Where Are the Hurricanes?

[Update by Dave Cohen on 08/24/06 at 12:06 PM EDT] You can read the latest on the hurricanes and climate debate at realclimate.org—Fact, Fiction, and Friction in the Hurricane Debate. The story is by two distinguished climate scientists, Gavin Schmidt and Michael Mann.

What a difference a year makes. Last year at this time, Katrina was bearing down on the Gulf of Mexico and Rita was still in the future. The Oil Drum's traffic was way up as our editors and commentors provided up to the minute coverage.

Today, the National Hurricane Center is tracking Debbie, the 4th named storm of 2006. When Katrina hit, it was "the eleventh named storm, fifth hurricane, third major hurricane, and second Category 5 hurricane of the 2005 Atlantic season."

Where are the hurricanes?

As it turns out, they are in the Pacific Ocean this year where they are called typhoons. Reuters reported Typhoon kills at least 83 in China on August 10th.
Typhoon Saomai tore into Cangnan County in eastern China's Zhejiang province Thursday after authorities relocated 1 million people in the densely populated commercial province, Xinhua said....

Saomai, Vietnamese for "morning star," capsized boats and collapsed houses as it carved a swath of destruction through southern China, following in the path of seven previous typhoons this season.

On August 18th, Bloomberg reported Tropical Storm Wukong Hits Japan's Kyushu; Flights Cancelled. Wikipedia summarizes the 2006 Pacific typhoon season.

In addition, the NHC is now tracking Ileana in the Eastern Pacific where there has been more activity than in the Atlantic.

The forecast team at Colorado State's The Tropical Meteorology Project, led by Dr. William Gray, predicted in April of 2006 that there would be 17 named storms, 9 hurricanes and 5 intense hurricanes during 2006. The latest revision for activity after August 1st indicates 13 named storms, 7 hurricanes and 3 intense hurricanes.

Similarly, NOAA's Climate Prediction Center 2006 forecast called for

NOAA continues to predict a high likelihood (75% chance) of an above-normal 2006 Atlantic hurricane season and a 20% chance of a near-normal season, according to a consensus of scientists at National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's (NOAA) Climate Prediction Center (CPC), National Hurricane Center (NHC), and Hurricane Research Division (HRD). Therefore, 2006 is forecast to be the tenth above-normal season in the last twelve years. See NOAA's definitions of above-, near-, and below-normal seasons.

This updated outlook calls for a seasonal total of 12-15 named storms, with 7-9 becoming hurricanes, and 3-4 becoming major hurricanes (categories 3-5 on the Saffir-Simpson hurricane intensity scale). The likely range of NOAA's Accumulated Cyclone Energy (ACE) index (Bell and Halpert, 2000) is 110%-170% of the median. These totals include the three tropical storms (Alberto, Beryl, and Chris) that have already occurred. Therefore, for the remainder of the season, we expect an additional 9-12 named storms, 7-9 hurricanes, and 3-4 major hurricanes.

Both the NOAA and Colorado State predictions still forecast more hurricanes to come. Sea surface temperatures have been reported as below 2005 levels but now there are signs that the Atlantic hurricane factory is primed.
The latest space-based measurements of Atlantic Ocean surface temperatures have revealed a wide swath of hot water ready to supercharge any storms that form there -- if a few other things line up as well.

In recent weeks the water temperatures have risen significantly from the Cape Verde Islands off northern Africa, all the way west to the Gulf of Mexico.

A broad expanse of surface waters have hit the magic 82 degrees Fahrenheit (28 C) mark, which hurricane experts say is prerequisite for the hurricane factory to kick on.

"We're a little bit cooler than this time last year, but it's still warm enough," said NASA oceanographer David Adamec.

Are we still in hot water? Or have we made a miraculous escape from the ravages of Atlantic tropical storms in 2006? Discuss.

