Will We Reach 4,000 Days Since a Major Hurricane Strike?

August 8th, 2016 by Roy W. Spencer, Ph. D.


In less than two months (October 6, 2016) it will be 4,000 days since the last time a major hurricane made landfall in the U.S., which was Wilma on October 24, 2005.

Wilma was a record-setter, being the strongest Atlantic hurricane on record, with peak estimated sustained winds of 183 mph and lowest surface pressure of 882 mb. That surface pressure corresponds to a 13% removal of atmospheric mass in the core of the hurricane compared to normal sea level pressure.

But after the record-setting 2005 Atlantic hurricane season, with a whopping 27 named tropical storms, the bottom pretty much dropped out of hurricane activity since then.

After an unusual January hurricane this year (which I don’t meteorologically count as part of the 2016 season), we’ve had one system (Earl) that briefly achieved hurricane status before making landfall in Belize several days ago:


Will we reach October 6 without a major (Cat3 or higher) hurricane strike? No one knows. The Atlantic is quiet right now, and there has been no significant trend in global tropical cyclone activity since satellite monitoring started in the early 1970s.

243 Responses to “Will We Reach 4,000 Days Since a Major Hurricane Strike?”

Toggle Trackbacks

  1. Norman says:

    Dr. Spencer

    Do you have an explanation why the hurricane numbers have dropped for such a sustained time since 2005? Is the Atlantic cooling a bit or does the coast of Africa have less dust storms?

    • I don’t think anyone knows, although there are opinions. In my experience, it seems like the limiting factor tends to be wind shear. You can have easterly waves, warm SSTs, but if there is too much wind shear, you won’t get strong systems.

      • Certain interesting and significant phenomena ( tropical cyclones, snowstorms, droughts, floods, heatwaves, etc. etc. ) are multi-factoral and episodic. The contribution to those factors may include small or no influence of temperature.

        Therefore, it’s not surprising that there’s not a significant correlation with AGW. The trouble is, the IPCC, in an effort to drive emotion, decided to invoke GW wrt hurricanes and other weather events anyway. As a consequence, they have to live with failed predictions.

        • Dusty in Chattanooga says:

          Perfect. The only problem is “Where is the national news media”? Remember the fevered vision Gore attempted to impart, of serial hurricane catastrophes of Biblical proportions, all due to MMGW? The only “catastrophe” brought about by the past 4000 days has been to Gore’s reputation among sentient beings.

          • Bob Gray says:

            Sentient beings already knew that Gore has no scientific background whatsoever, so never paid him the slightest attention in the first place.

          • Walt Allensworth says:

            But the science is settled!
            Hurricanes will yuge! Yuge with global warming!

      • Norman says:

        Dr. Spencer,

        Your reply led me to this article. It says El Nino seems to suppress hurricane activity in the Atlantic basin both with increased wind shear and also increased atmospheric stability. That would explain a decrease of Atlantic hurricanes this year. Not sure about the other years.


        • Greg Harvey says:

          I just looked up 2005 and that was a El Nino year…?? so doesn’t that kind of blow the El Nino’s seem to suppress Hurricane activity idea out of the water

          • Dusty in Chattanooga says:

            Isn’t this a La Nia year? And who is “La Nia” anyway?

          • Al Gore says:

            It’s “la Nina” (with a tilda accent, which I’m too lazy to find), and it means “little girl.” “El Nino” means “little boy.”

          • mpainter says:

            Great, Al. Now if you fix the spell checker, you will have done something useful. For once in your life.

        • RAH says:

          The below is what I understand from watching Joe Bastardi’s updates and forecasts at Weatherbell.com and reading others from other sources:

          The El Nino is over and thus so are the easterlies which helped prevent Tropical storm formation in the Gulf, Caribbean and especially the Gulf because of their shearing effect. However, though SSTs are elevated it looks like the traditional path off the African shore where tropical waves form that eventually become hurricanes is still covered with dust which inhibits formation. So the best chance of a major storm to form is off the eastern Seaboard or Gulf of Mexico where SSTs are higher than usual and are forecast to remain so for the balance of the season. Or in the Caribbean then moving into the warm waters off the US southern coast in the Gulf. So close in formation seems the biggest danger right now and probably will remain so for this season. With such high SSTs in so close to the US shores any tropical storm or CAT I or II hurricane could strengthen as it approaches shore instead of weakening as they usually do.

      • Phil Hoey says:

        Dr. Roy, you realize of course that you have now ‘jinxed’ it. For sure the US will get one now. đŸ˜‰
        That being said, I understand there is only limited data available that is over ~150 years old, but since the sun spot cycle seems to have a major impact on the planet’s climate, is it possible to infer impact would not also influence a hurricane cycle?

      • Phil McGuire says:

        I’m not arguing in any way this related, I live on west side of Vancouver Island in Victoria and have noticed it’s a lot “windier” this summer, especially in late afternoon with some big gusts. There’s a brisk breeze blowing right now; any agreement or explanation on that?

    • Roudter says:

      WTF?….Hurricane Sandy?….That was 2012….significantly less than 4000 days ago….

      What is this lie all about?

      • An Inquirer says:

        Sandy was not a major hurricane, and it was not even a hurricane when it landed. It caused spectacular damage because another storm system joined it as it reached New York. Reputable weathermen have often wondered why such a combination does not occur more often in the Northeast.

      • Geez…please come up to speed, will ya? Look up Sandy at landfall, and the definition of “major hurricane”.

        • david steakley says:

          it does occur to one that perhaps the definition of “major” is not so useful and perhaps lacks the meaning being ascribed to it in this piece and in the comments, if events like Sandy or Ike are not included.

          • Again, the definiton is meteorological…if we used destruction of life and infrastructure instead, then we would not be able to tell if hurricanes are getting worse with climate change…because destruction goes up anyway as coastal population and infrastructure increases. Similarly, what if a “hypercane” with 200+ mph windspeeds makes landfall where no one lives? Do we exclude it from the record as meaningful?

          • Kyle Tingle says:

            David Steakley,

            Definition is by force, not damage. Damage is dependent on where a storm hits. That Sandy hit the most populous place in the US made for lots of damage, but from a force standpoint, it wasn’t a Cat 3 or above.

          • mpainter says:

            So you think population density at landfall should be the criteria for a hurricane index, rather than sustained wind speed?

            How convenient for the alarmists, who would screech their brains out when a Cat 2 storm hits Miami. Or any such coastal metro area. Such as Galveston. Or any highly developed coast.

            Or when cat 1 Sandy pushes a spring tide a few feet higher in NYC harbor. Also add geographic features for funnel effect. Now Sandy becomes a Cat 3 hurricane. Hot dog! Funnel effect!

            How the global warmish love to change definitions to amplify their screeches

          • mpainter says:

            My comment in response to Steakly, above

        • 2Bad4All says:

          OK, then what about Ike.

      • mark says:

        Hey Roudter! Hurricane that reach LANDFALL. Sandy was a superstorm NOT a hurricane.

        To put it into terms you can understand, a superstorm is a lot of rain and windy weather.

        Try reading a book instead of drinking the kool aid…

        • Walt Allensworth says:

          Liberals spend too much time in the echo chamber drinking their own cool-aid.

      • James J Strom says:

        More specifics as to Inquirer’s post. At landfall in NJ Sandy had winds of 80 mph. Sandy was not classified as a hurricane at that point, but if it were, it would have been category 1 when it hit the US. Sandy covered an unusually large area and as a consequence built up exceptionally high tides which did a lot of damage to the coast at landfall.

        • mpainter says:

          A hurricane is defined as having sustained wind at 74 mph or more. The National Hurricane Center downgraded Sandy to storm status at about fifty miles offshore.

    • Gene Lonnon says:

      Look at the patents Bill Gates Filed to stop hurricanes just before this streak started. Can you imagine the amount of Dollars his buddy Berkshire could bilk from the fools in Florida if the patent was used to stop or turn hurricanes headed toward the US.

