Harvey, the Storm That Humans Helped Cause

[Dug]

The graph indicates that as well.

Not really. Not sure why you want to argue against the point. I didn't say the connection is rock solid but we know that warm waters is where they get their strength, if the waters are warmer then the strength increases. Whether humans "are the cause" (not actually the argument any climate scientist makes) is besides the point.

Also thanks @GothamCity this is far more in depth

[Rasulis]

Someone on in this forum said it was because Trump pulled out of the Paris Climate Agreement.
Can they all be right?

- - - Updated - - -



Funny thing is we have had less hurricanes since "global warming" or "Climate change" has been a thing.

http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/pastdec.shtml

You are working off incomplete data. The last part of your table only cover 2001 - 2004 which gives the impression that fewer hurricanes occur that decade. In reality, 2001 - 2010 was a very active decade. As you can see from NOAA table below, 18 Cat 3-5 hurricanes made landfall that decade (in the Atlantic Basin alone). More than any decades prior to that.



Also, just looking at hurricanes that made landfall is misleading. The year 2010, not a single hurricane made US landfall. However, The 2010 North Atlantic hurricane season was extremely active with 19 named storms, 12 hurricanes, and five major hurricanes. The Accumulated Cyclone Energy index that year was 190% of the 1951 - 2000 median value which put it in the “hyperactive season” category. The jet stream’s position contributed to warm and dry conditions in the eastern U.S. and acted as a barrier that kept many storms over open water. Also, because many storms formed in the extreme eastern Atlantic, they curved out to sea without threatening land due to the North Atlantic (Bermuda) High.

[Bloodwolf]

I guess this type of journalism will become normal. We'll have a "we told ya so" article explaining how oil is bad yet the dickhead that wrote this used oil when he brushed his teeth twice today. Multiple times after that. His pc he used required oil at stages to be made. It goes on and on. When will the climate crybabies realize they contribute to the problem as much as everyone else?

If they at least vote someone that tries to tackle carbon emmisions the crybabies do a lot more than everyone else. Because it's all about politics and how you can change the free markets through them. Climate change won't get solved through altruistic personal choices but by controling the way our money flows. Carbon taxes in the way California did them are one way of many to achieve that. The problem is bad lobbyism from companies that provide fossil fuels undermine exactly that.
They are providing people who deny climate change a lot of money for their political campaigns. And I'd be happy if that'd be some tinfoil hat theory, because it's hard to tackle these problems. And through politics they have a way to play with the public opinion. It'd be naive to now go on and say: "Yeah you know Bloodwolf that sounds like Dan Brown writing a new Illuminati, have you lost your mind?" because lot of lobbies did that. Tobacco and added sugars are the two big examples here. The meat- and dairy-industries act in a similar way. And they don't have nearly as much money as those companies we speak of.
Tobacco adds lying about the dangers of smoking were making a difference. the food industry showing ads about how often you need to consume certain products to be healthy is making a difference. Trump saying climate change isn't real make's a difference. People being uninformed and denying facts are making a difference. Climate change crybabies can make a difference. We built a system through advertising and investments in certain companies that lead us in that wrong direction, but it's actually not that hard to change it. In fact the market is changing right now and the people that profit from fossil fuels are trying to resist, which is why I guess there are now a lot more deniers than in the time of CFC's.
Truth be spoken, many people, including you and me, very well know about the dangers and consequences AND the reasons, but we are to ignorant to make the difference through personal choices. But if you influence the system by subsidizing climate friendly options, making them more attractive to the public than the climate destroying choices you made the public care about the environment without thinking about it.

- - - Updated - - -

You are working off incomplete data. The last part of your table only cover 2001 - 2004 which gives the impression that fewer hurricanes occur that decade. In reality, 2001 - 2010 was a very active decade. As you can see from NOAA table below, 18 Cat 3-5 hurricanes made landfall that decade (in the Atlantic Basin alone). More than any decades prior to that.

-snip-

Also, just looking at hurricanes that made landfall is misleading. The year 2010, not a single hurricane made US landfall. However, The 2010 North Atlantic hurricane season was extremely active with 19 named storms, 12 hurricanes, and five major hurricanes. The Accumulated Cyclone Energy index that year was 190% of the 1951 - 2000 median value which put it in the “hyperactive season” category. The jet stream’s position contributed to warm and dry conditions in the eastern U.S. and acted as a barrier that kept many storms over open water. Also, because many storms formed in the extreme eastern Atlantic, they curved out to sea without threatening land due to the North Atlantic (Bermuda) High.

Well I guess someone knows how to interpret graphs. You know @ allybeboba, there is an actual difference between looking at a table with very limited data, and actual research.

[Allybeboba]

You are working off incomplete data. The last part of your table only cover 2001 - 2004 which gives the impression that fewer hurricanes occur that decade. In reality, 2001 - 2010 was a very active decade. As you can see from NOAA table below, 18 Cat 3-5 hurricanes made landfall that decade (in the Atlantic Basin alone). More than any decades prior to that.



Also, just looking at hurricanes that made landfall is misleading. The year 2010, not a single hurricane made US landfall. However, The 2010 North Atlantic hurricane season was extremely active with 19 named storms, 12 hurricanes, and five major hurricanes. The Accumulated Cyclone Energy index that year was 190% of the 1951 - 2000 median value which put it in the “hyperactive season” category. The jet stream’s position contributed to warm and dry conditions in the eastern U.S. and acted as a barrier that kept many storms over open water. Also, because many storms formed in the extreme eastern Atlantic, they curved out to sea without threatening land due to the North Atlantic (Bermuda) High.

It isn't 'my' table.

El Niño and La Niña contributed to many of the recent strong hurricanes.

[Trassk]

While I do think human influence is having a negative impact on the eco system, it that is responsible for this storm thats simply pie in the sky.

Whats more interesting, is how considering we at present as a species are more numerous now then its ever been in humanities history, when for that reason alone any natural disaster will always wipe out several thousand people each time something happens. Its just logistics, more people spread all over the planet, of course they will die from something devastating happening.

Its just natures way of culling the herd.