It's a fact: climate change made Hurricane Harvey more deadly

[Old Rocks]

Here's the first cult member to blame Harvey on global warming. I knew it wouldn't take long. It's difficult to exaggerate how stupid these people are:

It's a fact: climate change made Hurricane Harvey more deadly | Michael E Mann​

We can’t say that Hurricane Harvey was caused by climate change. But it was certainly worsened by it.

What can we say about the role of climate change in the unprecedented disaster that is unfolding in Houston with Hurricane Harvey? There are certain climate change-related factors that we can, with great confidence, say worsened the flooding.

Sea level rise attributable to climate change – some of which is due to coastal subsidence caused by human disturbance such as oil drilling – is more than half a foot over the past few decades. That means the storm surge was half a foot higher than it would have been just decades ago, meaning far more flooding and destruction.

Harvey was almost certainly more intense than it would have been in the absence of human-caused warming, which means stronger winds, more wind damage and a larger storm surge.

The stalling is due to very weak prevailing winds, which are failing to steer the storm off to sea, allowing it to spin around and wobble back and forth. This pattern of subtropical expansion is predicted in model simulations of human-caused climate change.

In conclusion, while we cannot say climate change “caused” Hurricane Harvey, we can say is that it exacerbated several characteristics of the storm in a way that greatly increased the risk of damage and loss of life. Climate change worsened the impact of Hurricane Harvey.​

Patty, just because you aren't smart enough to comprehend the article, it doesn't mean it didn't make sense to anyone wirh an adequate IQ lol

Actually Mann has a habit of running to the press with what amounts to SPIN -- not science. He's got no scientific treatment of his assertions. PLENTY of hurricanes have formed in the Gulf in waters that are 1deg warmer from global warming AND DID NOT intensify. In fact, THIS one only intensified less than 16 hours from landfall after traversing much of the Gulf.

The crap about "static" weather conditions is ALSO not fully developed science. Aint the 1st time a hurricane was "blocked" from traveling or took an erratic course.

I think MAYBE you need to realize that the fear and the hype that these activist mouthpieces tried to sell in the 80s ---- It's ALL been revised downward. Because CO2 is NOT the master thermostat of the climate system. All the projections from 80s alarmism have failed miserably. The more exaggerated theories of GW --- like "trigger of no return" temperatures, positive feedbacks, runaway warming ---- have not manifested in the 30 years or been detected since they were puked out by a very YOUNG immature branch of science.

GW is real. But it is NOWHERE near a crisis to panic the herd over. And by the time we attempted the reverse the 0.6degC change in your lifetime -- our energy innovations would have all changed anyways.

Well now, we shall see about that. And if the 'alarmists' turn out to be correct, how the fuck are you going to apologize to your descendants?

 

[flacaltenn]

Here's the first cult member to blame Harvey on global warming. I knew it wouldn't take long. It's difficult to exaggerate how stupid these people are:

It's a fact: climate change made Hurricane Harvey more deadly | Michael E Mann​

We can’t say that Hurricane Harvey was caused by climate change. But it was certainly worsened by it.

What can we say about the role of climate change in the unprecedented disaster that is unfolding in Houston with Hurricane Harvey? There are certain climate change-related factors that we can, with great confidence, say worsened the flooding.

Sea level rise attributable to climate change – some of which is due to coastal subsidence caused by human disturbance such as oil drilling – is more than half a foot over the past few decades. That means the storm surge was half a foot higher than it would have been just decades ago, meaning far more flooding and destruction.

Harvey was almost certainly more intense than it would have been in the absence of human-caused warming, which means stronger winds, more wind damage and a larger storm surge.

The stalling is due to very weak prevailing winds, which are failing to steer the storm off to sea, allowing it to spin around and wobble back and forth. This pattern of subtropical expansion is predicted in model simulations of human-caused climate change.

