recall reading about a recent Atlantic basin sediment study that showed MORE tropical cyclone activity during The Little Ice Age than currently.
I suspect all of that is another “model circle jerk.” Models don’t tell you anything aside from the result of applying the MOSTLY INCORRECT assumptions put into the model.
“In a cooler world without climate change”… “Researchers at Imperial College London estimated that in a world without climate change”
The only such world is one which has no climate, no atmosphere. A dead world. Life on this planet is proof of climate change, just not the kind they’re speaking of.
“To my mind the word attribution has been tortured into meaning something altogether new: settled science – here’s the results. Even the BBC – and we all know what they’re like – has been rather mute on Melissa; which begs the question, why is Jamaica (a colonially oppressed nation) not so important to Auntie?”
On the contrary the BBC has extensively covered the effect on Jamaica.
There was even a post here earlier criticizing their coverage ‘BBC Lie About Hurricane Melissa’One of the comments criticized the BBC coverage thus:
“The first 12 minutes of last evening’s BBC news coverage was exclusively on Melissa, as though there was no other news of importance in the world.”
Their most recent article was 4 hours ago reporting on the death rate and damage on Jamaica.
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/clylqpyg8pjo
If hurricanes are becoming more frequent and intense, why aren’t the people and nations living and working on these Caribbean Islands either moving away or spending money hardening their cities, buildings and transportation?
The Jamaicans are too stoned to leave. 🙂
In an emergency you are more likely to survive if you’ve got Peter Tosh, Burning Spear or Bob Marley on the Ghettoblaster and a few reefers to hand and adopt a horizontal pose.
Accumulated Cyclone Energy (ACE) is a measure of the intensity and activity of all tropical cyclones during a season. It is possible to have a season with low ACE yet several destructive major hurricanes (this year may be one of those).
Since the IPCC does not predict an increase in the overall number of tropical storms, with some models even indicating a decrease in them over time, ACE is not an appropriate metric by which to measure the frequency and intensity of major hurricanes.
Difficult days for your crew. Still, there was at least one this season…
Three, so far. Erin, Humberto, and Gabrielle.
Making up shit seems to be the “appropriate” metric.
Not checking things, as usual. Nothing’s changed, I see.
Ditto. Climate alarmists also like to make up facts — too many fake facts — so I finally decided to create a cure for those suffering from this kind of junk science.
😎
Hard to read.
Sorry about that.
I don’t know how to make it bigger.
This is a point worthy of in-depth discussion.
When did ACE start being used?
The objections made to many averages (GAT, for example) may well apply to ACE.
ACE started in 1972.
Ah. The same date as the start of the climate catastrophe.
Well, it’s being (mis)used here to attack climate science….
“Climate Science”
bwahahaha
Where does one get a degree?
If global warming isn’t increasing ACE, then it isn’t happening.
An increase in ACE is not an IPCC prediction for the effect of global warming. As pointed out earlier, the prediction is for an increase in the frequency and intensity of major hurricanes, Cat. 3-5. The frequency of tropical storms in general is not expected to increase and may even decline. Therefore, ACE is not a suitable metric by which to judge the accuracy of IPCC predictions. But sure, carry on…..
“ the prediction is for an increase in the frequency and intensity of major hurricanes,”
A “prediction” from IPCC or climate models is of no more relevance to reality than a prophecy from a pack of tarot cards.
Yes there have been three category 5 hurricanes in the Atlantic this year resulting in a season with above average ACE. Just one other year in the last 50 when accurate satellite monitoring has taken place, that was 20 years ago.
It’s irrelevant to the IPCC hurricane prediction whether ACE is average or above or below average.
The IPCC forecast is for an increase in the frequency and intensity of major (Cat. 3-5) hurricanes.
Therefore, ACE should not be used as a metric by which to adjudicate on the IPCC forecasts; but this is WUWT, so, of course, it is.
Nothing is happening with anything in any hurricane data.
IPCC says that.
So hard to pretend to believe is “climate change”.. when basically NOTHING IS HAPPENING.
You just need to boost your intake of hallucinogenics and invent more fantasies and fairy-tales…
… all just to keep your child-like panic and hypochondria, that is your reason for living.
