Of course not.
Everybody knows, BUSH caused it.
Posted on 09/02/2005 9:38:44 AM PDT by Para-Ord.45
didn't take long for the media to blame the devastation caused by Hurricane Katrina on global warming, even though most climate experts dispute the idea.
In the Boston Globe - owned lock, stock and barrel by the New York Times, an avid promoter of global warming – Ross Gelbspan led off by informing his readers, "The Hurricane that struck Louisiana yesterday was nicknamed Katrina by the National Weather Service. Its real name is global warming." He went on to claim: "As the atmosphere warms, it generates longer droughts, more-intense downpours, more-frequent heat waves, and more-severe storms. Although Katrina began as a relatively small hurricane that glanced off south Florida, it was supercharged with extraordinary intensity by the relatively blistering sea surface temperatures in the Gulf of Mexico." But Dr. Stanley Goldenberg, a meteorologist at the Hurricane Research Division of the National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), told NewsMax.com: "I speak for many hurricane climate researchers in saying that claims like that are nonsense.
"Katrina is part of a well-documented multidecadal-scale fluctuation in hurricane activity. This cycle was described in a heavily cited article printed in the journal Science in July 2001."
Dr. Goldenberg's colleague at NOAA, Chris Landsea, agreed. "Hurricanes have been going on for a long, long time," he told NewsMax.com in an exclusive interview.
"They date back to Columbus' voyages and the Chinese have been writing about typhoons for a thousand years. Hurricanes are certainly a natural phenomenon.
"The question is are there any man made changes to hurricanes, and it's an important one to ask because we are changing the chemistry of the atmosphere. We're adding more carbon dioxide and methane and it does change the radiation and it's going to warm things up – some say a moderate amount and some say by a small amount, which is open to scientific debate.
"We also know that hurricanes are heat engines – they extract energy from the warm tropical oceans and release that heat in thunderstorm activity."
Even if by the year 2100 there is a doubling of carbon dioxide emissions and possibly a warming of the oceans by three degrees F., the overall change in the energy available to hurricanes would be fairly small, said Landsea.
"Our best guess now is that in about 100 years we may see hurricanes about five percent stronger than they are today with about five percent more rain. A five percent change is so small that it would hardly be noticeable."
Dr. Landsea concluded: "If you look at the raw hurricane data itself, there is no global warming signal. What we see instead is a strong cycling of activity. There are periods of 25 to 40 years where it's very busy and then periods of 25 to 40 years where it's fairly quiet.
"The last 10 years have certainly been busy but it is our suggestion that what we are seeing now we have seen before in the period from the late 1920s to the late 1960s, which was extremely active with Atlantic hurricanes. If you look at the raw data it doesn't show the last 10 years to be out of the ordinary."
Dr. William Gray, the professor of atmospheric science at Colorado State University who issues annual forecasts for the hurricane season, says the severity of hurricane seasons changes with cycles of temperatures over several decades in the Atlantic Ocean. The recent onslaught, he explained "is very much natural."
According to Kenneth Chang, writing in the New York Times, Dr. Gray reported that from 1970 to 1994 the Atlantic was relatively quiet, with no more than three major hurricanes in any year and none at all in three of those years. Cooler water in the North Atlantic strengthened wind shear, which tends to tear storms apart before they turn into hurricanes.
In 1995, he said, hurricane patterns reverted to the active mode of the 1950s and 1960s. From 1995 to 2003, 32 major hurricanes, with sustained winds of 111 miles per hour or greater, stormed across the Atlantic. It was merely chance, Dr. Gray told Chang, that only three of them struck the United States at full strength.
Historically, the rate has been 1 in 3.
Then last year, three major hurricanes, half of the six that formed during the season, hit the United States. A fourth, Frances, weakened before striking Florida.
Said Dr. Gray: "We were very lucky in that eight-year period, and the luck just ran out."
Did global warming cause the Galveston disater so many years ago? The left never gives up. Glad to see that real experts are debunking the crap. Thanks for posting.
Does anybody actually listen to and believe any of these talking head idiots on tv or propaganda rag sheets called daily newspapers?
"Do not fear the enemy, for your enemy can only take your life. It is far better that you fear the media, for they will steal your HONOR. That awful power, the public opinion of a nation, is created in America by a horde of ignorant, self-complacent simpletons who failed at ditching and shoemaking and fetched up in journalism on their way to the poorhouse."
--Mark Twain.
Disaster
Lies! They are a recent creation of Karl Rove to opress women, children and minorities.
The Rats believe in Hitler's theory of "The Big Lie." Tell it enough, and eventually people will believe it.