In conclusion, while we cannot say climate change “caused” Hurricane Harvey, we can say is that it exacerbated several characteristics of the storm in a way that greatly increased the risk of damage and loss of life. Climate change worsened the impact of Hurricane Harvey.​

Patty, just because you aren't smart enough to comprehend the article, it doesn't mean it didn't make sense to anyone wirh an adequate IQ lol

Actually Mann has a habit of running to the press with what amounts to SPIN -- not science. He's got no scientific treatment of his assertions. PLENTY of hurricanes have formed in the Gulf in waters that are 1deg warmer from global warming AND DID NOT intensify. In fact, THIS one only intensified less than 16 hours from landfall after traversing much of the Gulf.

The crap about "static" weather conditions is ALSO not fully developed science. Aint the 1st time a hurricane was "blocked" from traveling or took an erratic course.

I think MAYBE you need to realize that the fear and the hype that these activist mouthpieces tried to sell in the 80s ---- It's ALL been revised downward. Because CO2 is NOT the master thermostat of the climate system. All the projections from 80s alarmism have failed miserably. The more exaggerated theories of GW --- like "trigger of no return" temperatures, positive feedbacks, runaway warming ---- have not manifested in the 30 years or been detected since they were puked out by a very YOUNG immature branch of science.

GW is real. But it is NOWHERE near a crisis to panic the herd over. And by the time we attempted the reverse the 0.6degC change in your lifetime -- our energy innovations would have all changed anyways.

Well now, we shall see about that. And if the 'alarmists' turn out to be correct, how the fuck are you going to apologize to your descendants?

Not a calculus to anyone practicing science. Can only deal with the evidence and the solid theories. I'm sure folks working genetic engineering or nano-materials or nuclear power have the same attitude.

Just not a lot of evidence for known trigger temperatures or how "feedbacks" either DOMINATE the climate system -- be they positive or negative. So -- they'll be warming from man-made emissions. But NOWHERE near the fear and hype that causes you or Mann to LEAP into the spotlight for every fucking hurricane, tornado, forest fire, drought, flood, lack of snow, abundance of snow, or a new study of tree rings capable of determining the Earth's past climate to 0.2deg ---- 10,000 years ago..

Too many CLAIMS, no empirical measurements of LOOMING disaster in the 40 years that this circus has been in town..

 

[bripat9643]

Here's the first cult member to blame Harvey on global warming. I knew it wouldn't take long. It's difficult to exaggerate how stupid these people are:

It's a fact: climate change made Hurricane Harvey more deadly | Michael E Mann​

We can’t say that Hurricane Harvey was caused by climate change. But it was certainly worsened by it.

What can we say about the role of climate change in the unprecedented disaster that is unfolding in Houston with Hurricane Harvey? There are certain climate change-related factors that we can, with great confidence, say worsened the flooding.

Sea level rise attributable to climate change – some of which is due to coastal subsidence caused by human disturbance such as oil drilling – is more than half a foot over the past few decades. That means the storm surge was half a foot higher than it would have been just decades ago, meaning far more flooding and destruction.

Harvey was almost certainly more intense than it would have been in the absence of human-caused warming, which means stronger winds, more wind damage and a larger storm surge.

The stalling is due to very weak prevailing winds, which are failing to steer the storm off to sea, allowing it to spin around and wobble back and forth. This pattern of subtropical expansion is predicted in model simulations of human-caused climate change.

In conclusion, while we cannot say climate change “caused” Hurricane Harvey, we can say is that it exacerbated several characteristics of the storm in a way that greatly increased the risk of damage and loss of life. Climate change worsened the impact of Hurricane Harvey.​

Article chock full of facts...check
Article chock full of science and data...check.

Any hysterical rantings? Nope.
Was the article written by a paid Russian troll? Nope.
Was the article based on easily debunked, baseless claims? Nope.

No wonder every single conservatard on this site chimed in to offer their little "opinions."

Michael Mann is the biggest fraud in the "climate change" industry.

