• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Why Harvey was so powerful...

[h=1]Irma illusions – and realities[/h]If human emissions made Irma worse, did they also bring the 12-year lull in Cat 4-5 hurricanes? Paul Driessen Hurricanes Harvey and Irma brought out the best in us. Millions of Americans are giving money, toil and sweat to help victims rebuild. Unfortunately, the storms also highlighted some people’s baser instincts. Some advanced ideological commitments…
Continue reading →
 
hurricanes
[h=1]Enough is Enough! Stop hyping Harvey and Irma![/h] Dr. Neil Frank, former Director National Hurricane Center Over the past several weeks numerous articles suggest Harvey and Irma were the result of global warming. The concept is a warmer earth will generate stronger and wetter hurricanes. A number of people have said Irma was the most intense hurricane in the history of the…
 
Jack Hays said:
hurricanes
[h=1]Enough is Enough! Stop hyping Harvey and Irma![/h] Dr. Neil Frank, former Director National Hurricane Center Over the past several weeks numerous articles suggest Harvey and Irma were the result of global warming. The concept is a warmer earth will generate stronger and wetter hurricanes. A number of people have said Irma was the most intense hurricane in the history of the…
Click to expand...

At least Dr. Neil Frank backs up what I have been saying about Harvey.
https://www.debatepolitics.com/envi...s-action-climate-change-3.html#post1067668269
the excess rain was simply a result of it stalling.
 
longview said:
At least Dr. Neil Frank backs up what I have been saying about Harvey.
https://www.debatepolitics.com/envi...s-action-climate-change-3.html#post1067668269
the excess rain was simply a result of it stalling.
Click to expand...

Buried deep within is this provocative paragraph.

Speaking of CO2, there is a very intense controversy over what is causing the earth to warm. The earth has been warming for over 150 years. That is not debatable. What is debatable is the cause. Is it CO2 as “warmest” proclaim or other natural cycles? Solar experts in Asia, the Middle East and parts of Europe believe it is the sun. Over the past 3 1/2 years they have published over 400 papers that discredit CO2 and support natural cycles of the sun. If this is true, why is there intense pressure to spend billions and billions of dollars on green energy?
 
Jack Hays said:
Buried deep within is this provocative paragraph.

Speaking of CO2, there is a very intense controversy over what is causing the earth to warm. The earth has been warming for over 150 years. That is not debatable. What is debatable is the cause. Is it CO2 as “warmest” proclaim or other natural cycles? Solar experts in Asia, the Middle East and parts of Europe believe it is the sun. Over the past 3 1/2 years they have published over 400 papers that discredit CO2 and support natural cycles of the sun. If this is true, why is there intense pressure to spend billions and billions of dollars on green energy?
Click to expand...

The sun has no doubt cause more warming then CO2.
 
Jack Hays said:
hurricanes
[h=1]Enough is Enough! Stop hyping Harvey and Irma![/h] Dr. Neil Frank, former Director National Hurricane Center Over the past several weeks numerous articles suggest Harvey and Irma were the result of global warming. The concept is a warmer earth will generate stronger and wetter hurricanes. A number of people have said Irma was the most intense hurricane in the history of the…
Click to expand...
I certainly agree that stalling was the main reason for Harvey's incredible rainfall. Irma extremely flooded the North Atlantic side of Florida, and Southern Georgia, and South Carolina. Certainly some of this can be attributed to AGW.

The actual numbers from IPCC models are between 2% and 11% increase in hurricane intensity by the end of the 21st century. Assuming a linear relationship, we are 17% of the way to the end of the century. So currently our increase in hurricane intensity would stand between 0.34% and 1.87%. Rainfall rates associated with hurricanes will increase by 10-15% by the end of the century, which puts us currently at 1.7% to 2.6%.

There are two ways to look at this data. First, one can say the percentages are small. However, using a modest 2% for argument's sake, a 24-hour storm, with flooding, could be extended for another 30 minutes. A lot can happen in that 30 minutes. A dam could give way. Another neighborhood could flood. Water could penetrate an area of electrical equipment. Somebody could be killed in that 30 minutes. When one is the midst of a disaster, 30 minutes is a long time. And that 30 minutes will be more than 60 minutes, for our next generation, and about 100 minutes for the generation after that.
 
Media_Truth said:
I certainly agree that stalling was the main reason for Harvey's incredible rainfall. Irma extremely flooded the North Atlantic side of Florida, and Southern Georgia, and South Carolina. Certainly some of this can be attributed to AGW.

The actual numbers from IPCC models are between 2% and 11% increase in hurricane intensity by the end of the 21st century. Assuming a linear relationship, we are 17% of the way to the end of the century. So currently our increase in hurricane intensity would stand between 0.34% and 1.87%. Rainfall rates associated with hurricanes will increase by 10-15% by the end of the century, which puts us currently at 1.7% to 2.6%.

