4,001 Days: The Major Hurricane Drought Continues

October 7th, 2016 by Roy W. Spencer, Ph. D.

Also, The Hurricane Center Doesn’t Overestimate…But It Does Over-warn

matthew-hype-cartoon

Today marks 4,001 days since the last major hurricane (Wilma in 2005) made landfall in the United States. A major hurricane (Category 3 to 5) has maximum sustained winds of at least 111 mph, and “landfall” means the center of the hurricane eye crosses the coastline.

This morning it looks like Matthew will probably not make landfall along the northeast coast of Florida. Even if it does, its intensity is forecast to fall below Cat 3 strength this evening. The National Hurricane Center reported at 7 a.m. EDT that Cape Canaveral in the western eyewall of Matthew experienced a wind gust of 107 mph.

(And pleeeze stop pestering me about The Storm Formerly Known as Hurricane Sandy, it was Category 1 at landfall. Ike was Cat 2.)

While coastal residents grow weary of “false alarms” when it comes to hurricane warnings, the National Weather Service has little choice when it comes to warning of severe weather events like tornadoes and hurricanes. Because of forecast uncertainty, the other option (under-warning) would inevitably lead to a catastrophic event that was not warned.

This would be unacceptable to the public. Most of us who live in “tornado alley” have experienced dozens if not hundreds of tornado warnings without ever seeing an actual tornado. I would wager that hurricane conditions are, on average, experienced a small fraction of the time that hurricane warnings are issued for any given location.

The “maximum sustained winds” problem

Another issue that is not new is the concern that the “maximum sustained winds” reported for hurricanes are overestimated. I doubt this is the case. But there is a very real problem that the area of maximum winds usually covers an extremely small portion of the hurricane. As a result, seldom does an actual anemometer (wind measuring device) on a tower measure anything close to what is reported as the maximum sustained winds. This is because there aren’t many anemometers with good exposure and the chances of the small patch of highest winds hitting an instrumented tower are pretty small.

It also raises the legitimate question of whether maximum sustained winds should be focused on so much when hurricane intensity is reported.

Media hype also exaggerates the problem. Even if the maximum sustained wind estimate was totally accurate, the area affected by it is typically quite small, yet most of the warned population is under the impression they, personally, are going to experience such extreme conditions.


How are maximum sustained winds estimated?

Research airplanes fly into western Atlantic hurricanes and measure winds at flight level in the regions most likely to have the highest winds, and then surface winds are estimated from average statistical relationships. Also, dropsonde probes are dropped into high wind regions and GPS tracking allows near-surface winds to be measured pretty accurately. Finally, a Stepped Frequency Microwave Radiometer (SFMR) on board the aircraft measures the roughness of the sea surface to estimate wind speed.

As the hurricane approaches the U.S. coastline, doppler radar also provides some ability to measure wind speeds from the speed of movement of precipitation blowing toward or away from the radar.

I don’t think we will solve the over-warning problem of severe weather events any time soon.

And it looks like the major hurricane drought for the U.S. is probably going to continue.


406 Responses to “4,001 Days: The Major Hurricane Drought Continues”

Toggle Trackbacks

  1. I P Standing says:

    The Hype of the century

    • Granville Gilstrap says:

      If you are a Floridian there is no such a thing as over hyping..Urging people to evacuate saves lives.
      In my humble opinion Govenor Scott and the local municipal leaders have done an excellent job.

      • Aristotle says:

        I live in Florida, and there is such a thing as over hyping.

        There’s a certain line between emphatic, responsible warnings– and hysteria engineered for increased media ratings and political exploitation.

        • drlmg says:

          Aristotle: Absolutely!! 100% correct IMO.

        • They always exaggerate and every year they promise “this year will have many significant hurricanes” and incredibly they are wrong almost every year. So how can anyone believe they know what the “climate” will be in 30 years? It blows my mind, they don’t know where Mathew will be in 45 minutes yet they know for sure what the wether will be by 2050…

        • CapitalistRoader says:

          Liar. You can’t live in Florida. The Governor told us that the storm will kill you. If you live in Florida you’d be dead by now.