    • jwpatx says:

      It’s called HAARP. Except not the one in Alaska, it’s the array in Puerto Rico (I’m not sure of the official name of that one, but it’s the same set-up) that they’re using to heat the ionoshpere, causing a bubble that lower layers of the atmosphere move up to fill, which then causes air currents to shift in the desired direction. Tesla’s idea, put into practice ever since Katrina.

    • geo says:

      it’s not this farce of man made global warming.if man made how do they explain the earth warming after ice age no humans even around. it is government spraying all the chemicals in air. they have already admitted they are experimenting with weather modification

      • Lewis says:

        AGW true believers know history didn’t start until the beginning of satellite measurements. What is this ice age stuff you’re referring to? Sounds like sacrilege.

    • Jonathan says:

      Look into man made weather manipulation…

    • Jane says:

      Obama is killing them. Bush started killing them in 07

  2. Gore effect strikes, yet again.

  3. John Owens says:

    I live in Destin, Florida and I am hoping for a quiet season. So far it is looking good. The El Nino jet stream wind pattern is a bit North of what you would expect; but we are still getting more rain recently.

  4. mpainter says:

    Dr. Spencer, thanks for this proof that increasing atmospheric CO2 reduces the incidence of severe hurricanes (category 3 & higher), and indeed, reduces formation of hurricanes, overall. I predict that over the next fifty years, we will see increasingly fewer hurricanes as CO2 levels increase. Wonderful stuff, that CO2☺

    • Simon says:

      Except…. sorry to burst your bubble. Hold the celebrations. The US is not the planet. The jury is very much out on the effect of increasing heat and CO2 on the hurricane intensity across the planet. Typical D team article though that would love us all to forget the rest of the world.

      • mpainter says:

        You are a drooling idiot.
        Proof: “hurricane intensity across the planet.”
        Hurricanes are, by definition, only in the N Atlantic.

        Careful, Simon, lest the saliva stain your shirtfront.

        • Mike M. says:

          The limitations of mpainter’s knowledge are limitless. He does not know how the term hurricane is used (tropical cyclones in the east Pacific are called hurricanes). He does not know that the only difference between a hurricane and a typhoon is the local word used to name them. He does not have any concept of how one proves things in science. His shirtfront is soaking wet.

          • mpainter says:

            Mike M,
            The post addresses the “Atlantic hurricane season” with reference to hurricane landfall in the US. Why are you squalling about _Pacific_ typhoons and _Pacific_ hurricanes which never make landfall in the US? Because you wish to fling a spitball? Just can’t help yourself? Or perhaps you are upset at the “4,000 days since a Cat 3 landfall”.

            Got yourself in a real snit, you have. Careful, lest your saliva burn a hole in your shirt.

          • doctor no says:

            mpainter, you must be related to Donald Trump.
            Go on – tell us the family connection.

          • crakar24 says:

            LOL, the warmbots rush in arms waiving squealing like a pig but neglected to read the headline. Unfortunately its waaaay too late for them to back out now and save face so they double down on the insults.

            When will they ever learn.

          • Beef Eater says:

            “The limitations of mpainter’s knowledge are limitless”
            Who talks like that? The poorly educated, that’s who.

          • Dan Thiel says:

            Panties in a bunch?

          • mpainter says:

            Of course, MikeM has a limited vocabulary, which shortcoming he brandishes illimitably, although rather inamicably, but all for the sake of the cause. Semper Excelsior. Or something.

          • jwpatx says:

            Correct. If you release results of studies and don’t release the data by which you reached those results, IT’S NOT SCIENCE.

            Read Dr. Richard Lindzen’s recent stuff. He’s a professor emeritus at MIT. Apparently no one for the first 60 years of his life thought he was a crackpot, but since he has the gall to say, “wait a minute…” after he is no longer in danger of losing his job for doing so, he’s now labeled as such.

            I don’t think the fact that the climate is changing is up for debate, but there are so many factors that are not included in whatever equation they use to decide that taxing people more will fix it. For instance, weakening magnetic field, decreases/increases in solar activity, the massive amount of plastic trash floating around in the Pacific ocean.. that’s probably the biggest driver… it’s not an island, it’s a soup of plastic that prevents light from getting through, in an area that’s at least as large as Texas, and stifles algae growth. Not sure if you know this but 75% of the oxygen that gets synthesized from CO2 on this planet comes from oceanic algae. not forests.

          • Lewis says:

            I’m voting for the Donald. I hope you all are. The only reason you’d vote for Crooked Hillary is due to a lack of personal and/or social morals and the concurrent desire for a totalitarian state.

        • wtsane says:

          I utterly love the internet! Now people who have never met, can argue over the weather, can polarize the rain and create long-term animosity over something man can neither credibly predict, control, or in reality, impact. The trends on the planet are just about 99% controlled by our friend, Mr. Sun. The rest are controlled by volcanic and extra-earth events (meteors). It is the literal height of arrogance to think mankind can have more than a very fleeting effect on the environment/climate/atmosphere/weather.

      • Dusty in Chattanooga says:

        “Article”? All I saw was a comment. Please lead us to the article of which you speak.


      • RAH says:

        So Simon I take it that you agree with the line that the fact the US has not been hit is just plain dumb luck? Are you one of those that are “terrified” by the potential that the hiatus will end?


        I think your probably more afraid that our wonderful break from such storms will continue.

        As for tropical storms getting stronger across the earth? You do realize that with advances in technology which allows quicker detection and much more accurate and frequent monitoring of storms by satellite there is a factor of inflation in hurricane wind speed measurements over those recorded previously with less advanced means? It’s very much like the inflation of tornado counts and intensity that the NOAA Storm Prediction Center recognizes and tries to compensate for by adjustment.
        However as far as I know, while the honest scientists recognize this fact none have yet tried to quantify it in order to adjust the numbers.

        Both are very much like the same thing that has happened with the sunspot count. Better technology and full time observation have caused the count number to climb so adjustments have to made in order to make it viable to compare the historic records.

        I think that if the data is available it’s is time for someone to start working on doing the same to that more valid comparisons be made.

        • Simon says:

          “So Simon I take it that you agree with the line that the fact the US has not been hit is just plain dumb luck? Are you one of those that are terrified by the potential that the hiatus will end?”

          Not dumb luck. This pretty much sums it up. From the Royal Society….

          “There is considerable uncertainty about how hurricanes are changing because of the large natural variability and the incomplete observational record. The impact of climate change on hurricane frequency remains a subject of ongoing studies. While changes in hurricane frequency remain uncertain, basic physical understanding and model results suggest that the strongest hurricanes (when they occur) are likely
          to become more intense and possibly larger in a warmer, moister atmosphere over the oceans.

          So…. to focus on one area of the planet is just plain dumb and well… dishonest really if you are going to imply this is representative of the planet. Last years storm season in the Pacific was up there. Typhoon Haiyan (recent storm) was one of the strongest, if not the strongest to make landfall in history. The fact that the locals give their storms a different name seems to allow Mpainter to hide behind his bigoted ignorance. But for those thinkers here, a hurricane is a typhoon. Simple concept really.

          • mpainter says:

            Speaking of the Philippines, new Philippine president Rodrigo Duterte has renounced COP21. Why? Because he wants to crank out the energy that his country needs for achieving prosperity. This means fossil fuel and this means…yes, you guessed it: CO2, that wonderful stuff!

            Besides, Rodrigo Duerte is no fool. He sees how CO2 has cut back on the numbers of hurricanes and he figures that it should work just as well against typhoons.
            Like Simon sez, a typhoons is just a hurricane spinning in the wrong direction. ☺

          • Simon says:

            Always so funny when someone tries make make someone else out to be a fool…..
            “Like Simon sez, a typhoons is just a hurricane spinning in the wrong direction.”

            …. but makes a bigger one of himself. Clue Mr mpainter….
            which hemisphere are the Philippines in?
            Which hemisphere is the USA in?
            Which way do their respective storms spin?

            I think you will find it is the same way. I suppose you think all Chinese look the same and all Muslims are terrorists. Like I said, the world is bigger than the USA.

          • mpainter says:

            The mind of an AGW zealot at work:

            “I suppose you think all Chinese look the same and all Muslims are terrorists. Like I said, the world is bigger than the USA.”

