Harvey: 99.98 chance it wont happen again!!

[skookerasbil]

More Oooops for the climate clowns who's been telling us for 3 weeks climate change is making these big hurricanes more frequent for our future. Of course, the science says otherwise............

http://www.khou.com/news/harvey-99998-chance-it-wont-happen-again/479153993?utm_campaign=trueAnthem%3A+Trending+Content&utm_content=59cc73c604d301555d78c6d7&utm_medium=trueAnthem&utm_source=facebook

We hear a lot about "fake news" these days........nobody dabbles in fake news more than the alarmist establishment.

 

[gipper]

Well how about that?

No doubt warmers will discount this 'science,' while claiming they support science. Clearly they only prefer 'science' that supports their kooky narrative.

Just ask Mattieboy or OldCrotch.

 

[skookerasbil]

Almost zero to do with climate change.....................

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/2017/09/hurricane-irma-harvey-season-climate-change-weather/

 

[mamooth]

So, a no-name meteorologist babbles a nonsense factoid without even giving a source, and Skook laps it up and spits out some stupidity that isn't even related.

God I love this forum, and I love humiliating Skook. He always cries in such an amusing fashion. Let's try to get Skook to discuss the topic he raised himself. Of course, he'll need to find his 'nads first. Skook, check your groin area, and use magnification.

Skook, can you back up the crazy claim you made in the OP with any actual evidence? Remember, "but the weather guy on the TV said it!" is not actual evidence.

After that, can you tell us why one-in-50000 events happening is supposed to support your claim that unusual things aren't happening? I just ask because common sense would indicate the exact opposite.

 

[skookerasbil]

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/2017/09/hurricane-irma-harvey-season-climate-change-weather/#






99.98% sons!!!!

 

[skookerasbil]

LOL.........the NOAA says "the trend ( hurricane intensity related to climate change 1878-2006 ) is so significantly small it could be considered zero"

Nocookies


Nocookies


So....who looks pathetic on this thread?

 

[ScienceRocks]

Majors that hit Texas
Bret 1999
Alicia 1983
Celia 1970
Carla 1961
1941
1915
1900

Sure' I'll happen again.

 

[usmbguest5318]

Do you truly not understand the probabilistic difference between what climate level hurricane frequencies/likelihoods and weather-event level probabilities?

From the article:

Each and every year there is a chance, a 0.002 chance, that we will see another flood like Harvey. Or to put it another way, each year for the next 50,000 there is a 99.998% chance that we will NOT see a flood like Harvey. So, yes, I'm sayin' there's a chance.​

For climate science's predictions to be accurate, the hurricanes don't have to make landfall even. They need only be produced as per the predictions and within the margin of error. As goes the 99.998% chance of which the article speaks, that pertains to hurricanes like Harvey making landfall and causing flooding damage like Harvey did. That has nothing to do with the quantity and intensity of hurricanes that are created.

Hell, KHOU doesn't even provide enough information for readers to know whether the risk percentage they note is Houston-specific.

 

[ScienceRocks]

Harvey beat Amelia of 78 in rainfall in Texas! Wouldn't surprise me within the next 40 years we have another Harvey like rainstorm.

 

[Billy_Bob]

We have some left wing kooks that need to learn how to do math... Better than 98.999% chances it is natural....

 

[skookerasbil]

Do you truly not understand the probabilistic difference between what climate level hurricane frequencies/likelihoods and weather-event level probabilities?

From the article:

Each and every year there is a chance, a 0.002 chance, that we will see another flood like Harvey. Or to put it another way, each year for the next 50,000 there is a 99.998% chance that we will NOT see a flood like Harvey. So, yes, I'm sayin' there's a chance.​

For climate science's predictions to be accurate, the hurricanes don't have to make landfall even. They need only be produced as per the predictions and within the margin of error. As goes the 99.998% chance of which the article speaks, that pertains to hurricanes like Harvey making landfall and causing flooding damage like Harvey did. That has nothing to do with the quantity and intensity of hurricanes that are created.

Hell, KHOU doesn't even provide enough information for readers to know whether the risk percentage they note is Houston-specific.

Well s0n........people like me who have been on this earth for many many decades never saw anything like Harvey and it is highly likely I'll long be in my box when we see it again. The math is certainly closer to the level of probability as compared to the goofball climate crusaders making statements that this shit is going to become the norm. They say shit like that all the time.......and it never, ever comes to pass. We'll go with the math...........