        • Al says:

          This is the absolute truth!!!
          With the media it’s all about ratings.
          Example: The reporter “Live” on the east coast and showing the “extreme damage caused by the storm” and showing a boat that had sunk. Except that the boat was old, tacky and a piece of crap. Were any other boats at that marina, or any other in the area, sunk by the hurricane?? Probably not or we would have seen them “Live”. What a load of bullshit. Over-hype to the max. The media just LOVES it every time there is a hint of a storm, and are incredibly disappointed when it doesn’t turn into a Cat 5 storm. Then they like to ramble on about woulda, coulda, shoulda and how wonderful they are for keeping us informed. Narcissists

      • Noodles says:

        Here’s the problem– there are certain groups of people who need to evacuate. ANYONE who lives in an area that could have storm surge should evacuate. People with certain health issues, as well.

        If you live inland, evacuation is not needed. The threat of not having power is not enough to clog up highways for 8 or 10 hours. It causes unnecessary problems for those who DO need to evacuate.

        Look at Houston with both Hurricanes Ike and Rita. Plenty of people inland evacuated due to media hype and caused ridiculous amounts of traffic congestion. The people who DID need to get out (Galveston all the way over to Lake Charles) were then stuck in traffic for 10+ hours only to find all the hotels were taken up by people who did not need to leave. Yes, I had loved ones who lived on the coast and had their houses wiped off the map.

        If you’re in an area and are worried about loss of electricity and you’re not worried about storm surge, STAY PUT through the storm and leave afterwards. Not being able to charge an iPhone isn’t more important than people who need to get out for their safety.

        All the models were showing the eye would stay off the coast. The most dangerous part of the storm is to the right of the eye–WHICH IS IN THE ATLANTIC.

        They keep this hype up and they will be the weatherpeople who cried wolf.

        • Your comment is certainly well thought out and makes perfect sense from the standpoint of what should be a common sense approach to solving the problem of over hyping hurricane warnings. The aged and infirmed should heed all warnings and as you say, it’s the surge that presents the problem although heavy rains contribute to it.

        • Joe says:

          Hear, hear!! Noodles, you give me renewed hope in the intelligence of humankind.

        • Frog says:

          Good post and accurate. But don’t disregard the reason behind the over hype ;
          -To make more $ and higher ratings for the networks ( MSM)
          – To use this normal event as a practice session for martial law and mass control of people when the Globalists execute their end game. This will happen soon when they steal the election form Trump.

          • Gail says:

            And don’t forget the debate this weekend that will deal with, Surprise!, Global Warming, Climate Change, whatever they are calling it this week.

      • Roger MacDuff says:

        I am from Florida and WE despise over hyping. It creates more problems than it solves and more destruction to our lives than the actual event.

      • stonedome says:

        gov scott has done an excellent job, because he is a realist and not an alarmist.
        however, the media would have you think that all of florida is going to be leveled every time there is a hurricane making landfall. i live 40 miles north of where charley hit in 2004…we had more damage from straight-line from previous thunderstorms winds than that storm. my northern friends thought we might be dead because all of the hype, and it only gets worse. get your facts from webpages and listen to the STATE announcements. oh, and this guy.

      • Kuro Cauley says:

        It is bad to trust people who profess their honesty. We don’t know you and already I don’t trust you. Oh, also, Climate changes; always has and always will. It is part of nature. Nothing stays the same, except the lies of the left that are used to take your money and dictate what you are allowed to think and even say! Don’t be a climate change denier! Heaven forbid you think for yourself!

      • Bob Nicks says:

        False alarms are a bad precedent to set. People won’t trust future alarms, and it may cost them. I would not call being wrong an “excellent job” — they cant just issue blanket evacuations for every storm. That isn’t effective.

      • Donald says:

        I believe you are wrong (about there being no
        such thing as over hyping) for one very simple reason: if the false alarms become too numerous, people will inevitably start to ignore the warnings and they will lose their effectiveness. As an analogy, there is a warning label on every bottle of wine sold in California. Who reads those things? Answer: no one. You can hardly buy a consumer article in Calif. that doesn’t have a warning label of one sort or another. No one cares about them.

        That’s human nature. Not going to change that.

      • Ryder says:

        except when urging people to evacuate takes lives.

        This is the entire reason that children are told the “boy who cried wolf” story. Yes, that’s right… Even children are expected to know the consequences of over hyping. It surprises me that any adults somehow missed the lesson of that story.

      • Jason says:

        It is the sensationalist media that poisons the message.

        Every 5 minutes:
        “New Alert, News You can Use.
        The Sky if Falling Dogs are Burning, the Wind is Going to Kill your Kids….

        No Watter in a 500 mile radius, Prepare, Prepare…. and then.. a big Nothing !”

        Peter and the Wolf !

