patrick.net

What do you say when the "blatant propaganda mill" is just reporting facts same as any other newspaper? Are these facts somehow wrong, somehow tainted by association with a nationalistic news source? No wonder your grasp on science is so flimsy. You don't even know how to evaluate facts!
Explains a lot.

anonymous says

Irma at landfall comes in 7th-8th behind 1935 Labor Day storm.

Catastrophic storms, once rare, are almost routine

“As long as the climate isn’t changing, you can define these things reasonably well,” Trenberth said. “With climate change … what used to be a 500-year event is becoming a 70-year event or a 50-year event. It doesn’t mean that they’re common, but they’re no longer anything like as rare.”

“That’s what the changing climate has done,” Trenberth added. “It means the extremes are greater — and if we don’t adapt to these, if we don’t take them into account, if we don’t build more resilience, we will suffer the consequences.”

Hurricane Harvey And The New Normal

There’s very little doubt among scientists that climate change has ratcheted up the potential intensity of hurricanes and other large storms, Mann says. “There’s now a pretty solid consensus that … the strongest storms will be stronger.”

To understand how that happens, we can think of hurricanes as “heat engines.” At the start of a hurricane, warm air near the surface of the ocean rises, leaving a pocket of lower pressure air below. Other air from surrounding areas fills that pocket, and in turn warms and rises. As this cycle continues, “new” air swirls as it replaces the air that rises from the pocket. Meanwhile, the warm, moist air in the sky then forms a system of clouds, which spins and grows like an engine feeding off heat.

The contrast in surface and aloft temperatures drives that engine, and, thanks to global warming, surface temperatures are rising significantly. “It’s making those heat engines more efficient,” says Mann. And with more efficient heat engines come more intense storms.

“The old rules don’t apply anymore,” said Mann. “We’re no longer talking about chance alone. We’ve loaded the dice. We’ve loaded the weather dice by warming the planet and intensifying these storms and raising sea levels to the point where a storm that we’ve called a 1000-year event … is now a storm that we expect to happen once in maybe 20 or 30 years.”

Piggy, you are just plain wrong. Science has the final word.

Piggy, you are just plain wrong

Dude, I just showed you that you lied (or were "plain wrong") in the very title of the post. You referred to Irma as "strongest ever" -- and it was eighth out of the ones recorded. Still you insist, and even resort to insults? You only make a greater fool out of yourself.

As for the quotes by Trenberth and Mike Hide-the-Decline Mann (from the interview published in latimes), I will present NOAA's opinion: there is no evidence to link hurricanes and climate change. I present it for the second time -- the first time you chose to ignore it, running insead for your favorite 'may be, is likely, is projected' FUD porn.

So science indeed has the final word.

a1232

anonymous says

Dude, I just showed you that you lied (or were "plain wrong") in the very title of the post.

You showed no such thing. Unlike to you, lying serves absolutely no purpose to me.

The title of this thread, "Hurricane Irma: Strongest ever Atlantic storm causes 'major damage' in Caribbean - latest news", is the exact text copy and pasted without edit from the title of the CNN article linked at the time of the original post. The content of the link has been changed by CNN as the link was to live coverage, but the title of the that coverage was used as the title of this thread. Titling a thread after the webpage or article title being referenced by that thread is a perfectly reasonable and common practice. It does not make the statement my own. That's your first mistake.

Your second mistake is that Irma is not the strongest ever Atlantic storm. There is evidence of this. Here's a link, dumb ass.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/09/06/hurricane-irma-latest-live-news-strongest-ever-atlantic-storm/
Christ, right in the URL it states "strongest ever Atlantic storm". Here's a quote from the page.

The most powerful Atlantic Ocean storm in recorded history is sweeping across the Caribbean leaving destruction in its wake.

Even your fucking Fox News calls it "the strongest Atlantic Ocean hurricane ever recorded". Are you calling Fox News a liar?www.youtube.com/embed/kEeNc3IorPU

It is clearly you who is lying.

Once more piggy demonstrates that climate change deniers are liars.