            Simon sez.

          • RAH says:

            “So. to focus on one area of the planet is just plain dumb and well dishonest really if you are going to imply this is representative of the planet.”

            Really! So you reject the many times others have claimed that a specific severe weather event is a result of AGW or human caused “climate change”?

            The fact is that we were told AGW/climate change would result in an increase in the intensity of tropical storms.


            etc. etc. etc. ad nauseum.

            In the Atlantic the exact opposite has happened since 2012. Every season since then has been about average or below average.


            The fact is the fact that the US has gone almost 11 years without a major hurricane coming ashore is noteable for the all time record it is and for the fact that it is quite the opposite of what some publically claimed would happen.

          • Simon says:


            “The fact is the fact that the US has gone almost 11 years ”

            Hello… knock knock…. are you there. The US is not the planet.

            “Really! So you reject the many times others have claimed that a specific severe weather event is a result of AGW or human caused climate change?”

            Yep I do. See my quote from the Royal society above. Extreme weather is a lot trickier to be sure of than ice melt, temp increase and sea level rise.

          • RAH says:

            I’ve traveled a good bit and totally understand the US is not the planet. Your beginning to sound like a one line parrot and demonstrating the cognitive ability of the same.

            The fact is what was claimed by the government would happen has not and in fact the exact opposite has occurred! That was the key point of my post that you avoided addressing with your childish reply. Now I’m done with you.

          • mpainter says:

            An Inquirer says:
            August 9, 2016 at 1:06 PM
            Dave, I am not sure where you are getting your figures, but they seem misleading. See http://policlimate.com/tropical/global_running_ace.png

            Global ACE was seldom less than 1400 in the past, and often greater than 1600. Twice in the 1990s, it exceeded 2000.

            ACE now 50 to 60% of where it was in the 1990s.



            Let’s see if Simon can figure out what this means.

          • Simon says:

            “That was the key point of my post that you avoided addressing with your childish reply. Now Im done with you.”

            Ha ha that’s very good. Say you are going to take your ball and go home…. as you tell me I’m childish. Love it.

      • An Inquirer says:

        First, mpainter stretched Dr. Spencer’s post to a point that was not being made. Dr. Spencer was not proving that CO2 reduces major hurricanes. (Now his observation was undermining a common AGW-activist position that CO2 increases hurricane activity.) PERHAPS, mpainter was being sarcastic — because AGW activists has seized much poorer connections to “prove” a point.
        Second, Simon does not seem to realize that worldwide, hurricanes and typhoons are down. ACE has varied in history and it is on a downward track now.
        Third, a clarification on Dr. Spencer’s statement on Wilma.
        That hurricane was the strongest Atlantic hurricane in the satellite era. I think it was the 1934 hurricance that probably was stronger — it had stronger wind on land where it could be measured in those days. I am not looking it up, but that is my memory.

        • The psychological expectation that hurricanes were going to be worse after the record-setting 2005 season was widespread. I specifically recall the National Hurricane Center predicting intensification of just about every 2006 disturbance, and most of them didn’t intensify. It was obvious that the 2005 season biased their predictions.

        • mpainter says:

          Sarcastic? Oh, no, I meant it…
          CO2 is wonderful stuff!☺

  5. dave says:

    It is just an ordinary year; Ryan Maue’s Global Accumulated Cyclone Energy shows it:

    In his units, to nearest:

    Current Year to Date 346
    Normal Year To Date 328

    Normal whole Year 771
    2015 whole Year 1041

    • mpainter says:

      Except the post is about hurricanes, which are in the N Atlantic and adjacent seas.

      • dave says:

        Just to stop people bleating that, whatever happens in the USA, the rest of the world is blowing away. The hurricane season in the North Atlantic is beginning.

      • Simon says:

        So if the post is “about hurricanes, which are in the N Atlantic and adjacent seas” why do take this as proof,”that increasing atmospheric CO2 reduces the incidence of severe hurricanes (category 3 & higher).” Only a fool, or someone determined to mislead would make such a deduction from the activity in such a small area of planet. Can I offer you a word of advice? If you want to maintain any integrity in this debate, say stuff that has a level of honesty and makes sense.

        • mpainter says:

          See above

          • Simon says:

            Always such a laugh that the D team want the highest level of proof from the scientific community, re AGW being a threat, but are happy to declare the debate over on the flimsiest of evidence.

          • crakar24 says:

            I was once told by a warmbot that CO2 is a well mixed gas thats where the word GLOBAL comes from in Anthropogenic GLOBAL warming ergo if CO2 is a well mixed gas and is having what appears to be no effect on Nth Atlantic hurricanes then logically CO2 would have the same effect GLOBALLY.

            Or are people now going to tell the hypothesis has been rewritten again?

    • An Inquirer says:

      Dave, I am not sure where you are getting your figures, but they seem misleading. See http://policlimate.com/tropical/global_running_ace.png

      Global ACE was seldom less than 1400 in the past, and often greater than 1600. Twice in the 1990s, it exceeded 2000.

      ACE now 50 to 60% of where it was in the 1990s.

  6. dave says:

    The lingering effects of the 2016 El Nino should act to lessen dangerous hurricanes hitting the USA in the next two months.

  7. I think it is all random.

    • greg spears says:

      I think its the big hot shiny thing in the sky that drives our weather, I think when it come’s to the the earth the last 100 years of man has caused a small dent to the weather but the driving force is the Sun then Id say pointy mountains puffing smoke’s second and man a distant third and for us to think we are so smart and talented that the distant third can over ride the effects of the other two is either politically driven or peer driven. I wont say foolish cause I didn’t go to college. Being that Im just a high school educated soybean farmer what I know about the weather is just 50 years of farming in it. So Im not near as sharp as all of you cats. But since all of these prediction’s keep on falling right on there face and all of the scientist just keep doubling down it makes average folks like my self pretty skeptical of all of these well educated cats intention’s. Then there is those instances where another well educated cat steps up and goes against the consensus of all these other GW guys and he is sent packing to study the effects of bellybutton lint on weather in Tuvalu.

      • Robert says:

        Ever heard of the military wanting to control the weather by 2525? Well, I think they’ve just about done it. Ever seen those planes in the sky while farming which spray clouds behind them? X patterns (not normal) all over the place. They slow down over the summer but will be back in the fall – I guarantee it.

    • ren says:

      To set up a hurricane important upper winds of 500-200 hPa and the temperature of the surface of the sea off the coast of Africa.

  8. Bill Marsh says:

    Right now, I’d take the over on that

  9. Scott says:

    Hurricane Ike was a Cat 4 and was one bad, BAD motor scooter in Galveston, Texas in particular. That was September, 2008. I still remember the public service announcement that residents not living behind the seawall protecting downtown Galveston were “facing certain death” if they did not evacuate. That said, the lack of serious storms (other than torrential rains) since Ike has been very conspicuous.

    • Ike was Cat2 at landfall.

      • Mike M. says:

        But isn’t the storm surge, which is what usually does the real damage (and Ike’s did a whole lot of damage) dependent on the history of the storm for some time before landfall? So it seems to me that you are making a bit of an arbitrary distinction.

        • mpainter says:

          Ike had a terrific storm surge, up to 19 feet at Galveston. This topped the seawall. Nonetheless, it was officially a category 2 storm at landfall.
          You don’t like it? Go complain to the National Hurricane Center. Tell them about typhoons and Pacific Hurricanes. Tell them that they got it all wrong, that you know better than they.

        • Mark says:

          Ike, while a cat 2 at landfall, brought a large storm surge due to the funneling effect of Galveston Bay. Water did not flow over the sea wall in Galveston, instead in flowed in the backside from the bay, not from the gulf. The Eye of Ike hit Boliver putting Galveston on the western side of the eyewall. The sea wall does not protect the island on the bay side.

        • mpainter says:

          The highest elevation at Galveston Island (a barrier islands,i.e., a big sandbar) is 20 feet above MSL. Most of the Island is under 10 ‘ above MSL. In other words, it is a sitting duck, poor Galveston.