Lies are repeated until people believe that they are true or they stop listening to the crap they’re being told…the latter takes a while.
Melissa gained strength by sitting nearly stationary over warm water. Period.
Just as the Madame said… My dear you’re sitting on your fortune
Slow, yes. Warm water, yes. But also the upper troposphere has cooled 0.2 degrees since last year.
Hurricanes are a form of thermal engine. Warmer is lower pressure at the surface. Colder above means the latent heat transport is augmented. Both of those are factors, but there are many others, too.
The biggest problem is dumbing down augmented with hyperbole so the masses have something to get excited about/entertained.
At 500hPa a lot of air from the north was feeding the Melissa system before hitting Jamaica.
And the true irony? For all we know, it is the extraction of wind energy by wind farms that is increasing the phenomenon of storms “hanging around” in an area for extended periods as opposed to moving along.
Don’t know if/how much of a “trend” of that exists, but they certainly never bothered to consider for even a moment what the effects on the weather might be when they started to push to build worse-than-useless wind farms.
Story tip
Miliband Officially Drops Promise to Cut Energy Bills by £300
https://order-order.com/2025/10/31/miliband-officially-drops-promise-to-cut-energy-bills-by-300/
Miliband is to the UK, like Biden was to the U.S., everything both of them did/do, harms their own country.
Has Miliband had a mental health evaluation? He doesn’t seem to be competent.
From the article: “As the Atlantic Ocean warms”
What about that “Cold Blob” in the Atlantic ocean?
As always, Climate Alarmists/Propagandists assume too much. The truth is some parts of the Atlantic are warm, and some are not.
The lie the climate propagandists are trying to promote is that the Atlantic ocean is continually warming and getting hotter and hotter and hotter.
That’s not true. The oceans warm and cool, just like the atmosphere. Sometimes certain areas of the Atlantic ocean are a little warmer, and sometimes they are a little cooler, and there is no connection between CO2 and the temperature of the ocean.
The oceans have regional weather, just like the atmosphere. The Oceans are not just a worldwide bathtub that is continuously getting hotter and hotter, as portrayed by the Climate Propagandists.
Without the ocean’s ability to hold the summer warming winters would be freezing cold outside the tropics.
“… with the 1940s through 1960s being among the most active periods on record ”
In the early 1970s, when predictions of “the coming ice age” were rampant, reports were that cool periods have more turbulent weather than warm periods. I recall this was the perceived wisdom of Hubert Lamb (East Anglia) and Reid Bryson (Univ. of Wisc).
Anthony Watts presents facts.
The AP and the MSM only present and represent virtue signaling. In so doing they are destroying any credibility they ever had – keep doing it y’all at your own demise.
Very nice Anthony.
Hurricanes are the problem. Copy that.
So we need to massively increase atmospheric CO2 so it more quickly melts the arctic ice flooding AMOC and upsetting “the delicate salt balance” causing AMOC to collapse resulting in a major ice age. With that cooling, no more hurricanes.
Problem solved.
Right? Right? Right?
So, the oceans are hot causing the rapid intensification.
The Cat 5 hurricane, within a couple of days on the same ocean is now a Cat 1.
But the oceans are hot and a couple hundred miles will not make a difference when the oceans are “boiling.”
So what happened. Why did it not keep its intensity?
We know the answer, of course. It intensified due to all the hot air of the Climate Liars as the spewed forth their alarmism.
It didn’t increase its intensity because it went over land, including some very hilly terrain (over 3000′) in Jamaica then over land in Cuba. That breaks the eyeball and reduces the intensity.
https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTL7CIWOpWJQHXHi9F04W-tZGZZEqHWGWuUJr-AdziyMmmmgzTgSeYkTi7qWsekcfWIOm8&usqp=CAU
The AP is hardly alone in utilizing these distortions. Canada’s CBC can hardly wait for some weather event so that it can play its climate crisis card and assure its audience that this is the new normal that will continue unless we stop burning fossil fuels. The facts that voters rejected the national carbon tax in last April’s election and show few signs of making any major lifestyle changes to combat what they have realized is a non-problem keeps escaping the network. So it continues probably depending on government and environmental group donations keep on whipping what’s becoming a rapidly expiring horse that no one’s going to revive any longer.