Global Warming-Hurricane Link Questioned

U.S. Scientist Shifts Positions, Says Warmer Weather Will Reduce Number Of Hurricanes

(AP)  Global warming isn't to blame for the recent jump in hurricanes in the Atlantic, concludes a study by a prominent federal scientist whose position has shifted on the subject.

Not only that, warmer temperatures will actually reduce the number of hurricanes in the Atlantic and those making landfall, research meteorologist Tom Knutson reported in a study released Sunday.

In the past, Knutson has raised concerns about the effects of climate change on storms. His new paper has the potential to heat up a simmering debate among meteorologists about current and future effects of global warming in the Atlantic.

Ever since Hurricane Katrina in 2005, hurricanes have often been seen as a symbol of global warming's wrath. Many climate change experts have tied the rise of hurricanes in recent years to global warming and hotter waters that fuel them.

Another group of experts, those who study hurricanes and who are more often skeptical about global warming, say there is no link. They attribute the recent increase to a natural multi-decade cycle.

What makes this study different is Knutson, a meteorologist with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's fluid dynamics lab in Princeton, N.J.

He has warned about the harmful effects of climate change and has even complained in the past about being censored by the Bush administration on past studies on the dangers of global warming.

He said his new study, based on a computer model, argues "against the notion that we've already seen a really dramatic increase in Atlantic hurricane activity resulting from greenhouse warming."

The study, published online Sunday in the journal Nature Geoscience, predicts that by the end of the century the number of hurricanes in the Atlantic will fall by 18 percent.

The number of hurricanes making landfall in the United States and its neighbors - anywhere west of Puerto Rico - will drop by 30 percent because of wind factors.

The biggest storms - those with winds of more than 110 mph - would only decrease in frequency by 8 percent. Tropical storms, those with winds between 39 and 73 mph, would decrease by 27 percent.

It's not all good news from Knutson's study, however. His computer model also forecasts that hurricanes and tropical storms will be wetter and fiercer. Rainfall within 30 miles of a hurricane should jump by 37 percent and wind strength should increase by about 2 percent, Knutson's study says.

And Knutson said this study significantly underestimates the increase in wind strength. Some other scientists criticized his computer model.

MIT hurricane meteorologist Kerry Emanuel, while praising Knutson as a scientist, called his conclusion "demonstrably wrong" based on a computer model that doesn't look properly at storms.

Kevin Trenberth, a climate scientist, said Knutson's computer model is poor at assessing tropical weather and "fail to replicate storms with any kind of fidelity."

Trenberth, climate analysis chief at the National Center for Atmospheric Research in Boulder, Colo., said it is not just the number of hurricanes "that matter, it is also the intensity, duration and size, and this study falls short on these issues."

Knutson acknowledges weaknesses in his computer model and said it primarily gives a coarse overview, not an accurate picture on individual storms and storm strength. He said the latest model doesn't produce storms surpassing 112 mph.

But NOAA hurricane meteorologist Chris Landsea, who wasn't part of this study, praised Knutson's work as "very consistent with what's being said all along."

"I think global warming is a big concern, but when it comes to hurricanes the evidence for changes is pretty darn tiny," Landsea said.

Hurricane season starts June 1 in the Atlantic and a Colorado State University forecast predicts about a 50 percent more active than normal storm season this year. NOAA puts out its own seasonal forecast on May 22.

In a normal year about 10 named storms form. Six become hurricanes and two become major hurricanes. On average, about five hurricanes hit the United States every three years.

[creeper00]

Tom Knutson, meet James Hansen. You two should have a lot to talk about.

[christian735]

This global warming crappola is getting out of hand. Now everytime a major weather catastrophy occurs some liberal is screaming "It''s the End of the World, Global Warming will do us all in!"

And yet they have the nerve to call Republican Conservatives the fear mongerers.

[christian735]

However, there is no dramatic global warming and until people get off their brainwashed high horses they won''''t see that.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted by MyOpinion1 at 08:20 AM : May 19, 2008

Asking liberals to get off their brainwashed high horses over this global warming hype is like talking to a rock.

[mike71067]

"Global Warming-Hurricane Link Questioned"

Uh-oh. Anybody who goes against the global warming scam will be labeled a "global warming denier", and will be called all sorts of names by the Al Gore crowd.

Oppose these nuts at your own risk.

[libh8er]

I''d be willing to bet that all the foaming at the mouth libs who argued the ''science'' behind global warming and INCRESING hurricanes in the Atlantic will be absent today! ROFL!!!!

Al Gore - you are a FRAUD!!!!!!

