By P Gosselin
The US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) predicted that an above average Atlantic huricane seacon for 2025.
Now that the season is winding down, we are able to start concluding and summarizing the season: it’s going to come in as near normal activity. The forecast made earlier this year was a bit on the hyped side.
Huricane season forecasts have not really improved, despite all the claims that models are better than ever:
“In my 30 years at the National Weather Service, we’ve never had more advanced models and warning systems in place to monitor the weather,” said NOAA’s National Weather Service Director Ken Graham. “This outlook is a call to action: be prepared. Take proactive steps now to make a plan and gather supplies to ensure you’re ready before a storm threatens.”
NOAA’s outlook for the 2025 Atlantic hurricane season, which goes from June 1 to November 30, predicted a 60% chance of an above-normal season, and a 10% chance of a below-normal season. The agency forecast a range of 13 to 19 total named storms (winds of 39 mph or higher). Of those, 6-10 were forecast to become hurricanes (winds of 74 mph or higher), including 3-5 major hurricanes (category 3, 4 or 5; with winds of 111 mph or higher).
Near average season
According to data from the Univestity of Colorado, the season is now slghtly above average (November 7) in terms of accumulated cyclone energy:
Source: University of Colorado.
Though more activity may occur before the end of the month, currently there are no signs of tropical storms in the Atlantic.
Global overall trend
Alarmists have claimed tropical storm activity would increase with the onset of global warming. Though the globe has warmed over the past 50 years, global cyclone activity has not escalated as feared:
Twleve-month running average counts of global hurricanes (top) and major hurricanes (bottom), 1980 to March 10, 2025. Source: Ryan Maue.
Quite to the contrary, the overall trend has been somewhat downard since 1990, with no real trend since 1970:
Total annual global ACE (which integrates frequency and intensity) 1970 to March 10, 2025. Source: Ryan Maue.
The reality hasn’t cooperated with the alarmist climate hype. It’s been a disapoointing season for catastrophe prophets.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Forecasters don’t understand what is happening because we don’t understand how the Hunga-Tonga volcano is affecting our climate.
I was so disappointed that this massive release of the potent greenhouse gas H2O
was never considered to start a runaway greenhouse effect that will kill us all.
I was so ready for an overdose of fear,
but it was either completely ignored or got at best a bit of potential warming lipservice.
Maybe H2O ain’t greenhouse gasy enough or, from a pure scientific perspective – you can’t tax it.
I do take the Christy et al graph w a pinch of salt. They don’t actually measure ground or above surface temperatures. Too much noise below 5 km. It is using proxies and models. And weather balloons. And we all know the issues w measuring temperatures near ground level. And ‘average lower troposphere temperatures’.
I don’t think anybody can conclusively say that the HT eruption caused x..It is still all speculative. Nothing wrong w that.
UAH satellite data is routinely calibrated against RAOB data … https://www.drroyspencer.com/latest-global-temperatures/
Tonga did cause the UAH temperature spike, but no one yet knows exactly how. If we’d stop wasting billions on the fake climate crisis, we would be closer to understanding how our basic atmosphere actually works. I discuss this nearly daily on X (@_ClimateCraze). Alarmists and media won’t touch this subject because H2O and not CO2 caused this spike. Even so, I have so far given 4 talks about this subject, with more to be scheduled next year … https://climatecraze.com/talks.php
I agree. I’ve been comparing the temperature spike to the 1877 spike. While similar in profile, I believe they were created differently.
I’ve found that major ENSO events often occur with the same 19.86-year periodicity of Jupiter-Saturn conjunctions. The 2016 event came 7 cycles after 1877. I don’t expect another major solar-induced temperature-changing event until 2036.
The Hunga-Tonga water vapor was injection into the Stratosphere in almost perfect alignment with solar cycle 25 potentially causing it to play a larger-than-normal role; elevated UV levels can warm and dissociate H20.
Solar activity has recently increased, and temperatures have also briefly stopped falling. It’s probably just be coincidence, but still worth watching.