      • Rick says:

        There most assuredly is ‘over hyping’ in Florida. I live here and have seen it dozens of times. And it gets worse every year. I live on the west coast and the public school system closed Friday – how ridiculous is that? We had 15 mph winds, maybe some 20 mph gusts, and virtually no rain but because of all the hype the school system ended up making a very foolish decision. My Inlaws live in Daytona Beach, which was far closer to the storm, and they didn’t get much more than we did. Only one death in the US – lady went out to feed her dogs and a tree fell on her. So yeah, totally blown out of proportion.

      • MOJOJOJO says:

        Drudge was long overdue to put his foot in his mouth. Seriously even if NOAA exagerated the storm even a cat 3 hurricane will kill you. When a storm is coming in like that you have to get out of the stom zone.

      • Tom says:

        in my opinion, they cried WOLF again and then again and again. I have not left any of the times they have said and i am on the coast I get called crazy but I have my thousand dollars in my pocket. I have my generator but again no more than a thunderstorm.
        it is part of the government’s plan to keep you scared and off the more important issues which they know full well what the winds and rains are going to be they sure cant tell you with any accuracy as shown again that they know what the weather is doing.
        if we lived in grass huts and on the coast with no barrier like Haiti maybe their predications would be taken more seriously by the true understanders of weather and Florida. We don’t live in new Orleans with a dirt damn in a city 10 ft below sea level I live 10′ ft above the ocean high tide. So for all you fools hope you had a great week off and made a bunch of money for I continued as usual and i am still here.

    • roadhammer says:

      I went through Andrew. You’d be a fool to underestimate these storms. Predicting the path is still not an exact science. If you wait until you are sure the worst is going to hit you it will be too late. Fail to heed the warnings and experience the Darwin effect.

      • Sir Gareth says:

        Predicting the frequency and intensity of hurricanes or how they behave when they do arrive is impossible.

        However we know within a 1/100 of a degree what the temperature of the entire Earth was 150 years ago and what it will be 100 years from now

        Yes Virginia, there is a Santa Claus.

        • denis says:

          That’s why Chile. I used to live in Chile, earthcuake center of the world, in it is beautiful live and have fun with no earthcuake warning. I had 3 or 4 majors tremors, the biggest 8.6 and no big deal….then I moved to the states and start learning this thing of…watch out in 5 more days a hurricane is coming…..cat 3, no cat 4, no cat 5, landfall in Houston, no Landfall in Louisiana, sorry, it changed, Landfall in Galveston…..I stayed in Houston for Rita and all of them and no issues….after all, what’s worst than a earthcuake? I believe nothing….but as we lived from day one with the tremors….we are ready for anything I believe.
          We have 3 hits in the top 6…1, 3 and 6….from 9.5 to 8.9

        • Tom says:

          Yes you are right again here comes all the Global warming nuts trying to say how the earth is going to get destroyed by all these hugh storms . I am not really taking any of these nut jobs ide of what is happening, but i will tell you this if we dont get someone in the Whitehouse they dont wear panties we will have a nuclear war up or butts in the next year no more than two and the weather really wont matter because it will be all nuclear at that time and all the global warmers will be dead. They will be partly right they did die from global warming but the cause was from a nuclear bomb not a coal burning plant or an oil well. Bunch of idiots.

      • Roger MacDuff says:

        Whoa. It’s not an exact science? But man made global climate change is? I went through Andrew, Wilma (the last major storm to hit Florida) and am still standing. Didn’t evacuate over Matthew and NOTHING happened. The Darwin effect was on those who got gouged at the gas pump, Home Depot, Wal Mart and stuck in traffic. It takes a special kind of stupid in this day and age to believe the hype thrown out over and over when it comes to weather.

        • OldMule says:

          Mr. MacDuff, I believe Sir Gareth was employing sarcasm.

        • Frog says:

          They are called dumbed-down MSM and Globalist’e minions. ( or Sheeple)

        • Nate says:

          Really!

          If the track of Matthew had been 50 miles to the west, there would have been way Way more than nothing.

          If you knew that was going to be the path 48 h ago, I’d be very impressed-you’d be better than any weather model!

          So, you stayed, and NOTHING happened to you. You got lucky.

          • ECM says:

            He didn’t get “lucky”–he played the odds based on past performance of media over-hyped storms, which is entirely the point of this post.

            As others have noted, 9 times out of 10, staying put is the right thing to do, as the people that really do need to leave–the old, the infirm, etc.–are hamstrung by those that don’t have to leave but leave because of the hype, thus choking roads and making exit impossible.