 

[bripat9643]

First, Mann's graph has been confirmed by more than dozen independent studies, different people, using different proxies from different places. The United States Academy of Science did a study on it's own, as some of the members did not like the way Mann used the statistical tools. And came up with essentially the same graph. Second, as a scientists, Mann is bound by the ethics that all scientists are, and no one has ever shown that he violated those ethics.

Second, as a citizen, Mann is entirely free to state what he thinks national policy should be in regards to the warming that we are all seeing from the GHGs that we have put into the atmosphere. That the willfully ignorant and purposely stupid don't like that is hardly a consideration for anyone with above room temperature IQ. And if you "Conservatives" think that I am speaking contemptuously of you, you are correct.

Mann's graph has been confirmed to be a con. The so-called "independent studies" were anything but independent. They were Michael's buddies, his partners in crime. They all have a vested interest in promoting the climate change con.

The United States Academy of Science did not do what you claim.

New 'hockey stick' graph on climate change under fire​

A number of readers wrote in to express surprise at the recent letter from the US scientist Dr Michael Mann claiming that his famous "hockey stick" graph, showing temperatures having suddenly soared at the end of the 20th century to unprecedented levels, had been endorsed by the US National Academy of Sciences. Neither of the two Congressional inquiries involving the NAS did anything of the kind. Both found that the computer model used to create Dr Mann's "hockey stick", completely rewriting climate history, was fundamentally flawed.

This is one reason why, despite all the efforts made to defend Dr Mann's graph by his academic colleagues (describing themselves as the Hockey Team), I have described it as "one of the most comprehensively discredited artefacts in the history of science".​

Missouri Tigers Athletics :: Mizzou College Sports :: TigerBoard.com :: Briffa hockey stick another AGW fraud.

Beginning in 2003, I worked with Stephen McIntyre to replicate a famous result in paleoclimatology known as the Hockey Stick graph. Developed by a U.S. climatologist named Michael Mann, it was a statistical compilation of tree ring data supposedly proving that air temperatures had been stable for 900 years, then soared off the charts in the 20th century. Prior to the publication of the Hockey Stick, scientists had held that the medieval-era was warmer than the present, making the scale of 20th century global warming seem relatively unimportant. The dramatic revision to this view occasioned by the Hockey Sticks publication made it the poster child of the global warming movement. It was featured prominently in a 2001 report of the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), as well as government websites and countless review reports.

Steve and I showed that the mathematics behind the Mann Hockey Stick were badly flawed, such that its shape was determined by suspect bristlecone tree ring data. Controversies quickly piled up: Two expert panels involving the U.S. National Academy of Sciences were asked to investigate, the U.S. Congress held a hearing, and the media followed the story around the world.

The expert reports upheld all of our criticisms of the Mann Hockey Stick, both of the mathematics and of its reliance on flawed bristlecone pine data. One of the panels, however, argued that while the Mann Hockey Stick itself was flawed, a series of other studies published since 1998 had similar shapes, thus providing support for the view that the late 20th century is unusually warm. The IPCC also made this argument in its 2007 report. But the second expert panel, led by statistician Edward Wegman, pointed out that the other studies are not independent. They are written by the same small circle of authors, only the names are in different orders, and they reuse the same few data climate proxy series over and over.

Most of the proxy data does not show anything unusual about the 20th century. But two data series have reappeared over and over that do have a hockey stick shape. One was the flawed bristlecone data that the National Academy of Sciences panel said should not be used, so the studies using it can be set aside. The second was a tree ring curve from the Yamal Peninsula in Siberia, compiled by UK scientist Keith Briffa. ​

Climate scientists have no ethics. They are all paid propagandists.

 

[bripat9643]

Here's the first cult member to blame Harvey on global warming. I knew it wouldn't take long. It's difficult to exaggerate how stupid these people are:

It's a fact: climate change made Hurricane Harvey more deadly | Michael E Mann​

We can’t say that Hurricane Harvey was caused by climate change. But it was certainly worsened by it.

What can we say about the role of climate change in the unprecedented disaster that is unfolding in Houston with Hurricane Harvey? There are certain climate change-related factors that we can, with great confidence, say worsened the flooding.