Nor can anyone state with reasonable scientific facts why it took on the order of 16 months for the “temperature spike” to possibly be revealed in the UAH GLAT monthly temperature variation measurements.
That is, the eruption and stratospheric injection of water vapor happened in January 2022, but upward departure from normal delta-T “noise” level around the UAH-designated “running, centered 13-month average” trend line didn’t happen to until May 2023 . . . a delay of 16 months!
“Did cause” is certainly debatable scientifically.
Mt Tambora’s aerosols caused cooling 15 months after its eruption. The 1815 eruption caused the 1816 year without a summer. Tonga’s water-vapor and its atmospheric effects caused warming 18 months after it’s eruption. Tonga’s smaller aerosol content may have delayed warming a few months with some prior cooling before its atmospheric depletion.
Boldly stated, but without any reference to published scientific findings of such.
In rebuttal, you might find this article enlightening: New Study Disputes Hunga Tonga Volcano’s Role In 2023-24 Global Warm-Up, in its reporting on the work of Texas A&M atmospheric scientist Dr. Andrew Dessler and fellow researchers (including multiple scientists from NASA) as published in the Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres in July 2024 (see https://artsci.tamu.edu/news/2024/07/new-study-disputes-hunga-tonga-volcanos-role-in-2023-24-global-warm-up.html ).
Among the stated findings (my bold emphasis added):
— “Texas A&M atmospheric scientist Dr. Andrew Dessler and fellow researchers analyzing the climate impact of the 2022 Hunga Tonga volcano eruption — widely thought to be responsible for the Earth’s extreme warmth during the past two years — have determined the two-day underwater event actually cooled the climate.”
— “Historically, large volcanic eruptions like Tambora in 1815 and Mt. Pinatubo in 1991 have led to significant cooling effects on the global climate by blocking sunlight with their aerosols. However, Hunga Tonga’s eruption presented a unique scenario: As a submarine volcano, it introduced an unprecedented amount of water vapor into the stratosphere, increasing total stratospheric water content by about 10%.
— “Because water vapor is a powerful greenhouse gas, Dessler says there was initial speculation that it might account for the extreme global warmth in 2023 and 2024. Instead, the results . . . reveal the opposite: The eruption actually contributed to cooling the Earth, similar to other major volcanic events.
— “While this paper answers several important questions, Dessler acknowledges that it simultaneously introduces new ones. For instance, the researchers highlighted some unresolved issues related to the Hunga Tonga eruption, such as the unexpectedly low levels of sulfur dioxide produced by such a violent eruption and the minimal impact the eruption had on the 2023 ozone hole.”
Simple reason: it isn’t.
Of course it is. It caused massive amounts of water vapor to be distributed into the stratosphere and produced shockwaves measured the world around. It was a massive event never seen before. That means no one can know what the long term effects are because there is no data bank to compare it to.
Here, for your benefit (my bold emphasis added):
“Schoeberl et al. examined how Hunga’s eruption affected climate in the Southern Hemisphere over the following 2 years. They found that in the year following the eruption, the cooling effect from the volcanic aerosols reflecting sunlight into outer space was stronger than the warming caused by water vapors trapping heat in the atmosphere. But most of the volcano’s effects had dissipated by the end of 2023.
“The researchers used satellite data to examine how stratospheric aerosols, gases, and temperatures changed after the eruption. The Hunga eruption contributed about 150 metric megatons of water vapor into the stratosphere—an amount so high that it raised global levels of stratospheric water vapor by about 10%. This massive water injection cooled temperatures in the tropical stratosphere by 4°C in March and April of 2022. In turn, this temporary cooling created a secondary circulation pattern that led to reduced ozone levels throughout 2022.”
— https://eos.org/research-spotlights/atmospheric-effects-of-hunga-tonga-eruption-lingered-for-years
Yes, and in OTHER NEWS, a mosquito bite on an elephant’s butt in Kenya caused a worldwide increase in elephant stampedes over the following 14 months….
Agree. Earthquakes with magnitudes of about 4.5 or greater on the Richter scale are strong enough to be recorded by seismographs all around the world.