          • Nate says:

            He should pay attention to his local govt warnings rather than ‘the media’.

            And what should the local govt do? Use the information gathered by NOAA and its hurricane trackers, and warn people who are likely in the path.

            What else would you have them do? Based on past destructiveness of hurricanes, and deaths of people in their paths (Galveston 5000 deaths), they have no choice.

            If the path had been as predicted, a bit to the west, and the govt had not ordered evacuation, and numerous deaths followed, you would have wanted their heads on platters!

        • Tom says:

          I roger that Roger no need to evacuate everytime they cry wolf which is about 3 times a year that everyone takes off for a week to go thru 30 mph winds and two to six inches of rain. it is hilarious to hear the nut jobs talking global warming and they think that is what is going to destroy America. everything a joke they really need to open their eyes and ears it is not a storm going to kill you it is your government in the long run. hate to break the news but we are all getting set up mentally for a big event. They control us by the fear they put into us. You cant tell someone that as no idea what is happening for they believe too much in themselves and this government and the good ole US government. in the end that will be who actually burns us all. Greed will destroy or great country. Not from the Trumps and others but by Wall Street and the government appetite for the ONE WORLD GOVERNMENT. again they got your mind off the election gave them time to screw with your heads again and change the narrative. In a swing state like Florida isn’t that odd that they don’t want your mind on the election. A bunch of fools we have that want to be called Americans they might be but they are a bunch of dumb Americans.

      • Bob Nicks says:

        Yeah, the Darwin Effect: when you try to prove something and end up proving yourself wrong. We are all apes, because — well, just because…

    • Zach says:

      I live in Bermuda. We have had 4 storms in the last 3 years. 2 in one week two years ago (Fay and Gonzalo.) I have lived through at least 15 storms and hurricanes with Gloria in 1985 in Long Island. Emily in Bermuda 1987 and Fabian 2003 being the 3 worst storms with Fay being close to those three. The problem with Hurricanes and Tropical storms is how many tornadoes come with it. You don’t know if your are getting and Andrew or a Matthew until you are in it. So there really isn’t an over hype. I would agree that the media capitalizes on it but if a storm like Matthew turned out to be an Andrew then no one would be claiming over hype. Max sustained winds have an impact but the speed the weather system is moving seems to influence the number of tornadoes. Emily in 1987 was traveling at an unprecedented 45KNOTS. The max wind speed was 70 knots – a minimal hurricane. It destroyed everything. Windows. Doors. Heavy metal garage warehouse doors flapping in the wind like flags. 90% of the residents roofs missing. The storm lasted 1 hour. Fabain was a category 3 travelling at 8knots. It lasted 12 hours. The long sustained assault by the winds were crippling. The same result as Emily. Heavy damage everywhere. Fay was a minimal hurricane where there was heavy damage. We have had lots of storms in between these that don’t produce the same damage. Even though the wind speeds and profiles are very similar. You just can not predict what a storm is going to be like. So it is better to be prepared than dead.

      • ron says:

        “I would agree that the media capitalizes on it but”

        Obama-speak =

        “Look we are corrupt but…”

        “We’ve made a lot of progress but there is much left to do”

        “We will continue to succeed”

        “Look I know I’m a globalist but..”

        So…No no no …its not ok and quickly dismissed. Don’t be hoodwinked by language tactics.

      • Scott says:

        Zach,
        You’re on the money, well written.

        Side note: I look around and find people are not smart. A freakin’ bunch of people around are just not bright.
        You have to get their attention. A supposed “over hype” might have to occur just to get them to look up off their cell phones to notice. Just look around you when you’re in traffic. Doubt me?

        • Zach says:

          I know – same thing here. People ride mopeds looking at cell phones. I lay on the horn just to jar them back to reality. That is my biggest fear in the US. Getting hit by a car driven by someone texting.

          • RAH says:

            As a big truck driver that looks down into 4-wheelers I can tell you that there is a large proportion of drivers with cell phones in hand as they drive. From my high perch driving ahead by looking as far down the road as I possibly can as safety requires, I can often identify those distracted from their driving a good ways before I catch up to them. Speed control is the give away more than weaving generally.

            I wish every state made hand held devices illegal and rigorously enforced the law. Sadly I see State police breaking that law. We commercial drivers are required by law to use hand free devices no matter where we drive. The penalty if caught with cell phone in hand for me is a $3,800 fine plus a fine up to $13,000 for the company I drive for. Obviously such a ticket means automatic termination of employment.