Sea level rise attributable to climate change – some of which is due to coastal subsidence caused by human disturbance such as oil drilling – is more than half a foot over the past few decades. That means the storm surge was half a foot higher than it would have been just decades ago, meaning far more flooding and destruction.

Harvey was almost certainly more intense than it would have been in the absence of human-caused warming, which means stronger winds, more wind damage and a larger storm surge.

The stalling is due to very weak prevailing winds, which are failing to steer the storm off to sea, allowing it to spin around and wobble back and forth. This pattern of subtropical expansion is predicted in model simulations of human-caused climate change.

In conclusion, while we cannot say climate change “caused” Hurricane Harvey, we can say is that it exacerbated several characteristics of the storm in a way that greatly increased the risk of damage and loss of life. Climate change worsened the impact of Hurricane Harvey.​

Patty, just because you aren't smart enough to comprehend the article, it doesn't mean it didn't make sense to anyone wirh an adequate IQ lol

Actually Mann has a habit of running to the press with what amounts to SPIN -- not science. He's got no scientific treatment of his assertions. PLENTY of hurricanes have formed in the Gulf in waters that are 1deg warmer from global warming AND DID NOT intensify. In fact, THIS one only intensified less than 16 hours from landfall after traversing much of the Gulf.

The crap about "static" weather conditions is ALSO not fully developed science. Aint the 1st time a hurricane was "blocked" from traveling or took an erratic course.

I think MAYBE you need to realize that the fear and the hype that these activist mouthpieces tried to sell in the 80s ---- It's ALL been revised downward. Because CO2 is NOT the master thermostat of the climate system. All the projections from 80s alarmism have failed miserably. The more exaggerated theories of GW --- like "trigger of no return" temperatures, positive feedbacks, runaway warming ---- have not manifested in the 30 years or been detected since they were puked out by a very YOUNG immature branch of science.

GW is real. But it is NOWHERE near a crisis to panic the herd over. And by the time we attempted the reverse the 0.6degC change in your lifetime -- our energy innovations would have all changed anyways.

Well now, we shall see about that. And if the 'alarmists' turn out to be correct, how the fuck are you going to apologize to your descendants?

There is less than zero chance that the hysterical scenarios predicted by the climate change kooks are correct. If we follow their prescriptions, our children and grand children will suffer far worse than they will from anything they're predicting.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz you knew it was only a matter of time

Doesn't matter anymore. We could have 10 Harvey's per year/per month and trumpanzees would still believe whatever the orange cheeto told them to believe.

Could have? But we're not.....
What a pathetic post.

 

[Crixus]

Climate change killed my father, and raped my mother.

It also owned slaves and wants to build the wall to. ANTIFA better get over to global warming skids pre school and beat up som preK kids. Maybe set the jungle Jim on fire ?

 

[BlindBoo]

Here's the first cult member to blame Harvey on global warming. I knew it wouldn't take long. It's difficult to exaggerate how stupid these people are:

It's a fact: climate change made Hurricane Harvey more deadly | Michael E Mann​

We can’t say that Hurricane Harvey was caused by climate change. But it was certainly worsened by it.

What can we say about the role of climate change in the unprecedented disaster that is unfolding in Houston with Hurricane Harvey? There are certain climate change-related factors that we can, with great confidence, say worsened the flooding.

Sea level rise attributable to climate change – some of which is due to coastal subsidence caused by human disturbance such as oil drilling – is more than half a foot over the past few decades. That means the storm surge was half a foot higher than it would have been just decades ago, meaning far more flooding and destruction.

Harvey was almost certainly more intense than it would have been in the absence of human-caused warming, which means stronger winds, more wind damage and a larger storm surge.

The stalling is due to very weak prevailing winds, which are failing to steer the storm off to sea, allowing it to spin around and wobble back and forth. This pattern of subtropical expansion is predicted in model simulations of human-caused climate change.