          For the worst natural disaster ever in the US, see the Galveston Hurricane, 1900. A city of 30-35,000 was destroyed. Estimated 8,000 lives lost. No buildings left, except a few brick structures. My great-grandfather, a sea-faring man, survived in his “shipbuilt” home. He foresaw the disaster.

          “Hurricane Roulette” is what I call it, when people build their homes and businesses on the strands of the Gulf Coast. What good fortune for these gamblers that the last eleven years have seen no cat 3 hurricanes. All because of that wonderful stuff..CO! ☺

          • mpainter says:

            CO2, rather.
            !#%*@! Spell check, a Cat 5 hurricane blast it.

          • mpainter says:

            And, of course, their good fortune will not last indefinitely, because CO2 can only do so much.Some hurricanes are so big not even CO2 can stop them. ☺

  10. doctor no says:


    has a table listing the most intense mainland United States hurricanes by central pressure 1851-2015.

    (1) If you plot rank versus year, the long-term linear trend suggests a slight increase in strength since 1851.
    (2) However, a third-order polynomial fit to the data (which better identifies decadal and multidecdal-scale fluctuations) suggests that there has been a slight decrease since about 1970.
    (3) Assuming a intensely strong hurricane (e.g. like Katrina) were to occur this year, the same fit to the data still suggests little change over time.

    It is fair to say that there is little evidence for an increase in the intensity of mainland United States hurricanes over recent decades.

    • mpainter says:

      It is fair to say that no cat 3 hurricane has made landfall in the US for 4,000 days, come October 6. Like in the post. Above.

    • James Drouin says:

      Funny thing about all that hurricane data … every last bit of it prior to sometime between 1940 and 1960 is based on “newspaper records”, that’s right, “newspaper records”.

      Now as fine and educated as reporters are, they aren’t exactly meteorologists, are they.

      • RAH says:

        The vast majority of accurate wind measurements recorded prior to the 60s were from shore based weather stations. Though they started flying into hurricanes to gain information back in the 40s the really accurate wind readings from the Hurricane hunters did not come until suitable dropsondes were developed in the 70’s and the best data did not come until dropsondes had GPS capability.

      • Dusty in Chattanooga says:

        You’re too kind! “Fine and educated” is giving them quite a bit of undeserved credit, don’t you think?
        Gorebots are always such a laugh. They demand the highest level of proof from the independent scientific community, re AGW being no threat, but are happy to declare the debate over on the flimsiest of evidence. “The science is settled” is the least scientific statement ever made, on a par with either (take your choice) “Don’t sail too far past the horizon or you’ll fall off the edge of the Earth” or Pelosi’s “We have to pass the bill to know what’s in it.”
        “Warmest time in modern history” doesn’t cover a lot of ground, does it? 150 years of mostly anecdotal record-keeping out of want, 10,000 years of any significant human activity? And what of the alligator fossils being dug up in Gray, Tennessee as we speak? A subtropical species living comfortably north of the 36th parallel? How did the Earth recover from THAT bout of “global warming” without Al Gore being around to save it?
        It’s never “We should do this and my friends and I will pay for it”, it’s “You SHALL do this and you WILL pay for it.” pardon us if we ask to see the fine print at the bottom of the contract we’ve been asked to sign, or enquire of the mercury content in the swirly-cone light bulbs we’re told to buy “for environmental reasons”. And then they try to ban or even imprison those who disagree with them. I thought Adolph, Benito and Josef were all dead.

        • Michael says:

          Not to disagree with any of your points, but I live in northeastern NC, which is just about as far north as Gray, TN, and we have alligators right now. (Google alligators in Pasquotank.) Of course, we aren’t inland and above 1,000 feet in altitude.

  11. Transport by Zeppelin says:


    mpainter says:
    August 8, 2016 at 2:33 PM
    You are a drooling idiot.
    Proof: hurricane intensity across the planet.
    Hurricanes are, by definition, only in the N Atlantic.

    Careful, Simon, lest the saliva stain your shirtfront.

    Dr Spencer; why do you allow mpainter, a demonstratably obnoxious & arrogant trouble maker, to continue to post here at YOUR website?

    Surely this poor excuse for a human should be banned?

    • markit8dude says:

      Wow, are you really that big of a candy*ss? Whining for someone to be banned?

      I suspect when a kid & things weren’t going your way, you took your ball, thee very ball you & others were using – & unexpectedly went home.

      Hate to break it to you sport, commenter ‘Simon’ began the smugness & ad hominem.

      Or is your reading comprehension skills that compromised? Or your political leanings/ partisanship so strong it dictates your ‘Earth sciences understanding’?

      ‘Poor excuse for a human’ – lemme guess. You paint yourself as a ‘liberal’?

      FYI: a TRUE Liberal would welcome ALL ideas, angles. Especially when it comes to science. If you’re not willing to accept ALL stances, you may very well instead be an illiberal.

      To this day Einstein’s, Volta’s, Michelangelo’s ad infinitum – science contributions are constantly being put through the rigors of validity. For there’s no ‘settled science’

      Ever expanding technology, raw data & unwavering, apolitical support to the scientific method is essential in EVERY science.

      While you may not agree with mpainter’s stances, demeanor. Do try to look at all commenter’s with equanimity. Or ignore those you disagree with altogether.

      Good day.

      • Transport by Zeppelin says:



      • An Inquirer says:

        Transport by Zeppelin does not come across as a liberal in the historic meaning of that term. But rather as a left winger. The European Liberal of the 19th century believed in individual liberty and individual responsibility. They were very much against government control. Being liberal meant letting people pursue their own dreams instead of being restrained by the dictates of the government. Such an attitude is not practiced by left wingers.

    • doctor no says:

      Transport by Zeppelin,
      mpainter is related to Donald Trump and both have anger management issues.
      Something to do with having small hands I believe.
      In painter’s case, I suspect it is also a small mind.

      • Dusty in Chattanooga says:

        And you got your name from your wife’s constant response to your amorous fumblings, yes?

  12. JWDH says:

    mpainter was not the only one…..but I actually enjoyed the back and forth. It was not all dribble.

  13. anono says:

    Open Borders! (for white populations only)
    Noone is Illegal! (where white people live only)
    Minority rights! (when white people are the majority only)
    “diversity is our strength” translates to “white people are our weakness”

    That’s why they say anti racist is code for anti white
    That’s why they say diversity is code for white genocide

  14. Adelheid says:

    Wow. Stop being so full of testosterone, guys. You all sound very angry. I’m not touchy-feely but you all sound so in-your-face to each other. God decides, not science….

  15. FactsMatter says:

    NOAA: …., six days after Hurricane Ike made landfall as a Category 2 hurricane, Texas is still….

  16. Suzanne says:

    “Will We Reach 4,000 Days Since a Major Hurricane Strike?”

    What the hell you call Hurricane Sandy???

    That was during Election Week 2012, which adds up to only about 1275 days max.

    I always suspected that was HAARP spawned, to help fix the election.

    • JohnFLob says:

      The weather phenomenon “Sandy” was not a hurricane when it made landfall. “Sandy” was actually the merger of a tropical storm [under 75 mph] and a storm from the upper plains.

      • Mark says:

        It was also extratropical with a cold core when it made landfall. Part of why it was “superstorm” sandy was because a hurricane merged with a strong cold core low.

      • Tom says:

        Sandy may not have been a “hurricane” in a technical sense when it made landfall, but it threw untold numbers of people out of their homes for months. Some people haven’t rebounded.

        My family of 5 was out of our home for 10 months. The Eastern seaboard looked like a war zone.

        It was hurricane enough, and cannot be dismissed on a slight technicality.

        • Tom, you seem to me missing the point….even if average hurricane intensity were to stay the same year after year, decade after decade, hurricane damage and deaths would continue to increase because of increasing population and infrastructure along the coasts. That is why we don’t use those as metrics for *weather*, and how weather might be getting worse due to climate change.

    • Jim says:

      Sandy was not that strong of a storm. Just like Katrina was not that strong in New Orleans, it was just poorly maintained levies which failed. It’s a lot easier for a politician to blame climate however than it is to blame themselves for being inept and corrupt.