            These days it is estimated that 1 in 4 accidents result from distracted driving due to the use of digital devices.

            The scariest thing is there are big truck drivers doing the same damned thing! And plenty of others, despite the potential fines, and the fact that The hand free law for commercial drivers has been in effect since January 2012, are STILL using hand held phones to talk on. A good head set costs less than $100.00.

    • Edith says:

      Ignorant moron. Lost my Miami house in Andrew. Sitting here in Flagler County today watching the winds destroy my neighborhood.

      It is not an exact science and my family and I have survived because of the warning.
      You are probably sitting somewhere other than Florida, nice and dry.

      • Frog says:

        You would think if you llve in the middle of hurricane land that happen every single year you would get your home hurricane proofed by now.
        Who’s the “ignorant moron” ?

        • John says:

          You can’t ‘hurricane’ proof a home. You can reinforce one but no home can stand up to a Cat 5 storm. Most of us do have homes that are reinforced and we do prepare. Preparations are based on accurate predictions…not hype. The ignorant moron is anyone who thinks that you can build a “hurricane proof” home.

    • T says:

      Let’s say 100 hurricanes were a bowl of Skittles. If I told you that 3 of them were category 5, would you take a handful?

      Caution is prudence, especially when it comes to human life. When we assume room temperature, we’re not warming back up again.

      • Zach says:

        The problem is – a storm does not have to be a Cat 5 to be catastrophic. As said in my post above. Sometimes a Cat 1 can be just as bad as a cat 5. And sometimes a cat 5 can be not so bad. You just don’t know until the storm is on you. That’s why you prepare for the worst and hope for the best.

    • Bodhisattva says:

      OK so is Matthew considered to be a “HIT” or a “GRAZE” and does it matter? Is what happened so far (some predictions have Matthew doing a pirouette and taking aim at Florida in the near future.

      So what are your thoughts? Did this count as ending the “major hurricane drought” or will that have to wait for a direct hit/landfall event?

      • Bodhisattva says:

        Got distracted, meant that to say:

        Is what happened so far (some predictions have Matthew doing a pirouette and taking aim at Florida in the near future) justification for claiming the hurricane drought is ended?

    • Bodhisattva says:

      … is no doubt coming.

  2. Rick73662 says:

    I chose to pray it away. It is an illusion.

    • Quigley56 says:

      Everything is an illusion, eh?

    • joejoe says:

      Don’t you people get it,all hurricanes are because of climate change.Just forget about all those hurricanes that happened before the industrial revolution.

      • Mojojojo says:

        There were no hurricanes before the Industrial Revolution, those were just storms with sustained high wind speeds, idiot.

        • Michael says:

          “1. Hurricanes are named for the Mayan god “Huracan.”

          Our English word “hurricane” comes from the Taino (the indigenous people of the Caribbean and Florida) word “huricn”, who was the Carib Indian god of evil. Their huricn was derived from the Mayan god of wind, storm and fire, “huracn.””

        • Rick says:

          He’s not an idiot you moran.

        • Bodhisattva says:

          Hey, we didn’t fly planes through them so we can’t really say that they were storms with high winds, except at ground level, and it was so darn cloudy, with no satellites, that we can’t really say they had ANY of the features of hurricanes. Or at least not for sure.

      • sjmwilco says:

        don’t be quite so glib. I actually had an AGW proponent try to tell me, in all seriousness, that prior to the industrial revolution, the climate of the earth had always been constant and stable. these people are bat chit crazy

        • Bodhisattva says:

          Not crazy, just gullible.

          Remember, that’s what Al Gore and “climate scientists” command them to believe and regurgitate so often it rises to the level of projectile vomiting it.

      • Bobbi Irish says:

        “Hurricanes” did not even exist before the industrial revolution! They never happened.

        • Steve says:

          In ‘artfort, ‘ereford, and ‘ampshire, ‘urricanes ‘ardley Heaver ‘appen.

          • Bodhisattva says:

            I looked and there is not a single record I could find of a Hurricane hitting the Sahara and several other places, including Most of Russia, Alaska, Canada, Greenland, Iceland, Much of Europe (if not all, actually it’s all, I believe or any of the various Mediterranean and Middle Eastern countries, to name a few places.

            And ask most people in San Diego and L.A. and they’ll tell you no hurricanes have ever hit there – even though there are some records that may not be entirely true, at least with respect to San Diego.