[cfin5]

These recycled Soviet science propaganda tactics are really turning folks off like me to even care about the environment. I like all the neat ideas that are coming around to save energy and all that stuff, but when they start promoting theories and specifically refusing to debate other scientists rightful questions like they have in the past with the "theory" of evolution,.....I''ll have none of it. Oh by the way, thank you BEN STEIN!

[libh8er]

Oh by the way, thank you BEN STEIN!
Posted by cfin5 at 08:59 AM : May 19, 2008

Goes DOUBLE for me!

[libh8er]

And yet they have the nerve to call Republican Conservatives the fear mongerers.
Posted by Christian735 at 08:30 AM : May 19, 2008

They should call them assclowns because McCain is hitching himself (and by default us) to the gobal warming freak show.

[cfin5]

Posted by LibH8er at 09:05 AM : May 19, 2008-----I won''t be voting for McCain,....not even tempted. The thought of doing that puts such a foul taste in my mouth, I feel the sudden need to lick my armpit to get the bad taste off it. Since I''m a Constitutionist and no dem or rep,...I''ll be voting accordingly.

[singingrick]

Warm water is the fuel on which hurricanes run. The warmer the water, the stronger the storm.

[ubrew12]

LibH8er said: "Al Gore - you are a FRAUD"
This study hardly contradicts Global Warming. Others concerned about Global Warming have mentioned that it may not increase the number of storms, just their size. This study predicts more rain, flooding, perhaps higher winds. What always amazed me about Katrina is the way it gained strength over the Gulf of Mexico just before it hit land. The Gulf was just POURING energy into that storm, it was so overheated. Expect that sort of thing with global warming. Doesn''t make Gore a fraud.

Global warming in real, the US and other countries are manipulating the weather and the China earthquake and Myanmar Cyclone were NOT from natural causes.

The Bush Administration has twisted Tom Knutson''s legs for him to switch his position and Ben Stein is a liar. Follow Stein''s and Joe Liebermann''s religious ties, look at the Bush Family''s ties to Israel to follow the money and disastrous events in the US and the world.

There is no oil shortage and Americans are suffering with escalating prices that will not go down for years to come. Follow the money!

http://rense.com/general82/gull.htm

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ larisa-alexandrovna/ all-the-presidents-nazis_b_102022.html

http://www.liveleak.com/ view?i=8ee_1205521504&c=1

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IOZ4G7080Jc

[libh8er]

Doesn''''t make Gore a fraud.
Posted by ubrew12 at 09:42 AM : May 19, 2008

Only time will tell. Just keep sending him your $$$ for purchasing your ''carbon credits'' to ease your guilty conscience. LOL

[libh8er]

This study hardly contradicts Global Warming.
Posted by ubrew12 at 09:42 AM : May 19, 2008

Don''t even go there, cupcake. After Katrina, Gore (et al) couldn''t keep their faces off the TV blaming Katrina on gloooooobal warrrrrrming and warning that it would increase.

Well, Katrina was followed by two years of nothing. Now, we have this. There''s a sucker born every minute. Too bad we have more than our share!

[ubrew12]

LibH8er said: "After Katrina, Gore (et al) couldn''''t keep their faces off the TV blaming Katrina on gloooooobal warrrrrrming and warning that it would increase."
The SIZE of Katrina IS related to Global Warming. The frequency of such events is in question, cuz the Pacific warms also, and its warming prevents Atlantic Hurricanes from making landfall on the East Coast. Those that do, however, are more likely to be whoppers.

[jimfinster]

He said his new study, based on a computer model, argues "against the notion that we''ve already seen a really dramatic increase in Atlantic hurricane activity resulting from greenhouse warming."


The denier crowd previously refused to accept ANY computer modeling, when it showed adverse effects of climate change. Yet now they suddenly accept the validity of a computer model when it goes their way? LMAO !!!!

[bombadil4]

Rather than trying to decide your own position based on conflicting, confusing, and sometimes fraudulent "evidence," it might simplify things to just consider we''ve never been able to heavily abuse other ecosystems--, streams, rivers, oceans, etc. without serious and sometimes deadly implications for the flora, fauna, and sometimes even people who dwell there. What''s the chance, then, that we can get away with heavily abusing the atmosphere, perhaps the most sensitive and vital ecosystem of all? And of course trouble there will affect EVERYBODY.

[questionnews]

Global warming in real, the US and other countries are manipulating the weather and the China earthquake and Myanmar Cyclone were NOT from natural causes.
Posted by mariony at 09:46 AM : May 19, 2008


Wait.... Are saying that humans can cause 7.0 earthquakes anytime they want to??????????
Hold on while I make some popcorn real quick, this is going to be good!

[libh8er]

Those that do, however, are more likely to be whoppers.
Posted by ubrew12 at 10:24 AM : May 19, 2008

Well, I appreciate the fact that you are trying to have an adult debate on the matter. We''ll agree to disagree.