 

[usmbguest5318]

Do you truly not understand the probabilistic difference between what climate level hurricane frequencies/likelihoods and weather-event level probabilities?

From the article:

Each and every year there is a chance, a 0.002 chance, that we will see another flood like Harvey. Or to put it another way, each year for the next 50,000 there is a 99.998% chance that we will NOT see a flood like Harvey. So, yes, I'm sayin' there's a chance.​

For climate science's predictions to be accurate, the hurricanes don't have to make landfall even. They need only be produced as per the predictions and within the margin of error. As goes the 99.998% chance of which the article speaks, that pertains to hurricanes like Harvey making landfall and causing flooding damage like Harvey did. That has nothing to do with the quantity and intensity of hurricanes that are created.

Hell, KHOU doesn't even provide enough information for readers to know whether the risk percentage they note is Houston-specific.

Well s0n........people like me who have been on this earth for many many decades never saw anything like Harvey and it is highly likely I'll long be in my box when we see it again. The math is certainly closer to the level of probability as compared to the goofball climate crusaders making statements that this shit is going to become the norm. They say shit like that all the time.......and it never, ever comes to pass. We'll go with the math...........

A warmer, wetter atmosphere could also affect tropical storms (hurricanes), but changes to tropical storms are harder to predict and track. Some scientists have speculated that a warmer climate that allows more intense storms to develop would also spawn more hurricanes. Warmer temperatures may also heat ocean waters farther from the Equator, expanding the reach of large tropical storms. But there is little evidence to support the either of these theories, says Kerry Emanuel, a professor of tropical meteorology and climate in the Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s Program in Atmospheres, Oceans, and Climate.

The one way in which global warming could impact hurricanes is by making them more intense. More heat and water in the atmosphere and warmer sea surface temperatures could provide more fuel to increase the wind speeds of tropical storms. Warming that has already occurred since 1980 has increased sea surface temperatures 0.3 degrees Celsius, which should increase the maximum potential wind speed of hurricanes by 1 knot, according to hurricane intensity models. But increases that small could not have been observed yet. “At present, hurricane intensity is measured only to an accuracy of plus or minus five knots, so it is not possible to discern any change that might have occurred owing to warming that has already taken place,” says Emanuel.

Even if tropical storms don’t change significantly, other environmental changes brought on by global warming could make the storms more deadly. Melting glaciers and ice caps will likely cause sea levels to rise, which would make coastal flooding more severe when a storm comes ashore. In their 2001 report, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change stated that global warming should cause sea levels to rise 0.11 to 0.77 meters (0.36 to 2.5 feet) by 2100.
Source

 

[skookerasbil]

Do you truly not understand the probabilistic difference between what climate level hurricane frequencies/likelihoods and weather-event level probabilities?

From the article:

Each and every year there is a chance, a 0.002 chance, that we will see another flood like Harvey. Or to put it another way, each year for the next 50,000 there is a 99.998% chance that we will NOT see a flood like Harvey. So, yes, I'm sayin' there's a chance.​

For climate science's predictions to be accurate, the hurricanes don't have to make landfall even. They need only be produced as per the predictions and within the margin of error. As goes the 99.998% chance of which the article speaks, that pertains to hurricanes like Harvey making landfall and causing flooding damage like Harvey did. That has nothing to do with the quantity and intensity of hurricanes that are created.

Hell, KHOU doesn't even provide enough information for readers to know whether the risk percentage they note is Houston-specific.

Well s0n........people like me who have been on this earth for many many decades never saw anything like Harvey and it is highly likely I'll long be in my box when we see it again. The math is certainly closer to the level of probability as compared to the goofball climate crusaders making statements that this shit is going to become the norm. They say shit like that all the time.......and it never, ever comes to pass. We'll go with the math...........

A warmer, wetter atmosphere could also affect tropical storms (hurricanes), but changes to tropical storms are harder to predict and track. Some scientists have speculated that a warmer climate that allows more intense storms to develop would also spawn more hurricanes. Warmer temperatures may also heat ocean waters farther from the Equator, expanding the reach of large tropical storms. But there is little evidence to support the either of these theories, says Kerry Emanuel, a professor of tropical meteorology and climate in the Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s Program in Atmospheres, Oceans, and Climate.