I think it is premature to write this off as a non-event hurricane season. We are still heading into the busiest time when hurricanes typically form, and it can form as late as November. In fact last year I believe a TS or two formed in Dec. Nevertheless, whether there are 15 hurricanes or 5 this season, as far as oil markets/NO are concerned all it takes is one Cat 3+ in the GOM.
  1. HAARP is being used to keep them away.  When its not being used to make the people of Lebanon sick or course.
  2. Paymets were sent to the Yakusa to have the russian made weather machine not be used VS the USA this year
  3. The aliens who are set up about the sun are working to keep the hurricanes away
  4. The lack of hurricanes at the moment is just an expression of the randomess of the system.  Don't worry, they exist and some will hit.
let's see...you forgot the Illiminati, Maitreya, Alex Jones, Jerome Corsi, Courtney Brown, Art Bell, and George Noory, but otherwise that's a pretty comprehensive list.



Best of my reading they don't "do" weather.  Same with the jesuates.  Or the Jews.  Or them Gnomes of Zurich


Never heard of them - ok Him/Her.   Somehow the world teacher - hurracane link would be hard to make.   Not like yakuza...


The rest of the list are just people...and while they might want to control the weather...mostly they just report on it.
  Or report on the people controlling it.   Or something.

Maitreya: the Future Buddha whom we desperately need NOW!
and let's not forget about the Mother Jones, Jerome Jackson, Courtney Love, Ma Bell and Sushi Nori.
Sushi Nori is algae, see? Saved by algae again! I had my algae today, did you?
No, but Courtney Love had my algae today. Ooooooh! Go Fi-del! Go Fi-del!

A few of the Mets on the Eastern US Weather Board are looking closely at Invest 97L. They think this has the makings of the most dangerous system so far this season. If it develops, then the Western GOM is definitely at risk.

ON 97L..significant threat for western Carib western Gulf

Thoughts on 97L

Interesting last set of model runs- I still think that the track will be farther south than what these runs show, but it does look like the chance of it running WNW right into Central America is less than before. Maybe it can thread the needle and go through the Yucutan Channel, like what the ECMWF has. If so, not good news for the western/central GOM, and gas prices...fill up now

Oh, and also it's worth looking at this thread. Statistically, we're only about 30% of the way through the season for major hurricanes (>cat3).

Cumulative percent of Major hurricanes that hit the USA....

30-Jun 2%
15-Jul 3%
31-Jul 6%
15-Aug 18%
31-Aug 35%
15-Sep 57%
30-Sep 82%
15-Oct 95%
31-Oct 100%
How hot is the Gulf compared to last year? Surely that is the important factor as that will effect how stong any storm in the GOM will grow.
Both the Caribbean and the Gulf currently have very favourable conditions for hurricane development (sea temps are 29-30 degs) The slow storm season has allowed temps to rise.

The problem so far has been for systems to reach the Gulf without being ripped apart by shear (which could still happen to TD 5). A storm that makes it to the Gulf could intensify rapidly.

Lets not forget this is one thing that it would be really really good to be wrong about.

I am sure that the GOM does not want a lot of hurricanes

I live on the GOM, (Pensacola, Fl.) and I don't want any hurricanes!
Ummm...make that two P-Colians that are against this whole hurricane thing.

The track on Jeff Master's blog is definitely NOT good.  Guess I'll be checking the drive-away kit this weekend.

But guys, it makes such good TV!
Yeah, my parents live in P-cola as well and damn near got blown away by Ivan. Hope you live on such high grownd as they have there.  
That should have read ground...God I wish there was a spell checker on this site..
It is easy for someone like myself to speculate about hurricanes, but not so easy to do so with any sense of assurance.

I read some weather sites like "weather underground" and a few articles along the way.  This doesn't make me much of an expert.

That being said: from what I've read it seems likely that a hurricane will move through the GOM sonetine in the next 12 weeks or so, or at least a tropical storm.

Impacts will depend upon size of storm, timing and location of the strike, and ability of folks to prepare and evacuate.

Impact on GOM production depends also on the usual factors.

What are the odds the GOM will avoid hurricanes altogether this season?  Have there been very many seasons in the past where the GOM has completely lucked out?

Ask and you shall receive. A fifth tropical storm is now forming, this one much closer to the GOM.
natural gas just popped 40c in the night session to $7.40 so the aggregate vote is that the odds of GOM hurricane have increased. Always look to the market to give you the best predictor of direction.

