Chris Martz sums it up.
My question is: Where are the WWA people to explain how Climate Change is 1. Responsible. 2 They predicted it.
Chris Martz sums it up.
My question is: Where are the WWA people to explain how Climate Change is 1. Responsible. 2 They predicted it.
Crickets. Just wait til next year. Anyway, no hurricanes is proof that CO2 can not be trusted and must be cut in half or something. We know it is building up…more CO2, more heat, more hurricanes will come and when they finally do it will be more bad.
At the Mauna Loa Obs. in Hawaii, the concentration of CO2 in dry air is currently 427 ppmv. One cubic meter of this air has a mass of 1,290 grams and contains a mere 0.84 grams of CO2. This minute amount of CO2 does not have enough “molecular muscle” to hurt a fly and cannot cause any global warming or climate change as alleged by the corrupt IPCC and unscrupulous collaborating scientists (aka welfare queens in white coats).
This, sir, is a slur on welfare queens!
Have you ever heard of one Nicolas Théodore de Saussure?
https://fackel.substack.com/p/the-quite-unknown-story-of-co2-measurements-f6b
“Between 1827 and 1829, Nicolas de Saussure conducted no less than 225 attempts to measure atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations in the vicinity of Geneva.
“The average carbon dioxide levels of the air deriving from 104 measurements taken 4 feet above the ground and at all day- and night-times = 4.15 [units per unit of] vol. per 10,000 [units per unit of] vol. air. Max. = 5.74, min. = 3.15.
Reading the full article, one finds CO2 concentrations at or higher than Mauna Loa today… 30 years before the first oil well.
Let’s see . . . you want me to believe the capability of any scientist to accurately measure atmospheric CO2 concentration during the interval of 1827 to 1829 (alternatively “30 years before the first oil well”, your words) was comparable to the CO2 measurement accuracy available in the last two decades or so at NOAA’s Mauna Loa laboratory?
I won’t buy that.
BTW, Nicolas Théodore de Saussure was mostly known for his work in phytochemistry, plant physiology, and photosynthesis . . . not for any work in atmospheric chemistry or analysis.
You did not read the methodology.
Any methodology using chemistry and-or instruments incapable of accurately measuring atmospheric CO2 concentration—and beyond that performing such measurements at a non-representative location for Earth’s global average, near or in the city of Geneva—to, say, an accuracy of +/- 50 ppm is simply not to be trusted in providing data that can be compared to that available over the last 20 or so years from NOAA’s Mauna Loa observatory.
As to “reading the methodology”, this information from Google’s AI bot is sufficient for me (my bold emphasis added):
“In 1830, atmospheric carbon dioxide could be measured with a relative error margin of roughly 5% to 10% (an uncertainty of about plus or minus 30 ppm around baseline levels).
“Measurement Methods
— Chemical Absorption: The leading pioneer at the time, Swiss chemist Theodore de Saussure, used precise eudiometers and alkaline absorption solutions to capture and weigh carbon dioxide from measured volumes of air.
— Calculated Mean: De Saussure published comprehensive memoirs around 1830 estimating atmospheric carbon dioxide to be roughly 0.04% by volume (about 400 ppmv), which overestimated actual pre-industrial background levels (closer to 280 ppmv) due to chemical absorption errors and local contamination.”
“And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.”
— John 8:32, The Bible, KJV
I’ve already heard from a friend that zero hurricanes is another scrap of information about CO2 climate change.
I sometimes wonder what the actual CO2 level target is for the alarmists. Pretty sure a fair proportion of them think it should be zero, despite that being fatal to all life on Earth.
Myself, I think 1200 would probably be nice. It would make growing food significantly easier.
I would like it to stay under 40.000 ppm. That’s the concentration in my exhaled breath.
but 10.000 ppm is also OK, That’s the concentration in my fullface motorcycle helmet.
I always smile when I am riding my motorcycle, wearing my fullface helmet so CO2 must be good for you.
I kind of agree with you, but there is the ongoing issue of cutting back hedges and lawns. I may have to invest in a friendly robot to help do the hedge trimming and a robot lawn machine to remove the chore. When we have sufficient rains to make the grass grow here in central UK again. Thankfully our lovely summer weather did deliver us rain at the start of September so mowing and trimming has recommenced.
I sometimes wonder what the actual CO2 level target is
I’ve asked several times over the years. Never have received an answer.
Much like I have been asking someone to define the optimum climate.
For all we know we are evolving TOWARDS the optimum.
Keep it under 5000 ppm as they do in submarines.