And there are about 10,000 to 15,000 earthquakes in the Richter magnitude scale range of 4.0–4.9 each year . . . by my calculations, that equates to 8–12 earthquakes EACH DAY having Richter magnitude above 4.5, sending shockwaves that are measured around the world . . . accounting for the Richter scale being logarithmic.
— source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richter_scale
Nothing to see here, move along, move along.
Weird post. The NOAA forecast was:
“NOAA’s outlook for the 2025 Atlantic hurricane season, which goes from June 1 to November 30, predicts a 30% chance of a near-normal season, a 60% chance of an above-normal season, and a 10% chance of a below-normal season.”
Then it shows a plot of ACE, which was indeed above normal. Looks like the forecast was spot on. Gosselin confuses by showing dates from 2001 in the graph,, but I presume he meant 2025.
Then the old muddle
“Alarmists have claimed tropical storm activity would increase with the onset of global warming.”
Scientists didn’t. The IPCC predicted a possible lower frequency, but with strong hurricanes getting stronger. Anyway, the ACE plot shown does not include the current season, so can’t tell us anything about the forecast.
They predicted that it might be below average, average or above average.
Therefore since the season was one of those three, the prediction was accurate.
They predicted 60% chance that it would be above normal, and it was. Sowhat was “over-hyped”?
So no hurricanes making landfall in the US is ‘above average’?
I suppose the average number of hurricanes making landfall in the US is negative.
The prediction was for the North Atlantic, not for the US coastline. Hurricanes making landfall on Jamaica is relatively uncommon, about once every 10 years. Also the first time for a Cat 5 so definitely above average!
My amateur stats skills show that these predictions would have to be tested against 50 years of data to get even a 10% statistically significant level of accuracy.
So we have to wait until 2075 to see if these forecasts are accurate….ish
No, sorta true but not the full story . . . they went further by predicting the ranges of number of storms in each of three categories: named tropical storms, hurricanes, and major hurricanes.
So they were 60% wrong.. Ok. Thanks for the confirmation.
“Weird post.”
Thanks for the warning, but why do you keep writing these weird posts ???
I guess a ‘weird post’ here is anything that points out the ridiculousness of the lead article?
A weird post would be one by you that was accurate.
He…can’t…resist….Co2mpulsion
As he can not fight co2 he has to fight unbelievers.
And he was so impressed by Mann ‘s last years storm predictions( if we add this years storms to the mix Mann was spot on 🙂
that it encouraged him to keep on fighting the good fight.
‘predicts a 30% chance of a near-normal season, a 60% chance of an above-normal season, and a 10% chance of a below-normal season.”
That’s the great thing about real climate science. It produces predictions which can be tested against real data to see how accurate they are.
It is not guesswork. It is real, peer-reviewed science often using weather stations which actually exist (* – may not apply to Britain)
For all intents and purposes, the “average” is a meaningless metric. At best, it is a quaint slice of limited observation with no application to reality. I think the point the author is making is that the use of hurricane forecasting by the alarmist clique is not validated by the outcome.
Really???
NOAA forecast, with a stated 70% confidence level:
— a minimum of 13 named tropical storms (the lower end of a forecast range having ±19% stated uncertainty)
— a minimum of 6 hurricanes (the lower end of a forecast range having ±25% stated uncertainty)
— a minimum of 3 major hurricanes (the lower end of a forecast range having ±25% stated uncertainty).
So far—with only three weeks remaining—NOAA has only been “spot on” in achieving the minimums of those forecasts, which themselves had large enough uncertainty ranges as to question them coming from any supercomputer
climateweather models, let alone the hundreds of “scientists” that NOAA employs.Ho hum for the skeptics. Ignored by the alarmists.
The cyclone data was from Colorado State University, not the University of Colorado.
Actually it was from the People’s Front of Judea
not from the Judeans People’s Front.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a0BpfwazhUA
I think Nick is the sole member of the Popular Front of Climate Change
I think Enqist?/ Griff are the other 50%
Splitters!!