Most of us see the changing weather patterns.....we just disagree on the cause being man made.

[jon2012-2009]

"Global Warming-Hurricane Link Questioned"

Uh-oh. Anybody who goes against the global warming scam will be labeled a "global warming denier", and will be called all sorts of names by the Al Gore crowd.

Oppose these nuts at your own risk.
Posted by mike71067 at 08:52 AM : May 19, 2008

The science behind global warming is on solid ground to be undone by a single study. What counts is the overwhelming weight of evidence and that is what moves the scientific consensus. Anyway, the conclusions pertain only to one miniscule aspect of global warming. Factoring in the caveats raised about the modeling used, there isn''t much there.

You guys are just grasping at straws.

[jon2012-2009]

Most of us see the changing weather patterns.....we just disagree on the cause being man made.
Posted by LibH8er at 10:33 AM : May 19, 2008

The study has no bearing on whether global warming is man-made. If you choose to disagree with what most scientists say, that''s only your opinion and most people would say you are being foolish. Our understanding of the stars and planets, the origins of man and other species, the sub-atomic composition of matter--all that and more have been made possible by men of science, not by people like you. I''ll take their word any time.

[lochlan-2009]

All right global warming nuts, let me get this straight.

The earth, with a climate that has been changing for billions of years, has been trending warmer for about a hundred years now by a few degrees. And now you people want to stop it from getting any warmer. The whole planet, you want to keep it at its current temperature, is that right?

CO2 is the greenhouse gas you are talking about reducing correct? Just Facts From Wikipedia (for those with a brain):

Nitrogen 78.0842%
Oxygen 20.9463%
Argon 0.93422%
-- Carbon dioxide 0.03811%
Water vapor about 1%
Other 0.002%

"Existence of the greenhouse effect as such is not disputed. Naturally occurring greenhouse gases have a mean warming effect of about 33 0C (59 0F), without which Earth would be uninhabitable.[24][25] On Earth, the major greenhouse gases are water vapor, which causes about 36%u201370% of the greenhouse effect (not including clouds); carbon dioxide (CO2), which causes 9%u201326%; methane (CH4), which causes 4%u20139%; and ozone, which causes 3%u20137%."

"The atmospheric concentrations of CO2 and CH4 have increased by 31% and 149% respectively since the beginning of the industrial revolution in the mid-1700s."

[lochlan-2009]

2005 U.S. Senate Bill 517 and U.S. House Bill 2995
U.S. Senate Bill 517[15] and U.S. House Bill 2995[16] were two laws proposed in 2005 that would have allowed experimental weather modification by artificial methods, established a Weather Modification Operations and Research Board, and implemented a national weather modification policy. Neither ever became law.

[lochlan-2009]

And what sort of education level do you have again. A degree in NASCAR?


Posted by FloydZepp

I don''t like to brag, but I am a nuclear engineer.

[lochlan-2009]

FloydZepp-

And you?

[questionnews]

And what sort of education level do you have again. A degree in NASCAR?


Posted by FloydZepp

I don''''t like to brag, but I am a nuclear engineer.

Posted by lochlan at 11:28 AM : May 19, 2008

Careful there FloydZepp!! You might want to just stay with your normal insults & flee without a scentific response.

[zykracosmos]

What you are witnessing is how science works and is meant to work. Real science is peer reviewed, and studies aren''t necessarily conclusive. No one should critize Knutson for his study. Computer modeling is an evolving field, and although his model is flawed, it deserves to be thoroughly reviewed as unbiased science. Trenberth is the reigning expert in climate modeling, and his comments are most important here. This is part of the process. Knutson''s work was at least serious enough to gain a comment from Trenberth. No one is threatened by the scientific process. You can''t disprove truth. The search for truth in science is based upon peer review, repetition, and conclusions based upon probability, not absolutes. Even the most established theories of all time are constantly under review. This process is what separates science from politic or philosophical debate.

[lochlan-2009]

I''''m and electrical engineer doing research. And I doubt you are even in science.

Posted by FloydZepp

I can tell, with words like "nucular". Tell me the site you would prefer.

[sistatee-2009]

Global warming''s wrath? What BS. Get Al Gore''s fat _ss off that Gulfstream IV and watch the Earth cool down.

