One of the often quoted side-effects of global warming is an increase in the frequency and intensity of severe weather events such as hurricanes. This hypothesis is tested here against hurricane data from the National Hurricane Center, a branch of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and also the Joint Typhoon Warning Centre.Agreed--and wrong again, Al.
Data for the years 1999-2009 are analysed and tested against long term data for the North Atlantic, Eastern Pacific, Western Pacific, Northern and Southern Indian oceans. It is concluded that Hurricane intensity and frequency is significantly higher in this period in the North Atlantic. However in the Eastern Pacific, Western Pacific, Northern and Southern Indian oceans, there is no evidence of significant change. Taken together, there appears to be no significant difference in either frequency or intensity of hurricanes globally. Repeating the analysis for 1999-2007 gives the same result and this conflicts with statements made in the IPCC 2007 report. . .
Over the periods 1999-2007 or 1999-2009, it can be concluded that there is no evidence to support that the average number of tropical storms, hurricanes, major hurricanes or proportion of hurricanes which mature into major hurricanes has changed in the last 60 years.
Hatton btw:
once fixed weather models at the Met Office. Having studied Maths at Cambridge, he completed his PhD as metereologist: his PhD was the study of tornadoes and waterspouts. He's a fellow of the Royal Meterological Society, currently teaches at the University of Kingston, and is well known in the software engineering community - his studies include critical systems analysis.(via Planet Gore)
1 comment:
> Data for the years 1999-2009 are analysed and tested against long term data for the North Atlantic, Eastern Pacific, Western Pacific, Northern and Southern Indian oceans. It is concluded that Hurricane intensity and frequency is significantly higher in this period in the North Atlantic.
I'm curious if this is still correct IF you exclude the obviously possible "outlier" of 2005. Certainly 2006-2009 have generally been "below normal" (since the media was all over this "much worse" meme, and had to ack in 20006/7 that it appeared defective once the seasons were each over, and 8/9 were certainly insignificant years), and I don't recall the years prior to 2005 as being that nasty, either. So I have to wonder if an outlier is behind even this "notably" worse decade.
Post a Comment