"Does anybody actually listen to and believe any of these talking head idiots on tv or propaganda rag sheets called daily newspapers?"
Not me. It is amazing how moronic our society's "leaders" and most of the lamestream media have become or are becoming. Absolute cretins. The scary part is how so many around the world just lap up all manner of lies and junk science.
Yes they do.
I am currently too busy working on my plan to stop Earthquakes and Volcano erruptions to be bothered by Huricanes and Tsunamis. Hand me the duct tape.
When I see typhoons strengthening in the warm waters of the Arctic Ocean I might give global warming a thought. Until then I hope global warming alarmist look up (Weather) cycle in the dictionary.
Sorry, global warming alarmist = man made global warming alarmist.
Rush made a point,what if there was global warming and the ice caps melted.Shouldn`t the average temperature of the oceans then come down.Don`t hurricanes feed off of warm water.
As you know. Hurricanes are not the problem. People wanting to live where they hit is the problem. New Orleans was way past due. I feel for the people but this has been a serious known threat for decades. If expert after expert told me that my house was likely to be flooded or blown to bits by wind and water, I'd move. If I had to abandon the house with the clothes on my back and start all over in a new place, I would.
Life is full of unknown threats to thumb your nose at imminent danger.
Junk Science?
You do not have to be a Liberal to believe in global warming - nor do you have to be a bad scientist. I work in a University in the UK, where very good and serious science is being done, and they are properly cautious, but think quite seriously that the evidence does point to climate change.
Now it may not be any greater than previous weather cycles, but it that is no comfort - at one time or another just about everywhere in the world has been either a desert or an arctic wasteland, so even if it is natural it may still be a disaster. The point is that the climate has changed, and the change is accelerating. (and that human influence can be brought to bear to slow it) It does not mean that every hurricane or drop of rain in history is caused by this - but it does suggest that the chances of mre extreme eather are rising. Maybe Katrina was not influenced by this - but the chances of another CAT5 are higher now than before...
Point is that it is just not true that most climatologists disagree - the vast majority agree on climate change, and on the impact of greenhouse gases. That does not make them Liberals, and it does not make them idiots.
Nor does the opinion (debated and questioned by most scientists) of one political appointee scientist in the US mean that he is right. Global warming may have played its art, but it is hard to tell from one instance. When the next ten hit we will still not know, but I think it would be reasonable to agree then tat something is wrong... and it woul dbe reasonable to try to do something to ensure that the next ten do not go on to be the next twenty or fifty cat5 or even bigger. Caution is the sign of the conservative, not the liberal - should we not err on the side of caution and protect ourselves from the possibl eeffects of global warming?
As reported and commented upon by the lamestream media and most "leaders," pundits, left-wingers, and Hollyweirdos, it is pure junk science, and as has been noted by commentators on the issue like Michael Crichton, many academics in the field who promulgate the "sky is falling" line are purely agenda driven, whether financially, ideologically, by peer pressure, or otherwise.
Of course not.
Everybody knows, BUSH caused it.
Everything in science that is reported by the media is simplified and wrong. As for Hollywood - how can you cite Micheal Crichton? Not just junk science but junk literature as well...
But again, just because the press report it badly (be it cancer scares or anti GM crop scares or anything else) does not mean that the scientists are liberal agenda driven - or even peer driven or ideologically driven or financially driven. Where is the money for the Royal Academy in making these claims? how do they benefit? (answer - the don't - they may suffer because they bring bad news to politicians and business and the man on the street who do not want to know)
Even if the US had signed up to Kyoto (which in many ways was a bad agreement all round, not just for the US) by now it would probably not have made any dfference to Katrina. But it may make a difference in the next ten or twenty years, and the longer it is left the worse the effects and the longer they will be.
People who pull the junk science line and ignore the whole scientific community around the world (except for a few in America who rely on Federal funds, and don't want to annoy the oil industry) are like the people who ignored the scientists who said there is a big storm coming and they ought to move out of New Orleans. Bad news is not always Liberal scare mongering.
The sad thing is that in the UK, and I am sure many other places, many people are saying that Katrina WAS caused by global warming, or at least that is was made stronger by GW, or that even if it wasn't the next one will be, and it serves America right for not signing up to Kyoto - true or not there is little sympathy, since America is seen by the rest of the world as a dirty neighbour. And it is not just the left wingers saying that.
Michael Crichton may write junky books, but he has studied the issue of global warming and climate change, and he comments intelligently on these issues and the scientific data (or manipulation thereof) involved.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.