    • Sandy was only Cat1 intensity at landfall…85 mph max sustained winds.

      • An Inquirer says:

        Sorry, Dr. Spencer, I have often seen the official statement on this issue. Sandy was not a hurricane at landfall.

  17. Don Juan says:

    Global warming has ruined hurricane season for the weather channel. They don’t have anything to do.

  18. james says:

    Maybe, the formation and strengthening of hurricanes over long timeframes is a chaotic and unpredictable phenomena that transcends current political breezes.

    We’ll get a series of 2005 seasons soon enough, don’t sweat it if youre hoping for that. In the meantime just be happy thousands of people arent having their lives ripped apart periodically.

  19. Queef Sniffer says:

    VOTE for Trump …. Hitlery Clitlery for Prison /….. 14/88

  20. Avoidspam says:

    You can’t win. If there’s too many hurricanes it’s because of global warming. If there’s not enough hurricanes it’s global warming. Every “phenomenon” somehow is related to global warming. Methinks people need to stop thinking about global warming and start looking with an open mind

  21. Ed Pyett says:

    Hillary’s brain blood clot has stopped global warming
    warming whacks.. send your gubmint tenure $$ back

  22. Andrew Ritter says:

    This is completely incorrect. Ivan, Sandy, and countless others.

    • talljohn777 says:

      Andrew, Ivan was a Cat2 and Sandy was not a hurricane when it made landfall. Sorry, but there are also not countless others as you say. You are wrong and facts matter.

    • Sum Ting Wong says:

      Countless? Wow. Like, what, millions or maybe billions?

      Would you kindly post a table listing the worst (or, for that matter, any) dozen or so of them? That should be easy if their number was truly countless.

  23. ren says:

    The remnants of tropical storm from the Mexican jet stream directs over the Rocky Mountains.

  24. geogeek says:

    “FYI: a TRUE Liberal would welcome ALL ideas, angles.” I guess that’s why college campuses, those bastions of liberalism, are so tolerant of ideas that are vastly different than their own 😅

  25. David says:

    George Bush no longer hates black people. That’s why the Hurricanes stopped.

  26. Yosef Kalish says:

    Very interesting Dr. Spencer. Thank you.

    I’ve been reading a few of the comments here. Now I’m used to arm-chair presidents and arm-chair prime ministers. But arm-chair meteorologists is a new one for me! Cheers!

  27. Jerry Duff says:

    Funny stuff! Why no hurricanes? Lunar minimum! When El Nino dissipates later this year. I and many others will be laughing once again at AGW people. Rapid cooling coming as soon as El Nino goes away.

    AGW people remind me of children trying to put pieces from a puzzle together. Except the puzzle pieces they work with are all the wrong pieces.

    Instead of trying to fit something that does not fit. Just use the pieces that do fit. Quit trying to fill a void just so you can say this agenda works.

    Robert, while I once thought you were a very good scientist. I can no longer say that. I know the money you get is very good. But is your soul really worth it?

    You know the truth. AGW is part of that bigger plan.

  28. Jerry Duff says:

    When a planet starts to cool down. What happens to the mass?

    Answer: A more solid form.

    Been reading about the “Boom” phenomena taking place in various areas around the world. When mass goes to a more solid state. What happens to the gases inside that mass? What happens to soluble and liquid? What happens to the planets atmosphere as a result of the gas released?

    But AGW wants to blame this on man. While the planet atmosphere will see a rise in surface heat temperature. Guess what happens to the atmosphere when the planet finishes what it is completing! ;-D

  29. WagTheDog says:

    Actually, Sandy in 2012 was a CAT 3 and was the second-costliest hurricane in United States history.

  30. Paul Deckelman says:

    Interesting discussion.

    But while it is probably quite true that we have not had a Category 3 or higher storm hit the U.S. mainland in 4,000 days, since Wilma in 2005, it is quite another thing to assert that we have gone that long “without a major hurricane strike.”

    Those of us here in New York City and neighboring states who lived through Hurricane Sandy on Oct. 29, 2012 and who witnessed or were personally affected by it would certainly disagree with such an assertion. Using the narrow definition of a “major” hurricane as one Cart. 3 or above does not take into account other aspects of this storm which were indeed, major.

    The storm caused an estimated 157 deaths in the U.S. (223 deaths total, counting the Caribbean and Canada) and caused an estimated $75 billion of damage, $71.4 billion of it in the U.S., making it the second-costliest hurricane in history behind only Katrina. It was the largest storm on record in terms of diameter, spanning some 1,100 miles, and produced record-high storm surges up and down the Atlantic seaboard, which accounted for most of its massive destructive power. In coastal areas of New York City alone, several thousand homes were either completely destroyed or were damaged so severely that they were rendered uninhabitable without extensive repair work, only SOME of which has been done even now, almost four years later.

    Come to the Rockaway Peninsula section of the Borough of Queens – where in one small neighborhood of Breezy Point, more than 120 closely-packed homes were razed to the ground by a fast-moving fire sparked by an electrical short circuit and whipped by the hurricane-force winds, with firemen kept back by massive storm surges higher than the tops of their trucks coming in off of BOTH the ocean and Jamaica Bay – and tell those folks that they did not live through a “major” hurricane. I assure you – you will get an earful in response.

    • “But while it is probably quite true that we have not had a Category 3 or higher storm hit the U.S. mainland in 4,000 days, since Wilma in 2005, it is quite another thing to assert that we have gone that long without a major hurricane strike.”

      …actually, that’s exactly what it means. The meteorological strength of a hurricane is not determined by how many humans are in its way.

      • RussRamey6 says:

        Well done Dr Spencer

        All the hype is generated IMHO by the Michael Crichton premise behind “State of Fear”. Well written, and i have rarely if ever believed the MSM and Ivory tower league again.

        BTW, I am married to an ex-senior environmental chemist for BP NA, same position as yours. My background is history and political-economy, it’s all about power and collectivist redistribution, not hard science.

    • Roy says:

      Having lived in Mississippi, Louisiana or Florida the entirety of my brief 66 years on earth, I have seen or lived through every category of hurricane, all of them are are devastating and deadly to those they impact.
      The people of South Florida with Andrew, New Orleans with Katrina and the Northeast with Sandy, all fell victim to the same problem, no one listened.
      The people of New Orleans, a city built below sea level, basically a bowl, were told year after year that if a hurricane hits and the levies don’t hold they would be wiped out. New Orleans got hit by, very little, of Katrina’s east side. Everyone gave a sigh of relief, we dodged another bullet, then the levies broke, devastation everywhere. I spent two of my teenage years in the the 9th ward. The levee ran the length of the ward, every building was below the levee.

      South Florida went for decades without a direct hit from a major hurricane, During that span of time the growth rate in population and construction skyrocketed but building codes did not. Andrew had no resistance as it poured devastation out on the south end of a flat peninsula.

      I heard for decades the warnings of the damage that would be done if they took a direct hit from a hurricane, any category. Did anything change? I don’t think so!

      In every instance people were told to leave, too many chose not too and sacrificed there lives for it. That’s a man made disaster.

      If you choose to live in a hurricane zone, one day yours will come.

    • Oso Chris says:

      Working in the disaster relief field, it is my experience that just about all victims (those who suffer significant loss) will feel they have been on the receiving end of a major disaster. It does not mater if the tropical storm is a category 5 or simply a tropical storm. If they lost family members, friends, homes, etc., it was a major disaster.

      That; however, does not change the measurements used to gauge the strength of a storm. I only have 18 years of observation and no statistics to back this up, but water (mostly flooding), rather than wind, seems to be a more notable cause of loss. (Not to ignore that wind will impact potential water damage such as storm surge, opening holes in structures, etc.) Insurance companies are not stupid, why do you think they do not cover flood damage? (Except through the Govt National Flood Insurance program.)

      What the tropical storm, regardless of strength, does can mean a major or minor impact. Taking to someone I know currently living in Belize, seems the locals just took Earl in stride, no loss of life. Trees down, just get out a Machete and cut it away. Yet if Earl had behaved like Mitch did in 1998 when it moved over the coast of Central America and just sat there dumping water and washing away mountainsides, it would have been a different story, even with no change in the strength of the storm.