Or, in compliance with these NASA maximum cabin air CO2 concentration limits:
— the nominal 1-hour average carbon dioxide partial pressure on the International Space Station (ISS) to ~4,000 ppm under NASA-STD-3001,
—long-duration Spacecraft Maximum Allowable Concentration (SMAC), 7–180 days, to ~7,000 ppm.
Works for me, considering when I sleep the CO2 levels are much, much higher than ambient.
Unless, of course, there is adequate air flow.
So very many people getting all upset about global average atmospheric CO2 levels now exceeding 420 ppm while having absolutely no knowledge of the following (courtesy of Google’s AI bot):
“Residential buildings: Average 600–1,000 ppm CO2 while occupied, depending on household size and ventilation.
Business offices: Average 700–1,000 ppm CO2 during work hours, depending on occupant density and HVAC settings.”
Oh well.
Using the same methods as the attribution crowd, obviously higher CO2 causes fewer hurricanes!
I’m waiting to see how long it’ll take the mainstream media to publicize this information. Chances are good it’ll be a long wait, but just let a tropical storm develop anywhere, and they’ll be telling us that unless we stop using fossil fuels, these will appearing every week.
All they need is a tropical depression.
We have Fay now.
Not one of the wind forecasting systems (GFS, ECMWF, ICON) has seen Fay at more than 35knots. Where are mid Atlantic wind speeds measured and can they be monitored?
There’s been some mention of the lack of hurricanes in New England news, including keeping an eye on Fay and a subtropical system that may make this weekend interesting. Also today is the anniversary of landfall on Long Island of the Hurricane of ’38, scars of which are still identifiable in New Hampshire and other states. That’s also received mention this week.
This weekend’s storm received a mention on ABC this evening.
The national TV news just this evening featured a “monster” (I kid you not!) Nor’easter developing along the upper Atlantic seaboard with winds of—horror!—40 mph and—incredibly!—6 to 12-foot surf.
In lieu of blaming this development on “climate change”, I believe it’s just the MSM seeking some kind . . . any kind . . of attention-grabbing story to fill airtime in the absence of the usual Atlantic hurricane stories.
Soon there will be insane leftist protestors (I know, redundant) dressed up as hurricanes, lamenting the lack thereof, and blaming Trump.
and blaming Trump, fossil fuels, Israel, billionaires, pensioners …..
Well, Texas could use some rain, so a landfalling hurricane would help./s
But we on the West Coast are due for a Supernatural El Nino, so we’ll get plenty of rain.
Maybe El Nino has something to do with the hurricane drought in the Atlantic?
Just hope that any newly formed storms avoid JFK at the end of this month and next, as we are flying through that airport to and from Europe.
Why?
In the Northwest, El Niño is usually (not always) accompanied by less rain, and La Niña with more rain and cooler weather.
What were the hurricane seasons like around the 1982/3 super Nino? How about around the 1998 one?
In the Pacific the 1982 season was the most active and costliest hurricane season on record (23 named storms), in the Atlantic it was well below normal with only 5 named storms.
Yes El Nino suppresses Atlantic storms but increases them in the Pacific, so far a record tying 3 Cat 5 ones there.
Or does the lack of El Nino cause hurricanes?
El Niño creates strong upper-level westerly winds across the tropical Atlantic. This wind shear tears apart the tops of developing thunderstorms before they can organize into hurricanes.
https://www.aoml.noaa.gov/how-does-el-nino-impact-atlantic-hurricane-season/
The strong 2023 Hurricane season still happened despite a moderate to strong El-Nino phase at the time.
How do you explain this?
This paper answers your question …..
https://journals.ametsoc.org/view/journals/bams/105/9/BAMS-D-23-0305.1.xml
Yes, I know that, but my point stands since Phil stated this which I contradicted,
From your link agreeing there was a strong El-Nino just as I stated,
The very opposite effect.
We also seem to lack cold fronts, some weather debate about whether one will make it to south Texas this week or not. Gulf surface temperatures are high and northers provide the cooling from surface air and upwelling. In the NW Gulf hurricanes peak earlier but history doesn’t provide much guide about exceptions and some storms have very broad effects.
Fist time in 110 years = proof of climate change.
It’s already been reported that climate change has caused a surprisingly stable atmosphere which is one of the reasons for no hurricanes. You couldn’t make it up. No, wait, they just did.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/weather-news/articles/no-hurricanes-2026-3-reasons-115327072.html
So climate change is giving us extreme stability now? It’s worse than we thought.
I’m fine with that as I’ve been arguing the same way with my primitive
Moon-Desert-Cloud analogy.
Moon – no atmosphere = violent temperature swings of several 100 degrees as soon as you move from sun to shadow.