There are two ways to look at this data. First, one can say the percentages are small. However, using a modest 2% for argument's sake, a 24-hour storm, with flooding, could be extended for another 30 minutes. A lot can happen in that 30 minutes. A dam could give way. Another neighborhood could flood. Water could penetrate an area of electrical equipment. Somebody could be killed in that 30 minutes. When one is the midst of a disaster, 30 minutes is a long time. And that 30 minutes will be more than 60 minutes, for our next generation, and about 100 minutes for the generation after that.
Click to expand...

There has been no increase in either frequency or intensity of hurricanes.
 
Jack Hays said:
There has been no increase in either frequency or intensity of hurricanes.
Click to expand...

Actually, the correct answer is that we don't know if there have been increases. If you would have read my post, that's what I stated, with much more detail, than your unbacked assertion. However, the increase in water associated with hurricanes, is much less debateable. I cited the model data earlier.
 
Media_Truth said:
Actually, the correct answer is that we don't know if there have been increases. If you would have read my post, that's what I stated, with much more detail, than your unbacked assertion. However, the increase in water associated with hurricanes, is much less debateable. I cited the model data earlier.
Click to expand...

[h=3]Hurricane scientist Dr. Ryan Maue rips climate 'hype' on Irma & Harvey ...[/h]www.climatedepot.com/.../hurricane-scientist-dr-ryan-maue-rips-climate-hype-on-irm...



Sep 17, 2017 - Hurricane scientist Dr. Ryan Maue rips climate 'hype' on Irma & Harvey ... storms andhurricanes have not shown an upward trend in frequency or ... the best climate modeling tools, the bigger issue than global warming is that ...




 
Jack Hays said:
There has been no increase in either frequency or intensity of hurricanes.
Click to expand...

Wrong. The models show that there is a slight intensity increase to hurricanes. We just probably won't notice the evidence yet. More likely, our children and grandchildren will notice the higher intensity levels.

That said, the increase in water associated with hurricanes is more noticeable today. At about 2% more water (per the models), a 24-hour hurricane/storm can last an additional 30 minutes. For the next generation, it will be about 60 minutes, and the following 100 minutes.
 
Media_Truth said:
Wrong. The models show that there is a slight intensity increase to hurricanes. We just probably won't notice the evidence yet. More likely, our children and grandchildren will notice the higher intensity levels.

That said, the increase in water associated with hurricanes is more noticeable today. At about 2% more water (per the models), a 24-hour hurricane/storm can last an additional 30 minutes. For the next generation, it will be about 60 minutes, and the following 100 minutes.
Click to expand...

Models are not always (actually seldom) reality. Besides, we have had two times in the books when the Atlantic was warmer than now.
 
Media_Truth said:
Wrong. The models show that there is a slight intensity increase to hurricanes. We just probably won't notice the evidence yet. More likely, our children and grandchildren will notice the higher intensity levels.

That said, the increase in water associated with hurricanes is more noticeable today. At about 2% more water (per the models), a 24-hour hurricane/storm can last an additional 30 minutes. For the next generation, it will be about 60 minutes, and the following 100 minutes.
Click to expand...

The data were presented in #284. Not models, actual data. Come back when you can present some.
 
Lord of Planar said:
Models are not always (actually seldom) reality. Besides, we have had two times in the books when the Atlantic was warmer than now.
Click to expand...

Perhaps you should write the National Academy of Science, and tell them that they don't represent reality. Do it! Let us all know what they say.

It is notable that as these data records have grown longer and climate models have become more comprehensive, earlier predictions have largely been confirmed. The only real surprises have been that some changes, such as sea level rise and Arctic sea ice decline, have outpaced earlier projections.

Overview | National Climate Assessment
 
Jack Hays said:
The data were presented in #284. Not models, actual data. Come back when you can present some.
Click to expand...

Does your wife complain about your lack of listening? How many times do I have to tell you, your graphs don't represent MORE WATER in hurricanes.:beatdeadhorse
 
Media_Truth said:
Perhaps you should write the National Academy of Science, and tell them that they don't represent reality. Do it! Let us all know what they say.

It is notable that as these data records have grown longer and climate models have become more comprehensive, earlier predictions have largely been confirmed. The only real surprises have been that some changes, such as sea level rise and Arctic sea ice decline, have outpaced earlier projections.

Overview | National Climate Assessment
Click to expand...

Please stop with that idiotic overview. It is difficult to navigate through and search. Maybe by intent?
 
Lord of Planar said:
Please stop with that idiotic overview. It is difficult to navigate through and search. Maybe by intent?
Click to expand...

I don't have any problem. Perhaps you are challenged in this regard.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom