Climate update - new start to hurricane season

[billvon 3,064]

As most people know, hurricanes are formed when the energy from warm surface waters dissipates (sometimes violently) into the upper atmosphere.  Increased levels of greenhouse gas have two effects - they increase warming of the ocean all year long, and decrease temperatures in the upper atmosphere.  This has many effects - increased intensity of rainfall, more intense storms, and an earlier start (and later end) to hurricane season.

For the first time ever, the National Weather Service is issuing Tropical Weather Outlooks (i.e. early hurricane warnings) on May 15th instead of the usual start on June 1st, due to the earlier average start of hurricane weather patterns.  And it looks like next year hurricane season will start two weeks early.  This is happening because at least one named tropical system has formed in the Atlantic prior to June 1 for the past six years, which is a new phenomenon.

From The Verge:

Come May 15th of this year, the agency will start issuing its Tropical Weather Outlooks, which are routine forecasts that it typically doesn’t start releasing until hurricane season starts on June 1st.

https://www.theverge.com/22307511/atlantic-hurricane-season-start-two-weeks-early-may

[BIGUN 1,399]

6 hours ago, billvon said:

As most people know, hurricanes are formed when the energy from warm surface waters dissipates (sometimes violently) into the upper atmosphere.  

Wrong again - Everyone knows it's butterflies. 

[wmw999 2,528]

3 hours ago, BIGUN said:

Wrong again - Everyone knows it's butterflies. 

I know that butterflies in the stomach can give massive upheavals sometimes

Wendy P. 

Edited May 16, 2021 by wmw999
Autocorrect

[feuergnom 29]

If anybody in here is in need of material on warming oceans, try to watch the documentary "chasing coral" 

Try not to get depressed or suicidal afterwards

[murps2000 86]

1 hour ago, feuergnom said:

If anybody in here is in need of material on warming oceans, try to watch the documentary "chasing coral" 

Try not to get depressed or suicidal afterwards

Thanks.

[JoeWeber 2,810]

On 5/16/2021 at 12:14 AM, billvon said:

As most people know, hurricanes are formed when the energy from warm surface waters dissipates (sometimes violently) into the upper atmosphere.  Increased levels of greenhouse gas have two effects - they increase warming of the ocean all year long, and decrease temperatures in the upper atmosphere.  This has many effects - increased intensity of rainfall, more intense storms, and an earlier start (and later end) to hurricane season.

For the first time ever, the National Weather Service is issuing Tropical Weather Outlooks (i.e. early hurricane warnings) on May 15th instead of the usual start on June 1st, due to the earlier average start of hurricane weather patterns.  And it looks like next year hurricane season will start two weeks early.  This is happening because at least one named tropical system has formed in the Atlantic prior to June 1 for the past six years, which is a new phenomenon.

From The Verge:

Come May 15th of this year, the agency will start issuing its Tropical Weather Outlooks, which are routine forecasts that it typically doesn’t start releasing until hurricane season starts on June 1st.

https://www.theverge.com/22307511/atlantic-hurricane-season-start-two-weeks-early-may

Apparently those forecasters aren't complete yo's.

[JoeWeber 2,810]

20 hours ago, JoeWeber said:

Apparently those forecasters aren't complete yo's.

Who'da seen it coming? Our first named storm, Ana.

[wolfriverjoe 1,523]

Oh piffle. Just because it's the seventh year in a row that a 'named storm' has formed before the 'official' start to hurricane season.

That doesn't mean anything.

[billvon 3,064]

27 minutes ago, wolfriverjoe said:

Oh piffle. Just because it's the seventh year in a row that a 'named storm' has formed before the 'official' start to hurricane season.

That doesn't mean anything.

In three or four years, there will be a year where the first named storm does not happen until June 2nd.  At that point, the usual suspects here will say "See?  Storms are DECLINING and coming later and later!"

[brenthutch 444]

https://www.nhc.noaa.gov/
 

looks like the NHC threw a hurricane party and forgot to invite Mother Nature.

Edited May 30, 2021 by brenthutch

[Phil1111 1,149]

On 5/23/2021 at 9:26 AM, billvon said:

In three or four years, there will be a year where the first named storm does not happen until June 2nd.  At that point, the usual suspects here will say "See?  Storms are DECLINING and coming later and later!"

Why do you insist upon baiting?

48 minutes ago, brenthutch said:

https://www.nhc.noaa.gov/
 

looks like the NHC threw a hurricane party and forgot to invite Mother Nature.

[brenthutch 444]

It’s as simple as the NHS started hurricane season two weeks early and no hurricanes showed up.  It’s not baiting, it’s not cherry picking.  It’s just a simple straightforward fact.

Just because someone decides to name every thunderstorm or declare an arbitrary date, doesn’t make more hurricanes and it doesn’t make those hurricanes stronger.  

BTW the IPCC and NOAA agree with me on that point.

Edited May 30, 2021 by brenthutch

[brenthutch 444]

32 minutes ago, Phil1111 said:

Why do you insist upon baiting?

