Global warming has nothing to do with it

Discussion in 'General Global Topics' started by -Cp, Jul 20, 2005.

  1. -Cp
    Offline

    -Cp Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2004
    Messages:
    2,911
    Thanks Received:
    360
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Earth
    Ratings:
    +363
    Global warming has nothing to do with it

    There is some disagreement among climate scientists on the potential impact of global climate change on future hurricanes in the Atlantic Ocean. Last year, claims were made that the frequency of hurricanes will increase due to global climate change.

    For example, after Hurricane Bonnie, Charley and Frances hit Florida in 2004, the prime minister of England, Tony Blair, and many other prominent American scientists told the world that the hurricanes were due to global warming.

    Luckily scientists who actually regularly study hurricanes quickly responded with the facts, and, for once, the misinformation was curbed quickly and effectively.

    But now the alarmists are at it again, claiming that global warming will increase the intensity of hurricanes. Don't worry, readers; there is absolutely no scientific support or correlation of hurricane intensity or hurricane frequency with global warming.

    Hurricane scientists and experts actually believe that variations in the Atlantic Ocean Conveyer, not global temperatures, determine the frequency of hurricanes. It is predicted that we will see an increase in the number of Atlantic hurricanes for the next 10-15 years compared to recent years. This is nothing new -- the last peak occurred between 1930 and 1970.

    What is the Atlantic Ocean Conveyer and why does it affect hurricanes?

    In the North Atlantic in the Labrador and Gin Sea, water is cooled and sinks to the bottom in winter. The sinking water is replaced by warm Gulf Stream water that leaves the North Carolina coast and proceeds toward the Northeast to Ireland and Norway. The Gulf Stream draws water from the South Atlantic. The rest of the conveyer belt is in the other oceans, but the Atlantic portion is the dominant feature.

    This oceanic phenomenon varies and changes the sea-surface temperatures. When it is strong -- 1930-1970; 1995-2000-now -- there are more Atlantic hurricanes. When it is weak -- 1905-1925; 1975-1994 -- the hurricane season is mild.

    And what about intensity?

    Hurricanes have to keep moving or they die by upwelling the cold water below the warmer sea-surface temperatures. Hurricane Mitch, 1998, is a textbook example of this. Mitch stalled off Honduras when it lost its upper atmospheric steering currents. This caused it to die and drop over 6 feet of rain on the poor folks in Honduras and Nicaragua!

    A hurricane will also grow stronger as it moves over water warmer than 80 degrees F (26.5 C). This is why some people believe that global warming will increase hurricane intensity, but there are no scientific calculations that show the areas of water this warm increasing in size.

    However, if one graphs the ocean environment for Category 3, 4 and 5 storms, there is no difference in ocean-surface temperatures for tropical storms and Category 1 and 2 storms. What's more, the scientific literature documents that the western Atlantic off Africa is the prime breeding ground for the stronger storms -- and many of those stronger storms never make it to landfall.

    While it is tempting to blame the frequency or intensity of hurricanes on man, we all must remember how variable nature is -- and specifically in this case, the effect of natural variations on hurricanes' intensity and frequency is extremely higher than the possibility of man's interference.

    Dr. James O'Brien is the Florida state climatologist and a professor of meteorology and oceanography at Florida State University in Tallahassee.


    http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news...20,0,6840176.story?coll=orl-opinion-headlines
     
  2. Nuc
    Offline

    Nuc Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2005
    Messages:
    2,377
    Thanks Received:
    140
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Sydney, Australia
    Ratings:
    +141
    Since you just post articles without adding any comment I must ask you, do you think global warming doesn't exist? I suppose it's part of the left wing conspiracy, right? :blowup:
     
  3. freeandfun1
    Offline

    freeandfun1 VIP Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2004
    Messages:
    6,201
    Thanks Received:
    295
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings:
    +296
    IF (mighty BIG if) Global Warming does exist, it is more likely a product of nature than man.

    Two days ago we tied the record for the hottest ever on record here in Vegas. A sign of Global Warming right! I doubt it... the old record was set in 1942. A matter of fact, most of the records for record heat EVERYWHERE in the world were set decades ago. Global warming is real, but it is also a function of nature. Ice rings from the artic, tree rings, etc. show that global warming and ice ages occur in cycles every so many hudreds/thousands of years. I think it is arrogant to think we have that much control over mother nature.
     
  4. Nuc
    Offline

    Nuc Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2005
    Messages:
    2,377
    Thanks Received:
    140
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Sydney, Australia
    Ratings:
    +141
    "Global Warming" is a bad term for this phenomenon. "Global Climactic Disruption" would be more accurate. It means hot where and when it shouldn't be, cold where and when it shouldn't be. If you think the massive amount of pollution we spew has no effect on global climate, your head is in the sand. There is open water at the polar icecap at the moment for the first time in history and it's not part of any normal climactic trend.
     
  5. dmp
    Offline

    dmp Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2004
    Messages:
    13,088
    Thanks Received:
    741
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Enterprise, Alabama
    Ratings:
    +741

    Since you post comments which don't relate the the point of -Cp's articles, I must ask you; Do you think you could start posting comments which relate to the point of -Cp's articles?

    :D

    :poke: :spank3: :poop:
     
  6. Nuc
    Offline

    Nuc Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2005
    Messages:
    2,377
    Thanks Received:
    140
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Sydney, Australia
    Ratings:
    +141
    I thought my comments were on topic.
    :moon4:
     
  7. Said1
    Offline

    Said1 VIP Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2004
    Messages:
    12,087
    Thanks Received:
    937
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    Somewhere in Ontario
    Ratings:
    +937
    Fresh water run off from polar ice caps has a bigger overall effect on global temps. Run off and climatic effects due to changes in warm and cold jet streams are normal, the speed with which the ice caps are melting is not.
     
  8. USViking
    Offline

    USViking VIP Member

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2005
    Messages:
    1,452
    Thanks Received:
    69
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    Greensboro, NC USA
    Ratings:
    +69
    This link has a graph which indicates present rate
    of warming is not out of line with other warming
    rates in the geological past:

    http://www.scotese.com/climate.htm

    I realize the graph may be stylized, but the author
    does draw peaks of greatly varying duration, so I
    assume he is confident this is what the data shows.

    The earth appears to still be in a cold spell as
    prolonged as any in its history, and has experienced
    climate 10C hotter than the present.

    One benefit of a permanently warmer climate might
    be the permanent cessation of the Ice Age cycle.
    I have a book by a specialist in the Ice Ages, and
    his emphatic opinion is they are not over.

    I wonder if even the complete melting of the polar
    ice caps would cover the area now above sea level
    to the extent the ice did at its greatest advance.
     

Share This Page