Recorded history spans about 40 years. Nothing to hang your hat on against 4.54 billion of existence.
But then again, libbies are known to freak out due to their various mind altering habits...

Dan8267 says

The most powerful Atlantic Ocean storm in recorded history

Only an idiot thinks that the measurable increase in severity of hurricanes is unfounded. Scientists are damn good at what they do. They are certainly better at science than a random Internet idiot.

Who said that?
Dan8267 says

Only an idiot thinks that the measurable increase in severity of hurricanes is unfounded

If the locusts go rabid on us its all over...

anonymous says

Anyone else notice there was a major earthquake in Mexico today the same time Maria is doing it's thing and when Irma was churning, there was a major earthquake in Mexico. Coincidence or something more ?

anonymous says

Coincidence or something more ?

Hurricanes are heat engines and heat is, by definition, increased with global warming. It's not hard to follow that trail. The laws of thermodynamics demand that global warming makes hurricanes more severe.

Earthquakes are caused by plate tectonics, which have nothing to do with global warming. False comparison.

Dan8267 says

said Mann.

Mann and his hockeystick have been debunked

".Penn State climate scientist, Michael ‘hockey stick’ Mann commits contempt of court in the ‘climate science trial of the century.’ Prominent alarmist shockingly defies judge and refuses to surrender data for open court examination."

https://twitter.com/philklotzbach/status/906881395057844225Dan8267 says

You showed no such thing.

OMFG Do you have reading comprehension issues? I gave you a list of storms stronger than Irma, but you simply ignore it. Here it is again:

1969 Camille, 2005 Katrina, 1992 Andrew, 1886 Indianola, 1919 Floria Keys, 1928 Lake. The list is not from a newspaper -- it is from a twit by Philip Klotzbach, Meteorologist at CSU specializing in Atlantic basin seasonal hurricane forecasts. It is not from a journalist, it is as direct from a scientists as we can possibly get.
https://twitter.com/philklotzbach/status/906881395057844225

the exact text copy and pasted without edit from the title of the CNN article linked at the time of the original post.

Even your fucking Fox News

My Fox News. LOL. I don't watch either FN or CNN, but answer this. You love to exclaim "Science FFS!" -- how come you rely only on the quotes journalists who intefviewed scientists give you, rather than actually reading official scientific reports? NOAA says -- on their official website -- that there is no evidence to link hurricanes and climate change. Which makes all your newspaper references irrelevant.

Come to think of it, there is a patter here. All those climate scientists talk with absolute certainty about Very Bad Things that Will Happen only in interviews. When it comes to papers or offical reports, they are far more cautious, surrounding their predicitions with weasel words, if making them at all.

anonymous says

A groundbreaking study shows that earthquakes, including the recent 2010 temblors in Haiti and Taiwan, may be triggered by tropical cyclones.

That's news to me. I haven't heard of the study. If studies can prove the link or provide substantial evidence for it, then fine, but I'll remain skeptical by default until then.

I just read the article on the study.

Very wet rain events are the trigger," said Wdowinski, associate research professor of marine geology and geophysics at the UM Rosenstiel School of Marine and Atmospheric Science. "The heavy rain induces thousands of landslides and severe erosion, which removes ground material from the Earth's surface, releasing the stress load and encouraging movement along faults."

The hypothesis is that heavy rains cause surface material to move off some fault lines lessening the weight holding down the plates along those fault lines, and causing the earthquake to come sooner rather than later. This is sort of like loosing the grip of a vice preventing two magnets with like sides facing each other from separating.

Even if this hypothesis is true, it is not necessarily a bad thing for two reasons.
1. This might not increase the number of earthquakes but simply cause them to happen sooner rather than later.
2. If this does increase the number of earthquakes, then it should also decrease the severity of those earthquakes because the potential energy is being more often and won't build up as much. Lots of small earthquakes is better than a few large earthquakes.

However, based on what the article says, I doubt this is at all significant as the hypothesis only applies to a narrow set of fault lines.