Originally Posted by ilw
Is there really an increase in the number of severe hurricanes? I saw an article on BBC news and it had this chart
(NB the bottom one is only the last 4 years)
It doesn't seem to show any obvious trend to me??
interesting.
we want your oil!
Is there really an increase in the number of severe hurricanes? I saw an article on BBC news and it had this chart
It doesn't seem to show any obvious trend to me??
interesting.
Broken
1F is well within the natural cycle, as im sure everyone would agree.
What would be concerning is an increase that doesnt go away, which is what is being predicted now...and the shear size of the hurricanes, as opposed to the category which only measures windspeed.
At current trends, we'll be at one of those peaks at the end of the decade (and think about the stuff that was happening in the world during the last peaks)..
Those figures are only for hurricanes striking the US mainland btw... not all of them do, and doesn't include this year.
For your info:
The Accumulated Cyclone Energy Median in the Carribean last year (2004) was 226... this is only the 2nd time since 1950 that its topped 200 (the other time was 1995 @ 228)
The 50 year average was 98.
The 10 year average was 140.
To put this into perspective:
Only 13 times has the hurricane season been classified as "Hyperactive"... 6 of these were within in the last 10 years.
The average number of named storms since 1995 has been 13, compared to 8.6 during the preceding 25 years.
Heres the PDI chart for the last 75 years in the Atlantic..
The thick line @ 1949 is where monitoring by aircraft became accurate enough to include.
An It Harm None, Do What You Will
en(un)lightened
If I grant you your consensus, you must grant me that there is no consensus regarding the current trend's cause...is it cyclical or man-made?Consensus does exist.
It exists in that there is Global Warming.
Both the UN and the US scientific communities agree that it exists.
The UN and US Scientific Communities also agree that most of the increase is due to what humans are doing... and both refuse to say how much "most" is.
Research in 1987 forcast that a 1F increase in the Caribean would result in many more and much larger Hurricanes in that region. It also forcast more Tornado's on the mainland US. Both of these have happened.
Where the consensus stops, is what the results of Global Warming are.. there are so many variables that it is impossible to make a definitive model.
However, im sure that you fit a smoke alarm in case your house catches fire.
You (and your scientists) prefer to entertain the notion that Mother Nature is not capable of ramping up global temps without the sinful complicity of man, personnified as George Bush.
How do you and your scientists differentiate between this new up-tick in temps and the great number of similar events throughout (pre-Industrial Age) time?
Please answer this before you further cloud the issue with another google?
You haven't explained the now-defunct idea of a new Ice Age yet, either.
Oh, and BTW-
A big, fat NO on the consensus thingie; it most certainly does NOT exist.
Last edited by j2k4; 09-28-2005 at 01:20 AM.
"Researchers have already cast much darkness on the subject, and if they continue their investigations, we shall soon know nothing at all about it."
-Mark Twain
Broken
J2, no one disagrees that there is a natural cycle of temperature variance.
The planet varies between Iceages and Tropical temperatures at the extreme and has much milder cycles between the two.
However we are now outside of what can be predicted in a natural cycle.
As to no Consensus..
Tell that to the inuits that have their sledges going through the ice for the 1st time ever.
I fail to see how that is so when every Scientific Study, including your own, (exc those financed by Industry/Energy) lead to the same conclusions.
The Whitehouse has also admitted that its happening now.
I dont ask a Chemist a Biology question as you appear to btw.
An It Harm None, Do What You Will
en(un)lightened
I appear to...what?J2, no one disagrees that there is a natural cycle of temperature variance.
The planet varies between Iceages and Tropical temperatures at the extreme and has much milder cycles between the two.
However we are now outside of what can be predicted in a natural cycle.
Says who?
Certainly not a consensus, not of physicists or any other scientific discipline; hell-even among environmental wackos there is no such consensus.
As to no Consensus..
Tell that to the inuits that have their sledges going through the ice for the 1st time ever.
What has consensus got to do with Inuits?