      The ratings (Cat 1, 2, 3, etc) can only provide so much information, other factors such as moisture content, rate of rain fall, speed of movement of the storm, population of area impacted, etc. can cause differences in the amount of damage and impact of identically rated storms.

      These ratings are simply what we currently have to provide a somewhat consistent way to compare and evaluate the potential damage a storm could do and ends up doing. In any case, with all other factors being equal, if Sandy was still at it’s peak Category 3 when it made landfall, there would have been very noticeable differences in the damage done, if just from the wind blowing down more trees and opening up more buildings and homes to the elements.

      • mpainter says:

        A cat 3 Sandy would have generated a much greater storm surge, had it hit at that strength.

        Sandy made landfall with winds below hurricane strength. Yet the damage was immense. “Hurricane roulette” will someday bring a much more destructive storm to that coast. Yet people will play the wheel, roll the dice, staking their lives and fortunes.

        Their is a lesson in all of this: visit the seashore, frolic in the nice waves on the nice beaches. But don’t build your dream home there, no matter what.

      • RAH says:

        I agree with your point about perceptions of the victims being magnified. However the perception of non victims and even many who were personally completely disconnected from the effects of the storm as to the true power of Sandy has been distorted by intentional hype and misinformation by the general media.

        Thus on this forum and others even to this day we see people having no personal connection to the effects of the storm arguing that Sandy was a major hurricane based on the damage it did and number of lives it effected and not on the actual scientific measurements and classification of it’s wind speeds. They emote against the scientific measurements because of the hype and disinformation they were exposed to in the general media and by their government. And most will continue to do so no matter how many times one copies and pastes the scientific data and classifications from any source for them to learn.

        Such discussions and arguments about about Sandy are in fact the climate change/AGW arguments in microcosm when it comes to severe weather or even wild fires and droughts.

        Time and again we see the press and the pro
        AGW “scientists” claim such and such was a one in 100 or 1000 or even 1,000,000 year event. Time and again actual research demonstrates that the claim was false. But they got their headlines and the impressions out there playing on the disaster first and thus achieved what they wanted. And the facts later revealed which disprove their claim get no headlines. The most recent example here in the US being the flood in Ellicott City, MD. which was claimed to be a 1 in 1,000 year event even though they had a flood far worse in 1868.

        • Oso Chris says:

          Flooding will always get worse as we continue to pave and build over more ground that once helped absorb some of the water. What is amazing is that it is not worse in some of these areas.

  31. Art Carney says:

    how can this be? Al Gore along with a large number of Global warming folks were shouting after new Orleans that because of global warming there were going to be a massive increase in these storms.. Bu then almost nothing these people have claimed 20-30 years ago, that was going to happen by now has happen.

  32. Mark says:

    Hey Norman,

    Russian scientists are studying this thing called the Sun, and apparently it affects weather on earth. Since 2005 was the end of a major solar maximum, you may want to correlate the dates of solar maximums and minimums. The answer could have been staying you in the face every morning when you wake up.

    • Conor says:


      Russians, like all the other G20 states, had been studying something called the Nile Problem. This affects the formation of easterly waves that affect the region from whence these hurricanes mature. Uncle Roy is not saying much on this matter since he seems to be in denial about the whole thing – doesn’t write, doesn’t phone……… So if you see him can you give him message: the UK govt is examining ALL options for fuel in the future inc coal ie they are longer afraid of CC and GW.

      • RussRamey6 says:

        IMHO, what the UK government primarily is afraid of is the decline of production in North Sea Oil, plus the loss of control regarding Middle Eastern oil reserves since their Empire collapsed after WWII.

        • Conor Mcmenemie says:


          Do you really think polititions have such long memories? Westminster is still hungover from the party celebrating the reduction in the Scottish GDP, reducing the possibility of another independence referendum. No – the UK govt has been spoon fed climate research for the past 7 years which paints a completely different picture of CC and GW. Ask Roy, he is on the privelaged mailing list, but is keeping quite.

  33. Triple A60 says:

    This has had several names through the years Cooling… Warming… and now they have settled for change. That way they can blame any kind of weather for it… At one given time or another Liberals have blamed Global Cooling / Warming / Climate Change for anyone of the following.

    Rising sea levels.
    Falling sea levels.
    Rising temperatures.
    Cooling temperatures.
    Decreased sea ice.
    Increased sea ice.
    More hurricanes.
    Fewer hurricanes.
    Increase in Polar Ice.
    Decline of Polar Ice.
    Increase in severe Thunder storms.
    Decrease in severe Thunder storms.
    Crashing computer hard drives.
    Erectile dysfunction
    One lasting for more than 4 hours…
    Lerner’s E-mails mysteriously disappearing.
    Lerner’s E-mails mysteriously reappearing
    Electronic voting machines inexplicitly selecting Democrat when Republican is chosen.

    And if you don’t religiously and unequivocally believe this, then…
    You are considered _______________. (Insert any one of many derogatory names the oh, so tolerant Left has for anyone who dares to have a different opinion than them).

    Oh, and if you even slightly question the BHO then youre also a racist
    Intolerance will no longer be tolerated…

    World debt has now exceeded $600 trillion dollars as world governments prop up their failed economies fixing nothing as the US has been doing having the Fed buy securities to the tune of $85 Billon a month over the past 7 years. World governments need a new cash flow source to continue their lavish spending and “the people” are that source.

    Besides, even if one does believe in global warming, who in their right mind think that giving trillions of dollars to the likes of Al Gore and The Obama is really going to fix anything…

  34. DennisinOhio says:

    Triple A60 finally has it right. Excellent post. His comments are the very reason that most folks (with reasoning brains that is) do not put AGW anywhere on their top 20 lists of things to be concerned about. Even public school students can see with their own eyes that what they are being taught about “how things work” is in fact an agenda which they would believe at their own peril. It is instructive to watch the current political debates and notice the liberal answer to all problems is yet more taxes and regulations. To their credit, they tried mightily to make MGW a tool to extract countless trillions from the masses and control their every action, but alas, it has failed them. Thankfully, the vast majority of us were created with more than a wee bit of common sense, which is really all one needs to outwit progressive weasel schemes.

  35. Bill says:

    It’s global warming. Scientists have predicted that hurricanes would not happen with this change. It’s settled science. Don’t question it.

  36. Brian says:

    I guess Obama was wrong. He said we would have more hurricanes than ever before because of global warming.

  37. 2ndprotectsall says:

    Darn that pesky global normal!

  38. Jimmy NoChit says:

    This is Allah’s gift to The Chosen One, B. Hussein Obama. Praise be to Obama (and that MuHamHead fellow too).

  39. Dan says:

    I guess they forgot about Hurricane IKE in 2008.

    Damages: $37.50 billion USD (2008)
    Formed: Sep 01, 2008
    Dissipated: Sep 14, 2008
    Total fatalities: 195
    Highest winds: 142.92 mph (230 km/h)
    Affected areas: Texas Bahamas Turks and Caicos Islands Florida Keys Louisiana Haiti Cuba Mississippi Dominican Republic Great Lakes region Eastern Canada

    • Kyle Tingle says:

      Although Ike was a Cat 4 over open water, by the time it made landfall in Galveston it was a Cat 2 hurricane. As mentioned elsewhere in this thread, damage and fatalities have nothing to do with the meteorological category of a hurricane.

      As tracked by NOAA, they are taking into account windspeed at landfall, not max windspeed in open water. NOAA shows Ike as a Cat 4 landing as a Cat 2.

    • mpainter says:

      Dan, big hurricanes in the Caribbean almost always cause immense damage. You are dangling your bait for idiots, those who don’t realize that increasing population density means increasing vulnerability to storm damage, and population is multiplying on the islands and coasts of the Caribbean and the Gulf of Mexico.

      You will not find but a few idiots at Dr. Spencer’s blog. Best take your bait to sks, or HotWhopper, or Desmogblog. In those places, you might be able to raise a few screeches.