I know crews are still being organized to replace damage from IVAN let alone last years offshore damage - stocks like HOFF and GLBL have years of backlog work.

xRTR> Oil climbs towards $73 on U.S. Gulf storm worry

By Neil Chatterjee
SINGAPORE, Aug 25 (Reuters) - Oil prices climbed towards $73 on Friday as another storm brewed in the Caribbean with the potential to reach the Gulf of Mexico next week, creating worries over U.S. production already trimmed by an outage in Alaska.

Support also came from Iran's nuclear dispute with the West that could lead to United Nations sanctions against the world's fourth largest oil exporter  U.S. crude for October delivery <CLc1> was up 55 cents at $72.91 a barrel by 0237 GMT, after gaining 60 cents on Thursday. London Brent crude <LCOc1> for October rose 32 cents to $73 a barrel.

A spinning band of squalls in the southeastern Caribbean was on the verge of becoming Tropical Storm Ernesto by Friday, expected to head northwest towards the Gulf of Mexico by the middle of next week, forecasters said.

"Traders have turned their focus from comfortable inventory levels in the U.S. to storm activity out in the Atlantic," said Tobin Gorey of the Commonwealth Bank of Australia.

Forecasters expected Tropical Storm Debby to strengthen and possibly become the season's first hurricane, but saw its path heading away from the U.S. Gulf Coast, where production was battered by hurricanes Katrina and Rita last year.


hmmm... If I were a big-time trader of oil futures... I'd be thinking, how to game oil prices?

Any sort of event or threat to any significant production capacity causes a multiple-dollar jump.

I don't want to put ideas in anyone's head, but...
How hard would it be to pay some Iraqi bandits to blow up a pipeline?

Or, probably much easier : pay some Nigerian bandits to kidnap some oil-company personnel?

Or it could be done the other way. If you were a Nigerian bandit, why not fund your adventures by a little prior speculation?
I don't live all that far from the GOM and trust me, I don't want any more hurricanes. Several of them have passed over my house as tropical storms in the past few years after wreaking havoc on the coast. We need a calm year. What worries me though, is that people might assume this is the 'all clear' and that hurricane activity will return to 'normal' so that it's okay to keep developing the coast.
The earth is cooling! What are we going to do about this new crisis?!
If you've spent any time at all studying global warming, then you should have at least looked at what evidence there is associated with prior warmings (and coolings). (Note: There are plenty of additional similar references.) One interesting fact emerges... most prior ice ages appear to have been immediately preceded by periods of serious global warming. Now if that doesn't make sense to you, then it means you just lack both understanding and imagination in how such complex systems can function and interact. If you notice from the article I reference, the younger Dryas seems to have been caused by a warming period which ended up with the Thermohaline Circulation collapsing, something that we have evidence is occurring today.

But that's the danger of disrupting climate. The systems are so complex that we don't really understand them yet. Popular mythology says these things take thousands of years to change. Why? Because that is what science believed, about 100 years ago. It often takes a long time for popular mythology to catch up with current science. And current science shows that some extreme prior warming periods caused flips to full up ice ages in under a single decade in the earth's past, and what happened before could happen again.

Be careful of what you wish for because you might just get it.

And current science shows that some extreme prior warming periods caused flips to full up ice ages in under a single decade in the earth's past, and what happened before could happen again.

Can you site a source for this?

Many thanks,


This article discusses the history of rapid climate change, the scientific resistance to the notion, and what evidence accumulated in favor of it. Note that down in the article, ice cores demonstrate that the climate completely reversed in as little as 5 snow layers, i.e. 5 years. Other climate flips occurred completely within decades and almost all flipped completely over in under a century.

So the system can change suddenly and global warming doesn't mean we'll end up warm and toasty. We might and we might not. That's the danger of tampering with the climate! All of our grains, our entire world economy, our civilization itself have all been engineered around this particular climate. Several degrees of warming or cooling could wreck our agricultural base, destroy key cities, etc. And it could occur within the span of a single human lifetime, and, as documented above, it can rarely occur in as short as five years.

GreyZone, read the article top to bottom. Great article, thanks. But there is nothing in the article that says that golbal warming has ever caused a sudden flip in the world's climate to an ice age within a decade. In fact, though they do give evidence that warming could cause cooling in the North Atlantic, (we already knew that), they do not speculate on warming causing a complete ice age.