NOAA predicted a ~70% probability of an ‘above-average’ Atlantic hurricane season in 2025 and, with the prediction period still not over, so far:
There have been 13 named storms (NOAA forecast 13-19)
Five of these named storms have been categorised as hurricanes (NOAA forecast 6-10)
Four of these five hurricanes, four developed into major hurricanes (winds of 111 mph or higher), with one Cat, 4 and three Cat. 5s. (NOAA forecast 3-5)
2025 saw the second-most Category 5 hurricanes in a season, after 2005.
Alarmist?
Thanks for verifying that there is ABSOLUTELY NOTHING UNUSUAL happening with hurricanes or cyclones.. 🙂
What do we see in the commentary? The usual suspect contrarians ( like Nick S) posting something followed by almost all the frequent standard posters reacting to it.
I for one am getting really tired of this game.
But i guess this is what happens on platforms. The binary game trying to score points. But why oh why do people HAVE to react to others who are not worthy to play the game with?
The answer: because of yr own vanity you can’t help yourself. But i will call it ‘the idiot game’ from now on.
Ignorance is bliss..😄
Or, Little Nickie could just toddle away and keep his stupidity to himself.
90% of the people who read a site, never post.
If lies are left unchallenged, they become truth.
I am just a poor boy
Though my story’s seldom told
I have squandered my resistance
For a pocketful of mumbles
Such are promises
All lies and jest
Still a man hears what he wants to hear
And disregards the rest
Consider how AI gets its information.
AI operates on the standard of the preponderance of the evidence, meaning the more times it finds something, the more it considers it accurate.
So, yes. Left unchallenged, it becomes the “truth.”
Consider how the brain learns. Repetition strengthens neural pathways.
Consider how brainwashing works. Repetitions..
The only issue is people who read may not read all of the counter points.
Still a man hears what he wants to hear
And disregards the rest
No they don’t. Not on this platform. Not by its visitors. It is just vanity to engage.
I, too, dislike the “flame wars” that occur in reader comments.
I just get irritated by the space it takes up.
If you want to assess the number of hurricanes throughout the last century it is best to only count landfall ones as we of course had no satellites to track them at sea before 1979. Also, i rather doubt that all hurricanes that made landfall were counted a century ago. And only the strongest ones w massive damage reported, at least in the news.
and we only start categorizing them in 1975. Also, a hurricane can change in category throughout its trajectory. So a category 5 at sea can turn into a category 3 at landfall and vice versa.
So, who’s counting what and when?
Caveat: i am speculating here..
People only make predictions for certain reasons. You can buy tout sheets at every horse race that tell you what the results will be. I can pay the local psychic to tell me what my future love life will be. I can buy a newspaper and read my horoscope. I can buy chinese food and get a fortune cookie. I can also get numerous weather predictions from government agencies as a taxpaying citizen.
There are no refunds for incorrect predictions. Sorry about your luck.
I am not getting your point. Please enlighten me..
Ya know, if we were to remove the named systems which were never hurricanes to begin with it was a well below average hurricane season. Oh, well, the hypsters have to hype something in their endless attempts to terrify the masses about the climate crisis and justify their budgets.
Yep.
A un-noteworthy development becomes a threat to life & property event the moment some bureaucrat assigns a cringeworthy name to it.
We are not a species worthy of our origins.
“We are not a species worthy of our origins.”
Or maybe we are.
“In my 30 years at the National Weather Service, we’ve never had more advanced models and warning systems in place to monitor the weather,”
Since I’ve been six or seven, I’ve noticed how dumb (disingenuous?) that figure of speech is. True even if they’ve been using the SAME models all along.
“There’s no shit better than our shit” means basically that everybody’s shit is the same. I suspect advertisers know that.
“NOAA’s outlook for the 2025 Atlantic hurricane season, which goes from June 1 to November 30, predicted a 60% chance of an above-normal season, and a 10% chance of a below-normal season. The agency forecast a range of 13 to 19 total named storms (winds of 39 mph or higher). Of those, 6-10 were forecast to become hurricanes (winds of 74 mph or higher), including 3-5 major hurricanes (category 3, 4 or 5; with winds of 111 mph or higher).”