  40. Tom says:

    I know this is a lie because Al Gore told us we would be having frequent, and far more destructive, hurricanes all the time

  41. Mark says:

    Not at landfall. It want even a category 1

  42. Dan says:

    Hurricane Wilma Stats – IKE caused more damage and fatalities so it was classified as a major hurricane. And another fact that is wrong, are the dates in the article of Wilma. See below, It was formed 9 days after the article stated it was formed.

    Damages: $29.40 billion USD (2005)
    Formed: Oct 15, 2005
    Dissipated: Oct 26, 2005
    Highest winds: 183.30 mph (295 km/h)
    Total fatalities: 62
    Affected areas: Florida Cuba Yucatn Peninsula Bahamas Yucatn East Coast of the United States Atlantic Canada Haiti Cayman Islands Jamaica Honduras Belize Nicaragua Europe

    • Dan, you are the one who has your 2 facts wrong…if you are going to fact check, maybe you should actually read the post?

      1) “major hurricane” status is based upon a single meteorological criterion: maxiumum sustained wind speeds…not damage or fatalities, which would depend on where the storm hits.

      2) my post correctly said landfall for Wilma was on October 24, 2005..which is what my post is about (landfalling U.S. hurricanes). I said nothing of dates of formation.

  43. Eric O says:

    Dear “Dr” Spencer – What was Hurricane Sandy in 2012? A drizzle? Stop spreading misinformation.

  44. Davin says:


  45. bagger says:

    More undisputed settled science that Global warming doesnt even exist,,only in Liberals minds (what little they have) does it fester…..its a fantasy…Global cooling is our friend..nothing you libs have preached about the doom and gloom has come to be in the past 75 years,,,deal with it losers…and i wonder how many of you doofs have taken the Air condition unit out of your homes and businesses cause your Lead nutcase Kerry said it was going to kill you before ISIS does….lol…you people are truly sicknutjobs…must be awful wringing your hands everyday in panic worry about something so silly that doesnt even exist…choi ??

    • Paul Deckelman says:

      I don’t know when Kerry actually pontificated about the dangers to the health of the planet allegedly arising from the use of the chemical refrigerants found in the cooling tubes of air conditioners and refrigerators — but I do know that his statements ironically received wide news coverage the same week as the Democratic Party’s recent national convention.

      I believe the Democrats should have made a gesture of solidarity, standing behind their Secretary of State and former presidential nominee, and should have TURNED OFF the massive air conditioning units that were keeping all of the thousands of delegates, other party functionaries, news media people and others present at the giant Wells Fargo Center arena in Philadelphia where the convention was taking place nice and cool – besides the freon and other (to Kerry) harmful Earth-endangering gases being used, those air conditioners were surely consuming God only knows how much electric power (almost all of it generated either by burning fossil fuels such as coal oil or natural gas, making for a massive carbon footprint and increased “global warming,” or produced from nuclear power plants, another bete noir of the environmental Left).

      In fact, it would have been an eminently teachable moment – with all of the Dems and media types sitting there shvitzing and sweltering in the huge auditorium and FINALLY understanding first-hand the impact and the consequences of the kind of reduced-carbon society that so many people ideologically attached to that party so glibly preach as a lifestyle that OTHERS (besides themselves, of course) should follow, sacrificing material comfort in order to “save the planet.”

  46. Joe in JT says:

    How arrogant American thinking has become. It’s only a real hurricane when it hits the US coast. Explain to the people of the Philippines there’s no hurricanes or typhoons.

  47. Hawk says:

    Yet another government paid scientist pushing for carbon taxes by promoting the global warming myth! News flash. The SUN controls our weather! …but you’re too busy being an Al Gore sycophant to notice that little inconvenient factoid. Let’s ignore the fact that the polar ice cap EXPANDED!! That doesn’t fit into our little money making paradigm does it?

    The good news is, most sane people see though the global warming scam. We see though the lies and disinformation.

    Always follow the money!

  48. John weaver says:

    I have a very good explanation. 4000 days ago it was all over being reported that global warming will cause all kinds of string hurricane activity etc. God , who has always been in control of the weather and always will be.. Just showed man how foolish he is.

    • RussRamey6 says:

      Great post, how many heads are spinning wildly out of control?
      Personally, I am far more interested in actual rational discussion regarding solar activities driving our weather variation in cyclical patterns.
      Why is this such a challenge to the AGW crowd? Could it be more about power and collectivist redistribution than science?
      Political-economy in other words?

  49. Brian Osburn says:

    Hi Dr. Spencer,

    On my annual GOES East Satellite animation this year, I am counting up to 4,000 days since the last major hurricane to hit the USA. Here is the YouTube link for the May – July 2016 animation:


    On November 30th, I will be uploading the entire hurricane season animation.

  50. Frank magnani says:

    Sandy was never categorized as a hurricane it was a super storm

  51. Smoky says:

    Yeah, like Ike in 2008 wasn’t a problem. Sheesh!

  52. RocketmanUSN says:

    Obama said that global warming will produce more hurricanes and they would be stronger than anything we have ever seen in the past because of it…he lies!

  53. Iron Head says:

    El Nino, El Nina, Polar Vortex…..

    Keep making up names and other crap. The truth is the only thing they know about a hurricane is where it is.

    They have no clue where it is going and how strong it will be when it gets there.

    Annual predictions and extreme terminology works when they need more money in their budget.

  54. Joe Sansone says:

    The “real” reason we have not seen major landfall hurricanes is ….After surviving Wilma without storm shutters, I decided not to tempt fate any longer….so I had accordion shutters installed, at a great expense.While paying the installer, I said that now that I have some protection, ” we won’t have anymore hurricanes” …..and we had a , yeah, right laugh…….Well here we are coming up on 4000 days. You’re welcome!

  55. Sum Ting Wong says:

    Maybe AGW has caused extinction of the butterflies in South America upon whose wing-flapping hurricanes depended for their formation.

  56. Steven Keene says:

    Hurricane Ike hit my house In 2008. Looked pretty major to me.

  57. GlobalWrench says:

    Research the Department of Homeland Security’s Hurricane Aerosol Microphyics Program(HAMP)

  58. VanPastorMan says:

    Now the question is will Obama take credit for this?

  59. R. Stout says:

    My wife and I had a shore house in Little Egg Harbor, NJ where we enjoyed spending weekends. Eventually we turned it into a rental property, and began searching for another house for our own use. We closed on the second house the Friday before Sandy made landfall in Little Egg. The first house was totally destroyed, and the new one sustained over $35,000 in damages. Hundreds of houses in Little Egg were deemed uninhabitable and had to be demolished. I think that Sandy qualifies as a major storm based on the damage and destruction that I witnessed. I would like to know why this storm is not recognized as major.

    • mpainter says:

      R. Stout, don’t get indignant at meteorological definitions. That’s silly.

      Had Sandy come ashore as a Cat 3 hurricane, damages would have been worse. Much worse.

      “Hurricane roulette” is the game played by the unwary. Those of us who know better don’t gamble with our homes and businesses in such a fashion.

      • Mathius says:

        Everyone should do their homework assignment.

        Look up the “Long Island Express”

        Only major hurricane to hit New England. Back in 1938. Some estimates state that 2 billion trees were destroyed.

        I can’t imagine the hysteria if something half as bad happened today.

    • Michael says:

      A storm is not major just because you stupidly had a house in a dangerous area. I have been through many hurricanes here in eastern NC from 1954 on, and whatever house I was living in at the time was never damaged or flooded. Most of those hurricanes were stronger than Sandy.

      I know better than to have a home on the Outer Banks.

  60. Jake says:

    What about Hurricane Sandy?

    • What about the many times that question has already been answered here?

    • mpainter says:

      It is good to have the Jake types here, as an illustration of what AGW is all about:
      Minds ruled by panic.

      • Lewis says:

        What is it about hurricane Sandy? All these questions leave me in a panic.

        • Oso Chris says:

          It hit the heart of the East Coast liberal establishment’s base and a area that is not commonly hit with these types of storms. (Unlike FL, TX, LA, NC, etc.) A scrape goat is required because it obviously is not the fault of those who built, live, and purchased properties in vulnerable areas. FEMA makes Flood maps available, please use them.