They do talk about climate change within "decades", though not "a decade", they give no evidence, nor even make the suggestion, that global warming could cause an Ice Age.

Ice ages take time. Snow must fall and then not melt in the summer. Then more snow falls and so on and so on. How long would it take for an ice-cap one mile thick to form over Canada? On the other hand, how long would it take for the ice caps to melt? Ice ages simply cannot happen within a decade, or even several decades. The temperature may drop or rise over a couple of decades but what makes an ice age is ice, lots and lots of ice. That takes many decades.

But it was a great article and I would invite everyone to read it:

Reread the article, Darwinian. The Younger Dryas triggered in as little as 5 snow layers - 5 years. And is knowing that a full climate flip can occur in as little as 20-30 years supposed to make me feel better, for myself or my children and grandchildren? What do you think life is going to be like during those few years?

It is my understanding that ice ages, as identified by climate scientists, are the result of the actual climate flip - a significant drop in average global temperature. The ice buildup is an effect of the climate flip. I believe that you have your causes and effects backwards, sir.

More links on rapid climate change:

Discussion of rapid climate change and the historical record.


Another article specifically on climate shift in one decade or less:


This article also states that the Younger Dryas began and ended within a decade and thereafter temperatures remained 5 degrees colder globally for over 1000 years:


This article discusses the Greenland melt extent as of 2005, which is relevant because of the increase of freshwater entering the North Atlantic, which is believed to be a change mechanism to the Thermohaline Circulation:


Rapid climate change is an established fact, Darwinian. You seem to be clinging to the climate science of yesteryear.

Check out The Weather Makers by Tim Flannery for a good intro to this. A summary of the reasons for the last few rapid climatic changes would be:

An ice dam in the Northern Hemisphere bursts, sending at least 2 Sverdrups of freshwater flowing into the North Atlantic. This stops the flow of the Gulf Stream, plunging Europe and most of of the rest of the Hemisphere into a virtually instant ice age. Glaciers start growing again, etc. Meanwhile, the heat from the sun doesn't disappear; instead, it goes south. There it slowly melts the southern glaciers and is absorbed into the ocean. Eventually the tipping point is reached and the earth enters another warming phase. The 'mini ice ages' triggered by such an event have lasted anywhere from 200 to 1,000 years. And they began almost instantaneously upon the breaking of the ice dam.

Now, it should be noted that there are no longer any ice dams in the Northern Hemisphere. There is however, a large body of surface ice commonly referred to as Greenland which is now melting at 3 times the rate previously thought. If a large enough portion of the ice sheet slid into the Atlantic it would trigger a mini ice age.
So, it is within the realm of possibility.

A climate change does not an ice age make! There have been climate changes, like the year without a summer created by the eruption of Krakatoa in 1883. But small transitions are not ice ages though the last one is often referred to as "The Little Ice Age". But even this Little Ice Age took place over several decades.

From one of your links:

In the past few centuries, smaller transitions (such as the ending of the Little Ice Age at about 1650 AD) probably occurred over only a few decades at most.

There you go! Even the little ice age took several decades just to end. The Little Ice Age, small as it was, actually lasted 300 years, from about 1550 to 1850.

Ice does play a very significant factor in the formation of ice ages. As more ice forms at the poles, more heat is reflected into the atmosphere and consequently the colder it gets. More ice the next year, more heat reflected back into space, means more ice next year and so on and so on. Ice and long term climate changes, which lead to either an ice age or the ending of an ice age, cannot be separated. The ice itself plays the most significant part in the formation of an ice age....Sir!

Meteorologists may talk about "climate flip" and indeed there may be short-term flips of a few degrees. Indeed we are experiencing such a "flip" right now. And we have been in that "flip" for over two decades. And if the methane hydrates begin to melt, we will see the "flip" speed up considerably. But there is no such thing as a "flip" into or out of an ice age. After all, even the little ice age, which was not really an ice age, took several decades to end. An actual ice age would take centuries to form or to end, at least.

Actually, the often-cited "year without a summer" was likely related to a massive eruption from Mt. Tambora in 1815/16.

Krakatoa made for some beautiful sunsets around the world.