In conclusion, while we cannot say climate change “caused” Hurricane Harvey, we can say is that it exacerbated several characteristics of the storm in a way that greatly increased the risk of damage and loss of life. Climate change worsened the impact of Hurricane Harvey.​

Article chock full of facts...check
Article chock full of science and data...check.

Any hysterical rantings? Nope.
Was the article written by a paid Russian troll? Nope.
Was the article based on easily debunked, baseless claims? Nope.

No wonder every single conservatard on this site chimed in to offer their little "opinions."

It is an opinion piece.

While it may be true that: "In addition to that, sea surface temperatures in the region have risen about 0.5C (close to 1F) over the past few decades from roughly 30C (86F) to 30.5C (87F), which contributed to the very warm sea surface temperatures (30.5-31C, or 87-88F).

There is a simple thermodynamic relationship known as the Clausius-Clapeyron equation that tells us there is a roughly 3% increase in average atmospheric moisture content for each 0.5C of warming. Sea surface temperatures in the area where Harvey intensified were 0.5-1C warmer than current-day average temperatures, which translates to 1-1.5C warmer than “average” temperatures a few decades ago. That means 3-5% more moisture in the atmosphere.

That large amount of moisture creates the potential for much greater rainfalls and greater flooding."

It is not at all unusual for these type of storms to meander along the upper Texas coast. I've seen many tropical systems wobble in my 40 years here.

Warming may have increase the rainfall amounts slightly, imo, the affect on Harvey's path is minimal.

 

[bripat9643]

Here's the first cult member to blame Harvey on global warming. I knew it wouldn't take long. It's difficult to exaggerate how stupid these people are:

It's a fact: climate change made Hurricane Harvey more deadly | Michael E Mann​

We can’t say that Hurricane Harvey was caused by climate change. But it was certainly worsened by it.

What can we say about the role of climate change in the unprecedented disaster that is unfolding in Houston with Hurricane Harvey? There are certain climate change-related factors that we can, with great confidence, say worsened the flooding.

Sea level rise attributable to climate change – some of which is due to coastal subsidence caused by human disturbance such as oil drilling – is more than half a foot over the past few decades. That means the storm surge was half a foot higher than it would have been just decades ago, meaning far more flooding and destruction.

Harvey was almost certainly more intense than it would have been in the absence of human-caused warming, which means stronger winds, more wind damage and a larger storm surge.

The stalling is due to very weak prevailing winds, which are failing to steer the storm off to sea, allowing it to spin around and wobble back and forth. This pattern of subtropical expansion is predicted in model simulations of human-caused climate change.

In conclusion, while we cannot say climate change “caused” Hurricane Harvey, we can say is that it exacerbated several characteristics of the storm in a way that greatly increased the risk of damage and loss of life. Climate change worsened the impact of Hurricane Harvey.​

Article chock full of facts...check
Article chock full of science and data...check.

Any hysterical rantings? Nope.
Was the article written by a paid Russian troll? Nope.
Was the article based on easily debunked, baseless claims? Nope.

No wonder every single conservatard on this site chimed in to offer their little "opinions."

It is an opinion piece.

While it may be true that: "In addition to that, sea surface temperatures in the region have risen about 0.5C (close to 1F) over the past few decades from roughly 30C (86F) to 30.5C (87F), which contributed to the very warm sea surface temperatures (30.5-31C, or 87-88F).

There is a simple thermodynamic relationship known as the Clausius-Clapeyron equation that tells us there is a roughly 3% increase in average atmospheric moisture content for each 0.5C of warming. Sea surface temperatures in the area where Harvey intensified were 0.5-1C warmer than current-day average temperatures, which translates to 1-1.5C warmer than “average” temperatures a few decades ago. That means 3-5% more moisture in the atmosphere.

That large amount of moisture creates the potential for much greater rainfalls and greater flooding."

It is not at all unusual for these type of storms to meander along the upper Texas coast. I've seen many tropical systems wobble in my 40 years here.

Warming may have increase the rainfall amounts slightly, imo, the affect on Harvey's path is minimal.