  61. Sam G says:

    Retired from the military and due to being dented and dinged up a bit from my service, I required a warmer climate than my native New England could provide.

    Bought my house on the West Coast of Florida, installed 12mil hurricane/security film on every window. Reinforced the garage, improved the properties drainage and stocked up a 30 day supply of MRE’s and water.

    ….Then nothing. Not a hurricane for many many years. This is a good thing, having MRE’s expire is the best case scenario. What is interesting however is the bipolar opposite, California has had a decade of a brutal drought and Florida has had a decade of no real hurricanes.

    Kind of hard to not think they’re related in the grand scheme of things. In any event, I hope it rains for the folks out west and I hope for another ten years of no hurricanes. I still have to pay for Flood insurance though, which sucks.

    • My sister and her husband, after getting clobbered in the Keys in 2005, built a house well up Pamlico River in NC to keep their large sailboat protected. Guess what? No more strong hurricanes since 2005 in the Keys…but their NC house got clobbered.

      • kevink says:

        Reminds me of the woman that learned that 95% of all traffic accidents occur within 15 miles of the drivers house, so she moved 100 miles away…..

      • Lewis says:

        Looking at historical maps of hurricane tracks, it seems there is not a place east of the Mississippi River that is safe. The problem is the short term memories of men/mankind.

  62. Jeff says:

    I’d say hurricane Sandy was a major hurricane! The second most destructive in terms of $$ in us history! Even though it was ONLY a
    Cat 3! Over 200 dead.

    • Ugh. Sandy was Cat1 at landfall. Hurricane intensity is not measured by whether it hits a populated area or not. Destruction costs will continue to increase simply due to people flocking to the coasts and building more stuff.

      • bw says:

        No, the NHC official report was that Sandy was a post tropical cyclone at New Jersey landfall.
        I monitored wind speeds at the time. There were no sustained winds anywhere offshore over 55 knots. Land stations had lower sustained speeds. Photos of wind damage were consistent with sustained wind speeds at the tropical storm level.
        For example, here is the plot of sustained wind speeds at Robbins Reef buoy during the storm. Other offshore buoys recorded sustained winds of 55 knots maximum.

    • mpainter says:

      Sandy was downgraded to an extratropical storm status fifty miles offshore. So it did not make landfall as a hurricane, much less as a Cat 3 hurricane. Jeff.

      We seem to have attracted a lot of the Jeff types today.

  63. scott says:

    It’s Bush’s fault

  64. MCW says:

    YOU LIE! This story is totally false! algore told us we’d have more hurricanes and more intense hurricanes so I’m going with algore on this one, after all, he’s never lied to us.

  65. Rupert says:

    Hurricane Control Update:

    Global warming is something I cannot control. the hurricane barrier from Delaware to South of Florida was initiated over ten years ago and has functioned without maintenance or adjustment.

    The code is simple.
    Eventually global warming should over take it.

    Not this year.

    If tropical storm, pass gulf stream
    if hurricane, do not pass gulf stream, vector eastwards.

    Too simple, eh?

  66. David Smith says:

    Why does everyone waste all this time worried about something they can’t control anyway? Nothing but a bunch of eggheads with a need to be in control of everything because someone once told them they were smarter then anyone else. They spend their life in school learning from sophists who have never done anything but teach. Get a life, let nature be nature and work on improving yourself… that you have control over!!!

  67. Chuck says:

    Global warming! (squaawk!) Gloabl warming! Climate change! (squaawk!)

  68. drew says:

    somebody feeding beeno to gecko’s in Africa? which suppresses farts, which means butterflies aren’t frightened, which……………

  69. Big Bear says:

    Sandy hit myopic NYC, home of the federal ministry of propaganda. Naturally, anything in their back yard is amplified so molehills become mountains. These folks thrive on fear, and are doubtless vexed that their predictions of increased hurricanes due to globull warming have come to naught.

    • David Appell says:

      $60 B of damage.

      Fear? New Yorkers are the least fearful people on the planet.

      • Ryan Shaffer says:

        A cat 2 storm with a huge storm surge hits Houston and we just move on with life and take care of things mostly ourselves.

        A cat 1 storm with much less storm surge hits NYC and the world is coming to an end and the government must save everyone and everyone must acknowledge the pain of NYC.

        It’s just a difference in the backgrounds of the 2 areas. Houstonians try and take care of themselves and New Yorkers don’t.

  70. Whetherman says:

    Forget GW, CO2, solar cycles, volcanos, humans, etc. It’s all do to the Butterfly Effect, so someone needs to determine if the butterfly populations have decreased in Africa and S. America. lol

  71. Randy says:

    BTW – Hurricane Camille in 1969 was the most intense Hurricane to make US landfall since the 1935 Labor Day hurricane…had sustained winds of 175 MPH AT LANDFALL…Wilma hit the Yucatan at 155 MPH and then hit Florida at 120 MPH…not the strongest storm… The name Camille still causes pale faces when spoken about in my part of the world…Louisiana…”Supersatorm” Sandy wouldn’t even make the top 50 storms to hit FL or La…bunch of whiners up there

    • Wilma was the strongest Atlantic hurricane on record…Camille was the strongest hurricane at landfall in the U.S.

      • Randy says:

        Thank you for the clarification, Dr. Spencer..I appreciate that. I was just trying to explain my opinion that a storms strength at landfall is more impactful than it’s strength at sea.

  72. Tab Numlock says:

    Global warming produces milder storms as there is always more warming at the poles reducing the polar/tropical heat differential that powers storms. This is standard global warming theory that the warmists used to admit but now say the opposite for no apparent reason. America was colonized during the LIA when the Caribbean was plagued by hurricanes. The ice cores of glacial periods are full of desert sand, not just because the deserts expanded but because it was very windy.

    • David Appell says:

      “This is standard global warming theory that the warmists used to admit but now say the opposite for no apparent reason.”

      What you mean is, “I can’t be bothered to read and understand their papers.”

  73. jimc says:

    More on the politics of NYAG’s Scheiderman’s inquisition against skeptics.

  74. Rod MacDonald says:

    Perhaps hurricanes are necessary in keeping equilibrium . I seen somewhere that there is huge plankton blooms after a hurricane, plankton is a very large Co2 sink. Also mixes the Co2

  75. ren says:

    High clouds indicate the wind direction in the upper layers of the troposphere.
    You can see where on the equator is the highest surface temperature of the ocean.

  76. ren says:

    To understand the lack of hurricanes in the Atlantic full, you need to carefully look at the North Atlantic.

  77. C.J. says:

    This whole debate has so many rights and wrongs. I will only address the one issue that seems to be causing some confusion. There needs to be clarification made in the difference between Climate change, or control if you will, and Global Warming. The “Climate Change” or “Climate CONTROL” agenda is that of China and the World Banks. I suggest one researches the 2030 Agenda. The term “Climate Change” refers to social economic and enviromental climates and is not solely indicitive of Global Warming. Global Warming is strictly an enviromental issue. Having said that, may the debate continue.

  78. Martin says:

    Hurricanes form for a very specific reason and under certain conditions. Sea surface temperature is a fuel not an initiator. The timing of certain events is critical. Since 2005 the main factors that create high intensity hurricanes have been missing due to northern hemisphere temperature profiles leading up to and during hurricane seson. Some seasons have had higher intensity than others in he interval, but rest assured the large ones will come to visit again. CO2 has no influence on hurricane activity as some may suggest.

  79. David Appell says:


    As you should know, ACE is a very poor metric, since it does account for the size of storms.

    A hurricane expert at NOAA told me a couple of years ago that ACE is about the worst metric he can imagine.

    But even global ACE is increasing, at a trend of about +17/decade (2% per decade).

  80. David Appell says:

    Hurricanes are difficult to predict in a warming climate. But generally speaking a system that is warmer will have more nonlinear events.

    And hurricanes are way down the list of problems associated with global warming. Above them are sea level rise, heat waves, probably extreme weather, and maybe ocean acidification.