Again you are incorrect and did not apparently even read the cited sources. Ice ages are noted to begin suddenly now. These climate flips may end quickly but they also may not and thus allow the accumulation of snow and ice. Don't cherry pick for your own position. Read the entire paper, Darwinian. Rapid climate change connected to the onset of ice ages is no longer disputed by most scientists in that field. You are certainly free to think otherwise but your statements, in clear contradiction to the sources cited, will not alter my view in light of the data.
I posted a bit about this and associated stuff a couple of weeks back with a pile of links that may be useful:

My guess is the probability of a significant cooling in the next century or so is very low and the probability of significant warming is very high.

GreyZone wrote:

And current science shows that some extreme prior warming periods caused flips to full up ice ages in under a single decade in the earth's past, and what happened before could happen again.

And ggg71 asks:

Can you site a source for this?

Right ggg, I would like to see that source myself. But I will be far bolder than you chose to be; I flat don't believe it! I am an avid reader of geological history and I will say flat out that there is absolutely no historical evidence of any such event. Ice ages take centuries to develop but that is beside the point. There is no evidence that any ice age has ever been caused by global warming.

I fully realize that there is a theory that melting Arctic ice could cause a sudden drop in temperatures in Western Europe. Be that as it may, even if such an event did happen it still would not stop global warming. The overall temperature of the earth would still keep on rising because of the continuing rise of greenhouse gases. And there would be a positive feedback as well. The hotter the average temperature of the sea and tundra, the more methane that gets dumped into the atmosphere and the hotter and hotter the earth gets, mini ice age in Western Europe notwithstanding.

Tangentially related, ABC is going to air a show on Aug 30 titled "Last Days on Earth", which is going to scientifically look at various natural (and other) disaster scenarios.
I have to admit to being completely wrong in thinking that this year was going to be as bad if not worse than 2005. However, if you have a really bad year, probabilities are that the next year will be pretty good. I would say that this year so far has been pretty calm off the coast of USA. But the heat build up in the GoM has too be released somehow, so perhaps there could be a really big, bad hurricane out there sometime this season. I have to admit to thinking that Debby would do Houston (Dallas), but that doesn't look like happening, like Katrina and the Waves last year.

Global Warming means we're going to have nastier and nastier hurricane seasons!!  It's different this time!!!


We're talking about miniscule changes on a year to year basis.  There will be good years, and there will be bad years, just like there has always been.  It is possible that over the course of decades Hurricanes as a group might be slightly stronger due to warmer waters.  I won't discount that.

2005 was an incredible year for Hurricanes.  All sorts of records were set.  But the "average" year just doesn't change that much.

I feel really bad for people on the gulf coast, and rebuilding in coastal areas that are below sea level, or marginally above sea level might not make sense.  But the scaremonger stuff I read just flies in the face of common sense.

Of course there is noise in the system! But you act like there is no data about this. Stuart's excellent analysis of Hurricanes: Trend or Oscillation demonstrated clearly that:

  1. The NUMBER of storms is fairly constant for the given activity period (which swings along a multidecade cycle), but
  2. The POWER of storms is increasing linearly in line with the current warming.

And this makes sense since sea surface temperatures (SSTs) are what power hurricanes according to current theory. By increasing SSTs you increase the latent energy available to a developing storm.

So no, we don't expect more hurricanes overall and in terms of NUMBER, 2005 was an oddity. But in terms of POWER, 2005 is part of the trend.

A note on cycles:
"We're 11 years into the cycle of high activity and landfall," NOAA meteorologist Gerry Bell says, "but I can't tell you if it will last another ten years, or thirty."

Let's hope it's not 30. From National Geographic August, 2006
Superstorms: No end in Sight

I have been following an UK based meteorological department (they tend to be better than US based ones) and they use percentages as a guide. The 2006 percentage was higher than 2005, so they were predicting 2006 was going to be worse than 2005. As hurricanes tend to go in a multi decade cycle, and we are nowhere near the middle of this cycle, it is more likely to get worse each year rather than better certainly for the next 5 to 10 years, regardless of global warming factors. I presume ggg71 is an american who doesn't believe in global warming. I have to admit to not knowing whether global warming does affect hurricane formation or strength, but I would guess it is more likely, as hurricanes tend to need 28C water to form and the hotter the water, the stronger the hurricanes get.