Harvey has dumped more rain than the three previous major hurricanes COMBINED. I hardly think your 3% increase in moisture is responsible.

 

[BlindBoo]

Here's the first cult member to blame Harvey on global warming. I knew it wouldn't take long. It's difficult to exaggerate how stupid these people are:

It's a fact: climate change made Hurricane Harvey more deadly | Michael E Mann​

We can’t say that Hurricane Harvey was caused by climate change. But it was certainly worsened by it.

What can we say about the role of climate change in the unprecedented disaster that is unfolding in Houston with Hurricane Harvey? There are certain climate change-related factors that we can, with great confidence, say worsened the flooding.

Sea level rise attributable to climate change – some of which is due to coastal subsidence caused by human disturbance such as oil drilling – is more than half a foot over the past few decades. That means the storm surge was half a foot higher than it would have been just decades ago, meaning far more flooding and destruction.

Harvey was almost certainly more intense than it would have been in the absence of human-caused warming, which means stronger winds, more wind damage and a larger storm surge.

The stalling is due to very weak prevailing winds, which are failing to steer the storm off to sea, allowing it to spin around and wobble back and forth. This pattern of subtropical expansion is predicted in model simulations of human-caused climate change.

In conclusion, while we cannot say climate change “caused” Hurricane Harvey, we can say is that it exacerbated several characteristics of the storm in a way that greatly increased the risk of damage and loss of life. Climate change worsened the impact of Hurricane Harvey.​

Article chock full of facts...check
Article chock full of science and data...check.

Any hysterical rantings? Nope.
Was the article written by a paid Russian troll? Nope.
Was the article based on easily debunked, baseless claims? Nope.

No wonder every single conservatard on this site chimed in to offer their little "opinions."

It is an opinion piece.

While it may be true that: "In addition to that, sea surface temperatures in the region have risen about 0.5C (close to 1F) over the past few decades from roughly 30C (86F) to 30.5C (87F), which contributed to the very warm sea surface temperatures (30.5-31C, or 87-88F).

There is a simple thermodynamic relationship known as the Clausius-Clapeyron equation that tells us there is a roughly 3% increase in average atmospheric moisture content for each 0.5C of warming. Sea surface temperatures in the area where Harvey intensified were 0.5-1C warmer than current-day average temperatures, which translates to 1-1.5C warmer than “average” temperatures a few decades ago. That means 3-5% more moisture in the atmosphere.

That large amount of moisture creates the potential for much greater rainfalls and greater flooding."

It is not at all unusual for these type of storms to meander along the upper Texas coast. I've seen many tropical systems wobble in my 40 years here.

Warming may have increase the rainfall amounts slightly, imo, the affect on Harvey's path is minimal.

Harvey has dumped more rain than the three previous major hurricanes COMBINED. I hardly think your 3% increase in moisture is responsible.

My 3%? Do you understand where Mann got that figure? Harvey's path has more to do with the flooding than any other factor. I recall many storms have done that in the last 40 years.

His claim that a deep layer of warm water help intensify the storm has no reference to any study, but after all it is an opinion piece.

Study targets warm water rings that fuel hurricane intensification in the Caribbean Sea

"Tropical storms receive energy from their surrounding ocean waters. As a storm moves across the water, it may interact with rings of warm water known as eddies. As the storm moves forward over these eddies, the warm ocean waters below help fuel the storm's intensity through enhanced and sustained heat and moisture fluxes.

Similar warm ocean eddies exist in the Gulf of Mexico, a result of their separation from the warm-water Loop Current, are also of interest to the research team involved in this study.

Last year, Hurricane Matthew rapidly intensified from a tropical storm to hurricane status as it moved over the Caribbean Sea in the location where a warm ocean eddy exists, and in close proximity to where these measurements were taken for this study two years prior."