What precisely are the Inuits prepared to do if they are denied a consensus?
On that same note, I have heard studies that state a diet high in whale blubber causes extraordinary flatulence, which in turn aggravates the level of green-house gases.
Perhaps the Inuits ought to sign onto Kyoto...
I fail to see how that is so when every Scientific Study, including your own, (exc those financed by Industry/Energy) lead to the same conclusions.
The Whitehouse has also admitted that its happening now.
I believe Bush has acknowledged that the phenomenon of "global warming" exists; I do not recall him attributing it solely to the activities of man, specifically American man.
I dont ask a Chemist a Biology question as you appear to btw.
BTW-
Please be advised that you are not winning this debate.
"Researchers have already cast much darkness on the subject, and if they continue their investigations, we shall soon know nothing at all about it."
-Mark Twain
Broken
No one has said that its due "solely to the activities of man".
Both the UN and US Scientific academies have said that its "mostly" the activities of man.
And its only your opinion that im losing this debate.. just like its your opinion that there is no such thing as Global Warming, despite all the evidence to the contrary.
An It Harm None, Do What You Will
en(un)lightened
When did I disavow global warming?No one has said that its due "solely to the activities of man".
Both the UN and US Scientific academies have said that its "mostly" the activities of man.
And its only your opinion that im losing this debate.. just like its your opinion that there is no such thing as Global Warming, despite all the evidence to the contrary.
I have questioned it's provenance, certainly.
I didn't say you were losing the debate, Rat; I merely stated you weren't winning it.
If you want to claim a stand-off, that's fine, and I suppose your stubbornness entitles you...but you are not winning.
Tell you what:
Put it to a poll-I'm sure you could win that.
"Researchers have already cast much darkness on the subject, and if they continue their investigations, we shall soon know nothing at all about it."
-Mark Twain
Unemployable
Am l the only one here that's sick of j2k4's attitude lately?
l've read a good deal of his posts made over the last couple of years or so, and seen his arguments with regards to global warning, WMDs, and many other things. With the benefit of hindsight he has rarely been right about anything.
There is one outstanding question in the global warning debate: What if j2k4 and his ilk is wrong? Can we afford to take the chance? If any other country in the world were responsible for 40% of the world's pollution the US would be shouting from the rooftops for something to be done.
Maybe a few more Katrinas and Ritas will wake them up to what's going on.
Sig Removed...too clever
Use Logic Or STFU!!!
I tire of some of j2's posts 'cause they're cryptic until it's a bore (a hole in my head). However, I still welcome him..as a fellow American and still a good contributer to this board. I mean, at least he belongs here, Billy and his attitude is 10 times better than mine. (I never wanted you banned but the mods could at least follow through with their bans if they are going to institute them in the first place)
I would think only actual members of the board (like myself) should be able to light into him and those benefits should not extend to illegal aliens such as yourself.
Fuck off btw.
Last edited by Busyman; 10-01-2005 at 04:41 PM.
Silly bitch, your weapons cannot harm me. Don't you know who I am? I'm the Juggernaut, Bitchhhh!
Flies Like An Arrow, Flies Like An Apple
---12323---4552-----
2133--STRENGTH--8310
344---5--5301---3232
Looking for loopholes
One would have more sympathy for ID as a possible cause for the universe kicking off if one did not suspect that it was simply camouflage for a specific creation myth from one specific religion.
One also suspects that it would be none too popular in some circles if the main proponents were suggesting that say the Hindu creation myths were the inspiration for ID.
Consequently it is hardly surprising that it is being treated like an unexploded landmine by those who teach in the scientific community.
I would agree with JP, ID as an analytical concept is fine but it should remain a tool devoid of any specific religious baggage.
Cogito cogito ergo cogito sum
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
). However, I still welcome him..as a fellow American and still a good contributer to this board. I mean, at least he belongs here, Billy and his attitude is 10 times better than mine. (I never wanted you banned but the mods could at least follow through with their bans if they are going to institute them in the first place)
Bookmarks