Records are made to be broken. Just because 2005 was a record year, doesn't mean that a year in the near or far future will not beat it. And as Wilma proved, a hurricane can go from Cat 1 to Cat 5 in a short period of time. The longer the heat builds up in the GoM, the more energy that will be released by the hurricane over the right area of water. That is not scaremongering, just fact.

People who build in hurricane areas should be prepared for them. If you live in earthquake zones, build for them. If you badly build a flimsy house, who is to blame for an earthquake that destroys it? One guy built his house to withstand a cat 5 hurricane, and it did with a few minor leaks. He was the only one in the area to build a hurricane proof house. Most other houses were trashed. I bet the neighbours before the hurricane thought he was a nut, but I bet he thought his neighbours were stupid for not building hurricane proof houses on the beach. He showed building houses to withstand a major hurricane can be done and not be particularly expensive and can look very elegant.

When I bought my house, I checked on the chances of flooding, because I live in a flood plain of a river, but 30 miles or more from the sea. For my house to flood there would have to be a massive and prolonged cloud burst over a couple of days. So if my house floods, it is my fault. I will blame nobody and expect no help in cleaning up and repairing the aftermath. People living in the gulf area should expect hurricanes. They have been there since man moved into the area, so they can hardly complain that they did not know about hurricanes. Of course, if they believe that hurricanes only happen to other people and do not plan for consequences, then they get what they deserve. Some of our castles by the coast have 30 foot thick stone walls, I'd like to see what a hurricane would do to one of the Welsh castles built by Edward Longshanks. But coastal american homes seem to be built out of wood. Not exactly what I would use to build a home in a hurricane area.

Let me just set the record straight.  I am American, and I do believe in Global Warming.

But take the heading from this story: "Where are the Hurricanes?"

It's inflammatory!  They make it sound like there's some sort of conspiracy to keep the number of hurricanes down this year!  The reality is there are good years, bad years, and truly horrific years.  2005 was a truly horrific year.

2006 is shaping up to be a mild year.  We could have a bad September, we might not.  No one knows.  These long term weather predictions are nothing more then glorified guesses.  Cycles oscillate.  And while you may be able to see those oscillations on previous years charts, they do not mean you can predict the future oscillations with any certainty.


Re: It's inflammatory!

Since both Gray and NHC predicted an above normal hurricane season, I wondered out loud where the Atlantic hurricanes were. My assumption was that others might be wondering the same thing. I also noted that there has been activity in the Western Pacific affecting Japan, Taiwan and mainland China.

Another interesting question to wonder about on August 24th is whether we're going to be OK this year or not. The SST's are up and the season is not over. I do not want to see any hurricanes.

I like to use a catchy title to attract reader interest. I think, however, that it is only inflammatory in your mind.

So, take a stress pill and calm down.  

damn it, Dave, how dare you be provocative?
I'm predicting snow. With a chance of scattered maledictions.
These long term weather predictions are nothing more then glorified guesses.

No they aren't.  The long term climate (which is different than weather) are very good and have an exceptional track record.  Just look at Hansen's and the IPCC's past guesses and compare them to today.

Weather events, like hurricanes, are largely stochastic. Also any trends in event frequency are typically full of noise. The year 2006 simply may not have as many hurricanes as 2005 due to the random nature of weather.

That said, there is a widely known climate phenomenon called the quasi-biennial oscillation (QBO) that shows up in many different climate analysis, say for precipitation and temperature trends. This can be a fairly strong signal in the range of 1.8 to 2.5 years. The cause is somewhat of a mystery, but it is known that there is repeating pattern change in stratospheric winds over the tropics on this time scale (no one's been able to link this with the QBO's appearance in surface climate data, I note).

The QBO may simply be showing up in a "reduced" hurricane season for 2006, though, indeed, it is still a bit early to write off 2006 at the moment.


Tropical Storm Debby May Take Backseat to Caribbean-Bound Storm

If it becomes a tropical storm, it will be Ernesto.  This storm, unlike Debby, may threaten the U.S.

