Skip to comments.Meteorologist: Rush Is Right on Hurricanes
Posted on 09/13/2017 1:39:58 PM PDT by Kaslin
RUSH: Chuck in Portland. Its great to have you, sir. How are you doing?
CALLER: Hey, Rush. Glad to be on your show this morning.
RUSH: Great to have you here. I appreciate your call.
These people in Hollywood are absolutely bonkers. Theyre nuts. They dont know what theyre talking about. Even the ones in academia are giving half-truths about how these hurricanes really behave and hyping climate change because thats where the universities make their money off this.
Michael Mann is one of them, the way he talked about Harvey. But think of a hurricane, Rush and youve talked about it on your show. You talk about, Oh, the warm ocean water. It needs fuel. Thats the fuel that gets these storms going. But there are several other components to this, Rush, and needing fuel or the warm water is only one. Think of a hurricane as a car engine, to put it in simpler terms. The car needs fuel to run.
But it also needs cylinders, a radiator, and an engine size which you could think of as the dynamic stability of the storm. In other words, developing thunderstorms that occur and then the destruction of those storms and redevelopment as the storm moves along. If any one of those components doesnt operate correctly, the storm cannot rev up to Cat 5 no matter how warm the water gets, and you could think of the transmission as being the wind shear associated with these storms.
RUSH: Oh, now, I was gonna mention wind shear, too, because theres another hurricane out there. This is Hurricane Jose.
RUSH: Hurricane Jose, if you look at the computer models, Hurricane Jose just doing circles, and the model are not sure where its gonna end up. So I read today that interests along the Northeastern coast should be especially prepared. Make sure you have waters and batteries and Come on! The thing is hundreds of miles away and theres not a single model now that has it hitting any land.
CALLER: Well, thats correct, Rush, and youre usually correct.
RUSH: The shear is what I wanted to talk to you about cause people are asking me, How come Irma was what it was and this Jose thing its in the same place why is it not going where Irma did? I said, Shear is ripping the tops off of this hurricane. Would you explain to people what that means?
CALLER: Well, the wind shear is the change of wind with height as you go up in the atmosphere. These hurricanes need very little wind, and if you get too much wind at high levels, the storm tops cannot develop to the altitude that they do to get the Cat 5 going. In other words, the cylinders arent firing right. The radiator has a leak.
RUSH: Thats right. Youre not gonna have
CALLER: Yeah, it doesnt matter whether theres enough warm water or not. If the rest of the components dont all come together, youre not gonna rev that thing up to Cat 5. And let me tell you something else about these hurricanes, Rush. When they develop way out in the central Atlantic like Irma did and rev themselves up to Cat 5, the dynamic stability tends to have a life to it. These are heat engines, and they tend to become disorganized the longer you go through time. The most deadly storms that we experience here in the mainland are ones that actually form closer in, and the most deadly on record which people dont really talk about today is 50-some years ago, Hurricane Camille in 1969, in August 69.
RUSH: It was, yeah. It was deadly. Look, Im running out of time. I appreciate the call. See, being substantiated here by a lifelong, career meteorologist. That counts for much more than Paul Krugman or Matt Lauer or Stevie Wonder. But there is a hurricane out in the Atlantic. Its being ripped to shreds by shear. The shear over Irma was practically nonexistent. And they cant tell you why, and they cant move it. Its just the way the atmosphere is affecting this particular hurricane.
Well, shut that guy down.
It's a dream for liberals: academia gets to spend lots of other peoples money, and the Democrats get almost total control over everyone's life.
Actually, once again, the historical data is not being reported. Hurricane Irma was overhyped:
400 miles across was not the biggest storm ever as the media was saying. Katrina was 415 miles across. Irene was 600 miles across. Sandy was 1,000 miles across. This report is from the Huffington post (a liberal source) in 2012:
It seems to me after a long period of no major hurricanes since 2005, the global warming media is tripping all over itself to finally have some global warming disaster they can point to to justify their agenda.
Ive also read on climatedepot.com that the ocean temperature was not higher than normal. In fact, the hurricane blew up into a Cat 4-5 where the ocean temps were 2 degrees lower than usual, but the hurricane formation was facilitated by the lack of atmospheric shear.
So both of the perceptions that people have as a result of watching mainstream media are either wrong: (400 miles being the largest) or debatable: (ocean water temps vs. lack of atmospheric shear).
Invade the part of Africa where these storms come from, terraform it, change the ground, build canals, irrigate it.
Kill the hurricane spawning grounds.
Most good idea.
You’re very fortunate not to be henpecked and kicked off the thread over posting that. The weather-involved do not like “down-casting.”
Hurricanes serve a purpose. Live by the ocean, fear its wrath.
Do you mean sending clicks to Huffpost?
Is there a taboo about doing that? If so, didn’t realize.
Downcasting is a prediction that minimizes storm severity. Heavily weather-involved individuals want a big, bad storm and are very offended by anyone who dares to imply that it’s not an utter catastrophe. There’s only a taboo if you’re on a thread with such individuals. Fortunately, you’re among rational, levelheaded people at the moment.
This terra-form idea gets brought up occasionally, and goes nowhere.
The blunt truth is that there needs to be a simple 1-2-3 agenda put up with irrigation, wells dug, wind generators erected, and birth control introduced. Lesser populations...more dependable agriculture...storm changing tactics, would all benefit the US and this region of Africa.
Cost would not be a big factor. But we never seem to get around to any agreement because lobbyists want the mega solution packages instead. If we just had a dozen National Guard well-digging teams in Guinea for eighteen months...just about every village in the country would have a dependable water supply and simple methods of piping the water throughout a village.
Thanks for clarifying your point.
I would think most freepers are on the right page about gorebul warming and wouldn’t have henpecked me for scaling down the storm hype.
Avoid the official hurricane threads, then.
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.