Read more at: Study targets warm water rings that fuel hurricane intensification in the Caribbean Sea

 

[flacaltenn]

Here's the first cult member to blame Harvey on global warming. I knew it wouldn't take long. It's difficult to exaggerate how stupid these people are:

It's a fact: climate change made Hurricane Harvey more deadly | Michael E Mann​

We can’t say that Hurricane Harvey was caused by climate change. But it was certainly worsened by it.

What can we say about the role of climate change in the unprecedented disaster that is unfolding in Houston with Hurricane Harvey? There are certain climate change-related factors that we can, with great confidence, say worsened the flooding.

Sea level rise attributable to climate change – some of which is due to coastal subsidence caused by human disturbance such as oil drilling – is more than half a foot over the past few decades. That means the storm surge was half a foot higher than it would have been just decades ago, meaning far more flooding and destruction.

Harvey was almost certainly more intense than it would have been in the absence of human-caused warming, which means stronger winds, more wind damage and a larger storm surge.

The stalling is due to very weak prevailing winds, which are failing to steer the storm off to sea, allowing it to spin around and wobble back and forth. This pattern of subtropical expansion is predicted in model simulations of human-caused climate change.

In conclusion, while we cannot say climate change “caused” Hurricane Harvey, we can say is that it exacerbated several characteristics of the storm in a way that greatly increased the risk of damage and loss of life. Climate change worsened the impact of Hurricane Harvey.​

Article chock full of facts...check
Article chock full of science and data...check.

Any hysterical rantings? Nope.
Was the article written by a paid Russian troll? Nope.
Was the article based on easily debunked, baseless claims? Nope.

No wonder every single conservatard on this site chimed in to offer their little "opinions."

It is an opinion piece.

While it may be true that: "In addition to that, sea surface temperatures in the region have risen about 0.5C (close to 1F) over the past few decades from roughly 30C (86F) to 30.5C (87F), which contributed to the very warm sea surface temperatures (30.5-31C, or 87-88F).

There is a simple thermodynamic relationship known as the Clausius-Clapeyron equation that tells us there is a roughly 3% increase in average atmospheric moisture content for each 0.5C of warming. Sea surface temperatures in the area where Harvey intensified were 0.5-1C warmer than current-day average temperatures, which translates to 1-1.5C warmer than “average” temperatures a few decades ago. That means 3-5% more moisture in the atmosphere.

That large amount of moisture creates the potential for much greater rainfalls and greater flooding."

It is not at all unusual for these type of storms to meander along the upper Texas coast. I've seen many tropical systems wobble in my 40 years here.

Warming may have increase the rainfall amounts slightly, imo, the affect on Harvey's path is minimal.

Harvey has dumped more rain than the three previous major hurricanes COMBINED. I hardly think your 3% increase in moisture is responsible.

My 3%? Do you understand where Mann got that figure? Harvey's path has more to do with the flooding than any other factor. I recall many storms have done that in the last 40 years.

His claim that a deep layer of warm water help intensify the storm has no reference to any study, but after all it is an opinion piece.

Study targets warm water rings that fuel hurricane intensification in the Caribbean Sea

"Tropical storms receive energy from their surrounding ocean waters. As a storm moves across the water, it may interact with rings of warm water known as eddies. As the storm moves forward over these eddies, the warm ocean waters below help fuel the storm's intensity through enhanced and sustained heat and moisture fluxes.

Similar warm ocean eddies exist in the Gulf of Mexico, a result of their separation from the warm-water Loop Current, are also of interest to the research team involved in this study.

Last year, Hurricane Matthew rapidly intensified from a tropical storm to hurricane status as it moved over the Caribbean Sea in the location where a warm ocean eddy exists, and in close proximity to where these measurements were taken for this study two years prior."



Read more at: Study targets warm water rings that fuel hurricane intensification in the Caribbean Sea

No science that Harvey carried an UNUSUAL amount of water. The entire problem wasn't the WATER CONTENT of the storm. It was the SPEED and TRAJECTORY of that storm..

Hurricane rainfall is ALWAYS MORE affected by track and speed, than a slight variation (if any) of contained water..