Cloudless deseert – Superhot during day – freezing temperature at night
Cloudy deseert – mild temperatures during day, mild temperatures during night.
The temperature difference gets cut in half from 50 to 25 degrees by “dispersing”sunrays via climate gas h2o.
Climate gas homogenizes temperature.
The smaller the gap between peaks and lows the more stable the climate.
So climate change can give us disasters and perfect weather. Such is the crisis…. which to favor?
Could equally prove that geoengineers have been working relentlessly?
I doubt that.
Geoengineers are supposed to work for TPTB.
Those are the ones who have the power , the money, the means to engineer climate on a global scale.
They are interested in creating more chaos to usher in a New Order out of it and prove the impacts of AGW shock&awe style with horrible storms.
A hurricane free season would be the last thing they want.
It’s just as quiet in the alarmist, ambulance-chasing climate press.
No it isn’t. El Nino predictions of the worst ever are all day everyday news items. The alarmist weather press decides what is covered as alarming.
I saw some videos on X that there were quite a few hurricanes and typhoons in Pacific ocean. One hurricane struck Hawaii, for the first time in many years and caused lots of damage.
Hey, Captain Obvious, everyone else saw the same thing. This post was about the lack of hurricanes in the NORTH ATLANTIC.
Yes, which is a consequence of El Nino, the other consequence of which is an increase in tropical storms in the Pacific, where there have been a record equalling 3 Cat 5 hurricanes so far.
You are very precise in your first comment and now we get “quite a few”. That’s like a spouse saying she is going to pop-in-to the a department store for a few seconds. 🙂
Aren’t all hurricanes in the Pacific Ocean called typhoons?
Only those that form in the western Pacific.
You all just don’t get it. This just proves that climate change is real and we MUST take drastic steps to stop all this crazy stuff! And Trump is just making it all worse! More government NOW is needed to save us, how can you all be so blind???
The above is not an exaggeration, if anything it is actually more sane than many rants I have seen.
You left out the part of giving up all money.
It’s also “all quiet on the western troll front.”
Oops, I was going to post this Atlantic tropical storm activity graph at the peak of the season, Sep 10th, on various places. Autumn starts tomorrow in the USA (2005 EDT, 1605Z). I’ll post it on my FB page tomorrow.
Crikey! Well, if there are no hurricanes in the North Atlantic, then according to the climate pseudoscientists, energy in = energy out, energy conservation, forcings and equilibrium, those hurricanes must have gone somewhere else, or turned into something else, unless all that energy has disappeared into the sea.
It’s probably lurking around where it can’t be found, just waiting for climate change to wake it up again!
Why does anybody even bother listening to the lunatics? I understand that it is easier to be ignorant and gullible, but really . . .
It’s a travesty.
Yes. Exactly. The hurricanes morphed into a Super El Nino!
Attribution at its best! 😉
Yes they went to the Pacific!
https://tropical.atmos.colostate.edu/Realtime/
So are the geoengineers responsible for this or is it all just one of those things??
I found this on substack, which basically says it’s a cause for concern and not celebration! https://substack.com/@brainsmatter/note/c-342797514
From my British viewpoint, no hurricanes means our weather is calmer as well.
It may be a coincidence but 112 years is very close to 5 complete solar cycles.
Soon hurricanes will be something that children see only in films….
Nice parallel quote 🤣
It just gets worse and worse. now we have climate change alarmists trying to work out why climate change has resulted in no hurricanes. I image reparations are in the discussions they are having. The West must pay for all this stable undramatic weather now impacting the Caribbean. Perhaps they will claim the lack of high winds is having a knock on effect reducing wind energy generation offshore Miami so compensation must be paid to the grant harvesting industry.
Where is tropical storm Greta when they, need it…?
From the article: “We did it!”
We humans did nothing. Mother Nature is the controlling authority.
https://babylonbee.com/news/climate-activists-blame-global-warming-for-zero-hurricanes-forming-in-atlantic-this-year
Wake up, everyone. The lack of cyclones is due to Climate Change. Didn’t you realise that? Oh dear
Sorry, but super el nino is the scare story in focus for bias media. No hurricanes or beneficial rainfall don’t fit.
“WE DID IT!”
Wrong. We did nothing except sit back and observe.
Humans cannot control the weather or hurricanes.
Do not play into the Trans-Alarmist propaganda by insinuating we can..
Given the ability to track hurricanes in 1914 was much less than today, can we say with confidence that there were no hurricanes in 1914, rather than no observed hurricanes?
Which could mean this season was even LESS active than 1914, right Sparta?
IMO the only valid comparison to before the satellite era is landfall.
Concur.
At least the truth got one pants leg on.