The one way in which global warming could impact hurricanes is by making them more intense. More heat and water in the atmosphere and warmer sea surface temperatures could provide more fuel to increase the wind speeds of tropical storms. Warming that has already occurred since 1980 has increased sea surface temperatures 0.3 degrees Celsius, which should increase the maximum potential wind speed of hurricanes by 1 knot, according to hurricane intensity models. But increases that small could not have been observed yet. “At present, hurricane intensity is measured only to an accuracy of plus or minus five knots, so it is not possible to discern any change that might have occurred owing to warming that has already taken place,” says Emanuel.

Even if tropical storms don’t change significantly, other environmental changes brought on by global warming could make the storms more deadly. Melting glaciers and ice caps will likely cause sea levels to rise, which would make coastal flooding more severe when a storm comes ashore. In their 2001 report, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change stated that global warming should cause sea levels to rise 0.11 to 0.77 meters (0.36 to 2.5 feet) by 2100.
Source

I see a lot of "possible" and "could" in your post s0n........and would imagine you are big on reduction of our carbon footprint!!

My ? to you is..........at what cost?

You realize the state of the art right now is renewable energy. Energy sources that cant stand alone in the market without huge government subsidies. Some want all renewable energy......."to reduce carbon emissions". Would cost the taxpayers trillions.

Meanwhile, China will be increasing its coal production by 50% in 2050.

So.......is it not the most insane thing you've ever heard to fight carbon emissions here at home at a huge cost to taxpayers while halfway around the world India and China are burning coal in massive quantities? And we would be doing that based upon blind speculation and when nobody knows dick if any efforts to reduce carbon will have ANY effect!! F'ing duh............

IDK..........seems pretty retarded thinking to me!!

 

[skookerasbil]

I mean........c'mon now!!!

http://2050pathway-en.chinaenergyoutlook.org/assets/onepage/67.pdf

I joke a lot about "mental cases" in here but really, how does somebody connect the dots on this in such a way so as to be pushing green energy in America? The thinking is like me going to the doctor for a cold and agreeing to major surgery on my ass. I mean c'mon now...........

 

[usmbguest5318]

My ? to you is..........at what cost?

Until we find a new planet on which to live, I don't care what it costs.

 

[skookerasbil]

My ? to you is..........at what cost?

Until we find a new planet on which to live, I don't care what it costs.

Well thankfully s0n, that's a fringe sentiment. To most people costs matter.

 

[Old Rocks]

Explain that to the people in Houston, Florida, and Puerto Rico.

 

[frigidweirdo]

More Oooops for the climate clowns who's been telling us for 3 weeks climate change is making these big hurricanes more frequent for our future. Of course, the science says otherwise............

http://www.khou.com/news/harvey-99998-chance-it-wont-happen-again/479153993?utm_campaign=trueAnthem%3A+Trending+Content&utm_content=59cc73c604d301555d78c6d7&utm_medium=trueAnthem&utm_source=facebook

We hear a lot about "fake news" these days........nobody dabbles in fake news more than the alarmist establishment.

Does the math include data for a changing climate?

 

[Old Rocks]

Two five hundred year floods in Houston in 2016 and 2015, really a thousand year flood in 2017. And you want to talk odds? LOL Obviously those odds are no longer viable. Which means something has changed radically.

 

[skookerasbil]

So what if something has changed radically? So what?

If it has......which is a hail mary pass judgment.......so what? What are we going to do about it? The answer is zero........to answer any way else is not effective connecting of the dots thinking, hate to say.

The state of the art right now is renewable energy..............solar and wind.( go take a look at Puerto Rico now to see how that worked out ). Energy sources that cant stand alone in the market without huge government subsidies. Some want all renewable energy......."to reduce carbon emissions". Would cost the taxpayers trillions.

Meanwhile, China will be increasing its coal production by 50% in 2050.

So.......is it not the most insane thing you've ever heard to fight carbon emissions here at home at a huge cost to taxpayers while halfway around the world India and China are burning coal in massive quantities and will be for decades to come? And we would be doing that based upon blind speculation and when nobody knows dick if any efforts to reduce carbon will have ANY effect!! F'ing duh............

IDK..........seems pretty retarded thinking to me!!........not even a minimal stretch to say.






And lets not forget...........the same gloom and doom shit we are hearing now from members of the religion we heard 12 years ago after Katrina regarding hurricane activity and strength. Like 4 billion months went by and we get one bad month and the world is suddenly ending for these hysterics.............

So c'mon now...........