[zykracosmos]

A few observations of my own- While there is strong scientific evidence to link global warming with increased intensity of hurricanes (almost obvious, because hurricanes feed on warm water, and global warming has raised surface seawater temperatures), there are problems with predicting an increase in frequency for hurricanes or tropical storms. I had a conversation with Trenberth myself about this years ago, in suggesting global warming may increase the intensity of El Nino events (instead of an El Nino current 60 miles wide, you now have west to east currents that reach 600 miles in width). El Ninos now are so strong that they can actually reverse the Trade Winds, sending westerly winds across from the Pacific that provide formidable wind shear on any developing tropical storms. The storms get torn apart from the top down before they can develop into anything very powerful. This is exactly what happened in the El Nino year after the summer of Katrina. Climatology is a very complex science, and we still are trying to understand all the variables that need to be entered into a reliable computer model. We are much better at it than we were ten years ago, but it is definitely an evolving science.

[jimfinster]

ZykraCosmos:

Thanks for the insightful comments.

The new supercomputer at the National Center for Atmospheric Research should help. It''s called "Bluefire." Bluefire is one of the top 25 most powerful computers in the world, and it will triple NCAR''s computing power. Pretty neat - it is water cooled!

[libh8er]

The earth, with a climate that has been changing for billions of years, has been trending warmer for about a hundred years now by a few degrees. Posted by lochlan at 11:16 AM : May 19, 2008

Actually, by about 1 degree C over the last hundred years.

[demslie]

NASA figures from 2006:

The result indicates that a strong underlying warming trend is continuing. Global warming since the middle 1970s is now about 0.6 degrees Celsius (C) or about 1 degree Fahrenheit (F). Total warming in the past century is about 0.80 C or about 1.40 F.

Posted by FloydZepp

Democrats like FloydZepp cand show these figures but that is not what causes the problem of the Global Warming Subject. Hurricane Katrina and Global Warming are blamed on George Bush. Al Gore went to Congress and Testified that Global Warming is not a Republican or Democrat issue. Later that week he exclaimed, "George Bush has Betrayed us on the Environment". Global Warming has always been used by Democrats as a political tool. And most Environmentalist (Tree Huggers who vote Democrat) Claim that all enviromental problems, as well as every problem in the world started on January 20th 2001.

[erasmus81]

hawksprings, are you there?

Did you hear how Al Gore is making changes to his house? One of those changes is putting solar panels in his roof. That is one less thing you can complain about, right?:)

[zykracosmos]

Agreed FloydZepp. Global Warming only becomes a political issue if you try to link Republicans to the propaganda released by fossil fuel industries like Exxon, who see their $40 billion in profits from last year as endangered. Although Republicans are historically pro-business, that doesn''t mean endorsing all mega-multinational corporations whose priorities are not necessarily good for America. A true Republican perspective would envision global warming as an issue that could stimulate American business ingenuity towards non-fossil resources, development of new products and technology for non-fossil energy supplies, and most importantly (from the GOP perspective) a reason to distance ourselves from foreign conflicts (traditionally a Republican strongpoint). This issue can and should be an issue that unites all Americans, regardless of whether their priorities as environmentalists or businessmen. It''s time we all rallied around ourselves and help put these changes on the fast track.

[speakinup]

Watch Gore try to claim merit here.

[obamawhama]

one thing is for sure...scientists DOES NOT KNOW EVERYTHING.

[cfin5]

There are 32,000 scientist who beg to differ Mr. Gore. They''ve all signed the Oregon Petition. Since plants breath Carbon Dioxide, why won''t vegetation flourish all the more to give us Oxygen and filter the air all the more?

[algoresarse]

1) I''''m Republican.
2) Those were NASA figures.
3) Scientists around the world agree with these figures. How is this a Democrat thing?

You have truly stepped off the deep end.

Posted by FloydZepp at 02:09 PM : May 19, 2008
+ report abuse

****************

you change your colors more often than you change underwear you d amn liberal..democrat..this story pretty much suggest that even nasa dont know shi*t..it is a democrat thing because ''global warming'' is something every liberal democrat is exploiting JUST GORE

[algoresarse]

hawksprings, are you there?

Did you hear how Al Gore is making changes to his house? One of those changes is putting solar panels in his roof. That is one less thing you can complain about, right?:)

Posted by erasmus81 at 01:55 PM : May 19, 2008
+ report abuse

********

well its one out of many that gore should be changing..now have gore made such an impression on you that you are doing something about global warming??

any solar panels on your house?

[erasmus81]

well its one out of many that gore should be changing..now have gore made such an impression on you that you are doing something about global warming??

any solar panels on your house?

Posted by algoresarse at 02:50 AM : May 20, 2008

Yes, I am doing things about global warming. Everything that I can afford to do. There are a lot of things that people can do that cost very little.

Do I have solar panels? No, but I do have skylights. And just from having skylights, the furnace hasn''t come on for more than a few times in the past month or longer. And the temperatures outside have actually been a bit cool until recently.

What are you doing? Nothing, I bet, because you are one of those people still living in DENIAL. Right?