By Kenneth Richard on 6. May 2026
Another anthropogenic global warming (AGW) modeling failure emerges in observed tropical cyclone data.
According to climate modeling (Knutson et al., 2015 and 2020), everyday human activities such as driving cars and using cell phones (AGW) should lead to increases in tropical cyclone (TC) landfall frequency and intensity (i.e., accumulated cyclone energy [ACE], or maximum windspeed).
Instead, 45 years of satellite observations (Bell et al., 2026) indicate declining TC frequency trends over the western North Pacific (WNP, including the Philippines, Hong Kong, China, Taiwan, Japan, Korea, Vietnam, Micronesia), as well as a weakly declining trend (-7.6 ACE units per decade-¹) in TC intensity for the WNP.
“Landfall trends over individual nations are insignificant, but significant decreases are noted for the northern Philippines and parts of Micronesia, including for intense (> 33 m s-¹).”
“TC frequency across the region has been declining, linked to changes in the large-scale atmospheric circulation…as well as projected decreases in straight-moving TCs (i.e., those making landfall in southern China and the Philippines.”
“After removing the effect of ENSO [natural variability]…downward trend of 7.6 ACE units per decade-¹ for [the entire WNP].”
The records are deficient, but the Little Ice Age was apparently rather prone to
hurricanes. So warming would therefore tend to lower the number of hurricanes.
They wouldn’t have had this papers published if they hadn’t also said: “However, the relationship between the rain rate in outer rainbands and Vmax is less clear (e.g., Xi et al. 2023). Interestingly, in some cases, lower category TCs (and even Ex-TCs, especially when they interact with other weather systems) can generate significant rainfalls that are comparable to or even exceed those from stronger systems. Indeed, our analysis here of “Ex-TC tracks” may provide useful information to consider for future dedicated studies that are focused on rainfall-related hazards brought about by TCs.”
Ditto the Atlantic.
Total Accumulated Cyclonic Energy 1971-2017
Atlantic
Years above normal 9
Normal 21
Years below normal 17
Pacific
Years above normal 16
Normal 20
Years below normal 11
Totals
Years above normal 25
Normal 41
Years below normal 28
Source: NOAA
Not very concerning in my opinion.
This data is nearly 10 years old. Are there updates through 2025?
There’s a good pod from Tom Nelson interviewing Thomas Kurz “Why There Is No Climate Crisis” Very informative and worth a look
I’ve experienced two Typhoons while visiting the in-laws and fam in Japan! Way less wind and way more rain than here, just rain non-stop for 12 hours. When it finally ended, went outside to see how bad the streets were flooded (Tsukuba-mirai shi) and there was almost nothing! Just a few puddles. Japan’s infrastructure for handling these storms is mind-boggling, even in rural areas.
https://maps.app.goo.gl/iQTmGDuygE8SwcEy6
Observations TRUMP theory.
I recall reading about an ocean sediment study in the Atlantic basin that found TC activity was HIGHER THAN TODAY during The Little Ice Age.
On every level, it is a COLDER climate that should be feared, not a warmer climate. The so-called “climate science” of today has it completely backwards.
Every word warmistas say is the opposite of the truth/reality.
There are no exceptions.
The cannot happen by random chance or mistake.
Boring thermodynamic theory. The atmosphere transports heat energy from the tropics to the poles, via wind. It’ll be governed by a an equation that looks like ACE=k*(T_tropic-T_pole) . The Arctic has seen the main increase in surface temperature due to gerbil warbling or whatever, whereas the tropics have seen little change. Therefore the energy transfer of the heat engine will drop. So we’d expect ACE to drop more in NH than SH because the Arctic is warming more than the Antarctic. Has this got legs or not?
The are more tropical cyclones in the NH by a lot, so there is more to lose if it goes down.
Don’t expect the mainstream media to publicize these findings because every time one of these storms occurs, there’s always some climate guru to re-assure us, either outright or more subtly, that with the continued burning of fossil fuels such events should be expected to become more commonplace.
As if some event occurring means it is happening more.
If the models say it is happening, then it is.
Even if we have to fix the data before we can prove it.
/sarc
What’s up with the headline image? Anti-cyclonic cyclone? 🤪😆
AI needs some better QC I think before posting
Outflow aloft is always anticyclonic.
Hurricanes require high pressure in the upper levels to evacuate the huge volume of rising air,or the low will “fill in”.
See here:
“A high-pressure system aloft (upper-level anticyclone) is a critical component for the development and intensification of a hurricane. While hurricanes are intense low-pressure systems at the surface, they require a high-pressure system in the upper atmosphere (roughly 30,000 to 50,000 feet) to act as an exhaust vent, allowing them to strengthen. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
Here is how high pressure aloft affects hurricanes:
See image diagram.
High pressure (IOW anticyclone) over low pressure.
Also spin direction is reversed in southern vs northern hemisphere.