 

[WEATHER53]

We have just ended one of the longest streaks on record in the USA of not having a major hit the continent
When a fact like that is staring you right in the face it's best to pay attention rather than talking about bogus hockey sticks and inconclusive tree rings

 

[Dim Bulb]

We have just ended one of the longest streaks on record in the USA of not having a major hit the continent
When a fact like that is staring you right in the face it's best to pay attention rather than talking about bogus hockey sticks and inconclusive tree rings

Check this out:

redding weather 10 day - Yahoo Search Results

 

[Timmy]

We have just ended one of the longest streaks on record in the USA of not having a major hit the continent
When a fact like that is staring you right in the face it's best to pay attention rather than talking about bogus hockey sticks and inconclusive tree rings

Do hurricanes that don't hit the US not count ?

 

[BlindBoo]

We have just ended one of the longest streaks on record in the USA of not having a major hit the continent
When a fact like that is staring you right in the face it's best to pay attention rather than talking about bogus hockey sticks and inconclusive tree rings

The US coast line is not a very good measure of hurricane/tropical storm frequency.

 

[flacaltenn]

We have just ended one of the longest streaks on record in the USA of not having a major hit the continent
When a fact like that is staring you right in the face it's best to pay attention rather than talking about bogus hockey sticks and inconclusive tree rings

The US coast line is not a very good measure of hurricane/tropical storm frequency.

There's not been any conclusive results about the frequency or intensity of Atlantic hurricanes increasing.

 

[BlindBoo]

We have just ended one of the longest streaks on record in the USA of not having a major hit the continent
When a fact like that is staring you right in the face it's best to pay attention rather than talking about bogus hockey sticks and inconclusive tree rings

The US coast line is not a very good measure of hurricane/tropical storm frequency.

There's not been any conclusive results about the frequency or intensity of Atlantic hurricanes increasing.

Using the US coastline would suggest there was a decrease in frequency. Any data collected during the first half of the 20th century for the Atlantic is inconclusive based on the sparseness of data collected

 

[The Original Tree]

We have just ended one of the longest streaks on record in the USA of not having a major hit the continent
When a fact like that is staring you right in the face it's best to pay attention rather than talking about bogus hockey sticks and inconclusive tree rings

Do hurricanes that don't hit the US not count ?

Sorta like anything you post doesn't address the actual topic or does not even contain a shred of truth?
Your post count should be ZERO, so NO, They don't count.

 

[flacaltenn]

We have just ended one of the longest streaks on record in the USA of not having a major hit the continent
When a fact like that is staring you right in the face it's best to pay attention rather than talking about bogus hockey sticks and inconclusive tree rings

The US coast line is not a very good measure of hurricane/tropical storm frequency.

There's not been any conclusive results about the frequency or intensity of Atlantic hurricanes increasing.

Using the US coastline would suggest there was a decrease in frequency. Any data collected during the first half of the 20th century for the Atlantic is inconclusive based on the sparseness of data collected

Bullshit. The frequency and intensities of hurricanes took a bump after 1980 when we had full satellite coverage of the area. No "spareness" of data. The data gets better every decade. It tends to OVER- REPORT storms that reach Cat 1 (or any any level) for a mere few hours. The P3 Hurricane planes are flying on EVERYTHING in hurricane alley as it enters the Caribbean or Gulf.

 

[The Original Tree]

We have just ended one of the longest streaks on record in the USA of not having a major hit the continent
When a fact like that is staring you right in the face it's best to pay attention rather than talking about bogus hockey sticks and inconclusive tree rings

The US coast line is not a very good measure of hurricane/tropical storm frequency.

There's not been any conclusive results about the frequency or intensity of Atlantic hurricanes increasing.

Using the US coastline would suggest there was a decrease in frequency. Any data collected during the first half of the 20th century for the Atlantic is inconclusive based on the sparseness of data collected

Unless it's about Global Temperatures which we could not even measure accurately 30 years ago and still cannot measure them accurately.

Yah, ALL THAT IS "CONCLUSIVE" and "SETTLED SCIENCE"