OK let’s take it point by point.
ACE already above normal.
Already 13 named storms.
Only 5 hurricanes so far
Of those, 4 were major hurricanes
Of those 4, 3 were category 5 (only happened once before during satellite monitoring period).
So based on the data so far NOAA’s prediction was accurate!
If that’s your standard for “accurate”, I’d hate to have seen you plotting the course for Apollo 11 towards the Moon.
Armstrong, Aldrin and Collins would have touched down somewhere in Mongolia if you were calling the compass marks.
I predict there is a 0% to 100% chance the sun will rise in the east tomorrow.
Of course at the south pole it won’t rise at all (because it’s up all day) and at the north pole it will not rise either(because it’s down all day), everywhere else somewhere in between, Boston for example it rose at 6:29am at 113º SE today. Only at the equinoxes will it rise in the East, so there is 0% chance it will rise in the east tomorrow!
Prediction is so difficult. Especially about the future.
H-T was an impressive explosion, but with a very limited and temporary effect. H-T ejected about 0.25 km3 of water into the stratosphere, but little aerosol. Pinatubo, El Chicon, and largest in the past 200 years, Tambora ejected 40-400 times more aerosols than H-T injected water into the stratosphere. Pinatubo, putatively causing a 1C cooling for a year, even though the absolute surface temperature of the Earth is measured only to ± 2 C, or worse. Tambora is supposed to be responsible for the Year without Summer- 1816, but it also coincides with a paucity of solar activity that extended throughout that period. These events and their consequences are NOT simple cause and effect events, but interact with other concurrent events to produce highly variable results..
Accumulated Cyclonic Energy, ACE, is a metric; often applied, but rarely accurate. ACE increases inexorably with climate models. Tropical cyclones are supposed to increase with ACE. But, they stubbornly don’t. That observation seems to make NO impression. Every year, the predictions are for an above average year since ACE is high. The problem is that the sufficient conditions for tropical cyclones are known, but not the necessary conditions. Otherwise, the predictions WOULD be accurate.
Through the 2025 season, there is no statistically increase in either the number nor intensity of tropical cyclones as predicted by ACE and climate models.
But, next season, an increase will be predicted yet again.
Maybe the forecasters will get lucky for a change.
This may be the case in the Atlantic, but the alarmists won’t hesitate to activate their backup plan(s); i.e., they’ll pounce on the typhoons that have hit the Philippines and Vietnam as another incontrovertible example of climate change causing more of such storms to occur. Their credo is never to look a gift horse in the mouth, and any storm anywhere provides that proof.
But the Mann-Mad-Media made the hype more intense!
well, yah, a season can be predicted to be above or below whatever ‘normal’ is.
I think you are saying that the art of prediction hasn’t improved.
(BTW, the first graph seems to have wrong date range.)
[A caution is that some people only quote hurricanes that hit the US, whereas some stay south, trashing Carribbean islands and the Yucatan Peninsula.)
The Atlantic season had very few storms and even those stats were somewhat padded. That’s why they do that idiotic ACE metric. We had 5 hurricanes and 8 tropical storms… and one of those was subtropical storm Karen which barely made the cut as a ‘storm’ and lasted less than a day. TS Andrea was even weaker and only lasted a day. I get afternoon thunderstorms worse than that! TS Barry and Lorenzo, just 5kt into TS and only lasted 2 days. TS Chantel and Dexter only 3 days. I forgot which storm it was, but it was ‘promoted’ to TS because one HH flight dropsonde near the edge of the NE cross at around 750mb flight level tapped the 1 minute wind point they could extrapolate a 35kt surface wind from. They were desperate to make sure we had more storms and still only managed to label 13 of them this year.
I don’t know what ACE is good for, but it seems to me to be a way to hype nothing. It’s like saying robbery is out of control when actual crimes are down by 60%… but one bank robbery netted the crooks $20 million. Add it all up and it looks horrible. It seems to be more about the narrative than actually investigating and tracking storms so those of us in hurricane country know what to expect when the next storm hits us.