Joe Bastardi, a forecaster for Accuweather in State College, Pennsylvania, said earlier this week he expects a burst of tropical storms during the next four to five weeks.
Uhmmm.... from 3 hours ago here.
Forecasters at the U.S. National Hurricane Center said the latest Caribbean weather disturbance was pelting the Windward Islands with gusty rain and could soon become Tropical Storm Ernesto.

"It's very, very close to that threshold now," said James Franklin, a senior hurricane specialist at the center.

No need to worry yet, we'll see.

another pic
storm track at RSOE
Sea Surface Temperatures

Plus storm track:

Looks grim.

Where are the hurricanes?

For the laymen who can't read scientific journals, here is a very well sourced and very easy answer to your questions.  It's  rough draft but I'll be updated it soon enough.


Satellite photos too!

I just updated it so if it didn't work for some of you it was because of the updating process.
Good stuff. Recommended for our contentious readers as another theory about what's going on this year. Also, you mention the AMO--which is a good thing IMO.

'looks at the title'
so your trying to prove just because we have not had Atlantic hurricanes that we have no global warming?
I don't know if i should laugh or cry at the stupidity of that.
I think the title is meant to be satirical.

I think.  I'm not sure what that page is saying.  

If that's the answer for laypeople, I hate to see the one for experts...

I think the title is meant to be satirical.

It's an exact quote.  Someone actually said this to me.

I think.  I'm not sure what that page is saying.  

Hrm........ then I'm not going my job right.  I'm showing that our recent hurricane activity is very likely due to global warming.  Call it a "50% and growing boost" ontop of the natural hurricane cycle.  I edited the page.  If you would be kind enough to reread it and tell me if it's clear you'd be doing me and the cause a great service.   ugh.. I need a blog.

If that's the answer for laypeople, I hate to see the one for experts...

It can be a big pain.

I ignored the title, not knowing what was intended. There are some good references in there.

[quote]so your trying to prove just because we have not had Atlantic hurricanes that we have no global warming?
I don't know if i should laugh or cry at the stupidity of that.[/quote]


I hope that explains it.  I will adjust the title.

yea thats a much clearer title.
There's always a chance that the GOM could form a hurricane all by itself. Homegrown F5, wouldn't that be a hoot?

Nope I got caught once in a weird wind storm in a 22 foot fishing boat in the gulf it was about 8 years ago.
It was kicking up at least 25 foot waves. We could see them coming at us on our radar. No rain but monster swells. Many of the waves had white caps and this was 50 miles offshore.
Later I talked with some shippers and many said they were afraid to lift there booms because the waves would capsize them.

It ain't fun. I learned a lot of respect for Mother Nature that night.

Also I've been in the gulf when it was smooth as glass with banks of fog drifting over the water a incredible site.

The Gulf may be fairly tame but it is not always.

No mention of the volcanoes earlier this year so far on this thread?

There was one in Montserrat, a really big one in Siberia, and another in SE Asia...

A climatology newsletter I get forecast a tame start to the hurricane season in Spring this year because the increased particulate levels in the upper atmosphere from these volcanoes, leading to a bit of temporary cooling in the early part of this year.

Its the Browning Letter is anyone's interested - http://www.fraser.com/news.html

El Nino - don't forget El Nino.

I've scanned comments above and don't believe I saw anyone mention of El Nino  - that massive Pacific current that washes ashore on S America every few years.

My understanding is that the whole global climate is somehow linked to El Nino, which, depedning upon its configuration determines the location of the N hemisphere jet stream.  The Jet Stream in turn has a major influence on Hurricane activity.

El Nino was active last year and this combined with warm ocean temperatures gave rise to the very active hurricane season.  I believe El Nino has reverted to normal mode this year - perhaps linked to the active Typhoon season in the Pacific.

Hurricanes disperse heat energy from the oceans and in their absence surface waters wil just get hotter and hotter.  The next time El Nino switches it may just produce hurricanes that flatten everything in thier path.

I have read about sand from Sahara stopping storms and not just shear. Is this unusual or will global warming in this way neutralize the storms which on the one hand would have otherwise have formed due to hotter waters in the Carribean. It seems sands from Gobi reach Korea, etc in North Pacific but do not block all those  big  storms coming over Southern China.