That’s Michael Mann and Gavin Schmidt 

[brenthutch 444]

https://www.nhc.noaa.gov/
 

As with global temperatures, Mother Nature stubbornly refuses to abide by the narrative laid out by climate change alarmists and produced no early hurricanes

[BIGUN 1,399]

1 hour ago, brenthutch said:

Mother Nature stubbornly refuses to abide by the narrative laid out by climate change alarmists and produced no early hurricanes

Dear God, Brent. 

You keep posting the same hyperlink. For that day. This is exactly what pisses everyone off. You pick one data point out of trend and celebrate that data point like a five year-old that's discovered he can write his name in the snow while peeing. 

What Bill originally posted was, "This is happening because at least one named tropical system has formed in the Atlantic prior to June 1 for the past six years, which is a new phenomenon." 

The very site you post is the same one that states: 

May 20, 2021 

NOAA’s Climate Prediction Center is predicting another above-normal Atlantic hurricane season. Forecasters predict a 60% chance of an above-normal season, a 30% chance of a near-normal season, and a 10% chance of a below-normal season. However, experts do not anticipate the historic level of storm activity seen in 2020. 

https://www.noaa.gov/media-release/noaa-predicts-another-active-atlantic-hurricane-season

The NOAA site and what Bill originally posted say the same thing. It's a six-year trend and for this year and next; the level of activity has increased, so we're going to keep an eye on it a couple of weeks earlier for the next two seasons. 

[gowlerk 2,249]

38 minutes ago, BIGUN said:

Dear God, Brent. 

You keep posting the same hyperlink. For that day. This is exactly what pisses everyone off. 

Why are you giving him helpful hints? Clearly pissing people off is his goal

[brenthutch 444]

1 hour ago, BIGUN said:

Dear God, Brent. 

You keep posting the same hyperlink. For that day. 

Wrong, that is from today. Read the date.

Edited June 1, 2021 by brenthutch

[Phil1111 1,149]

Meanwhile in the western US Amid Historic Drought, a New Water War in the West

"While drought consumed much of the West last year, setting the stage for an extensive wildfire season, the conditions this spring are far worse than a year ago. More than half of the West faces “extreme” drought conditions, according to the U.S. Drought Monitor, including wide areas of California and Oregon. Scientists have said the region may be going through the worst drought period in centuries."

Given that trump country is the area of this drought I've tempered my sympathies a bit. Obviously hurricanes will spread a blessing to other areas of trump country.

[BIGUN 1,399]

2 hours ago, brenthutch said:

Wrong, that is from today. Read the date.

WE KNOW! IT's from THAT day. EVERY time - THAT DAY. 

You keep posting the same hyperlink. For that day. This is exactly what pisses everyone off. You pick one data point out of trend and celebrate that data point like a five year-old that's discovered he can write his name in the snow while peeing. 

[brenthutch 444]

5 hours ago, BIGUN said:

WE KNOW! IT's from THAT day. EVERY time - THAT DAY. 

You keep posting the same hyperlink. For that day. This is exactly what pisses everyone off. You pick one data point out of trend and celebrate that data point like a five year-old that's discovered he can write his name in the snow while peeing. 

Yet one drought or one hurricane is proof of CAGW?  We have had nearly ZERO warming this century, we have had NO TREND in wildfires, droughts, hurricanes, and floods.  This is not my opinion, it is not a projection, it is observable FACT.  You can wish all you want but the ACTUAL FACTS are that the planet is not warming at the rate predicted by the alarmists, the catastrophic weather events have not manifested outside the range of natural variability.

Yes these inconvenient facts do piss off the folks who have bought into the CAGW narrative.  As Mark Twain is credited for saying, “It is easier to fool people than convince them they have be fooled”.  I give you guys full marks for doggedly clinging to a false narrative, but sooner or later the scales will fall from your eyes and you will thank me.

Edited June 2, 2021 by brenthutch

[olofscience 489]

9 hours ago, brenthutch said:

This is not my opinion, it is not a projection, it is observable FACT.  You can wish all you want but the ACTUAL FACTS are that the planet is not warming at the rate predicted by the alarmists, the catastrophic weather events have not manifested outside the range of natural variability.

And as demonstrated at least THREE times, you don't know what observable facts are since you are unable to read language any more technical than a kindergarten book.

[brenthutch 444]

18 minutes ago, olofscience said:

And as demonstrated at least THREE times, you don't know what observable facts are since you are unable to read language any more technical than a kindergarten book.

That is rich, coming from a guy who predicted EVs will overtake IC vehicles in four years.  

[olofscience 489]

13 minutes ago, brenthutch said:

That is rich, coming from a guy who predicted EVs will overtake IC vehicles in four years.  

So one prediction that still has 4 years to actually happen?

As opposed to several times you've mistaken models for actual observations? You know...in the past? Yeah winning alright.

[wmw999 2,528]

Please stop goading.

Wendy P.

[kallend 2,106]

43 minutes ago, wmw999 said:

Please stop goading.

Wendy P.

Maybe the troll should be suspended.