    • Nathan Ja says:

      I’ve been praying too….even though I am in Arizona, and I don’t even know anybody in the state of Florida. Wish I had been mindful of praying more for Haiti though. Just glad that this thing seems to be headed out to sea.

    • aLgOrithm says:

      I tried that with Obama and the HilldeBeast, unfortunately they are still around.

  3. Juanita Broaddrick's Upper Lip says:

    We’re all gonna die!!!!

    Oh, the huge manatee!!!!

    (The wind is so strong it’s blowing UNDER the water!!!)

  4. John Smith says:

    This sounds like the guy that lives to say I told you so

    • Bodhisattva says:

      Not 100% sure where you’re going with that… but it is likely approaching 100% (as indicated by the illustration) that this WILL be used to falsely hype “global warming” and how urgent it is we “STOP CLIMATE CHANGE”.

      I pity the fool that believes we can.

  5. TomBR says:

    Well no. That title belongs to Global Warming….I mean climate change, er…whatever.

  6. Jasper Jones, MD says:

    Don’t believe anything a govt agency tells you. This was falsley exaggerated to take the focus off of Hillary.

    • Fred Johnson says:

      Funny thing is… Hillary already came out and said “See!!! This storm is due to Global Warming and Donald Trump is unfit to be President because he doesn’t believe that!”

      Insane. And people believe her.

    • Bodhisattva says:

      I think it was exaggerated to overcome the complacency we tend to develop during those periods of time that God, or GAIA, or Nature decides to thumb a nose at those who are always preaching gloom and doom as they gnash their teeth and rend their garments. Then the inevitable happens – a perfectly normal storm strolls by – and suddenly THEY are all “WE TOLD YOU SO”, despite what, 11 years (4,000 days) of no hurricanes hitting the U.S.?

      That’s enough to warrant a bit of “over-representation of factual presentations” to motivate people, perhaps.

      Or not.

      That is a matter of opinion and I respect yours, whichever way you go on this issue.

  7. Ray McElveen says:

    Exaggerated hurricane reporting got people killed in Katrina.

    In Mississippi we were told the hurricane before Katrina was awful. Businesses shut down and lost sales. Employees lost wages, kids missed school and people disrupted their lives based on what the weatherman told them. Then the storm hit. Almost all of the precautions were unnecessary.

    When we were told about Katrina many didn’t listen. The boy had cried wolf once too often.

    Ray

    • Fred Johnson says:

      In the USA today, with the options that are available, I feel zero pity or sorrow for people that live in notorious disaster zones.

      They get to live in paradise 99% of the time… but then a hurricane/flood/tornado hits and wipes them out… AND THE REST OF US LIVING IN SAFE AREAS LIKE SANE PEOPLE HAVE TO PAY FOR THEM TO REBUILD THERE!!!!

      Yeah.. they don’t move.. they REBUILD in an area where it is likely to happen AGAIN. F people that do that.. the 1st time you got an insurance check you should have used it to relocate in a stable area that doesn’t have disasters frequently… like 95% of the country. And the government should NEVER give funds to the same area twice…unless it is a loan.

      • Fred Williams says:

        All regions of the United States are susceptible to some kind of environmental, economic, or geological calamity of some sort or another. Whether it’s hurricanes, snowbirds and people from Ohio in the southeast, floods, tornadoes in the midwest, blizzards, avalanches, drought, fire and earthquakes in the rockies in the west. Blizzards, floods, tornadoes, economic bailouts and opiate drug problems in the rust belt. Blizzards, floods, terrorism, and “superstorms” in the Northeast. No region is a special snowflake, and exempt from calamity, and we all help each other out, as a nation, as a society, as a UNITED States.

        • Bruce says:

          YOU need to get out more, SnowFLAKE. There are plenty of areas NOT plagued by disasters, REPEATEDLY.

          • Fred Williams says:

            Lol, yup, it’s only been over a decade since the southeast was waylaid by a hurricane. Whereas the west coast burns every year, Midwest is slammed by tornadoes every year, floods every few years, and the rust belt and northeast continue to suck at life and generally be disasters ๐Ÿ˜‰ thanks for playing! I’ll take my chances living in the south. A lot nicer than many of the other places I’ve lived and I’ll tell you something, I’ve been everywhere.. man..

          • Bodhisattva says:

            Please provide some examples of these mythical “plenty of areas NOT plagued by disasters, REPEATEDLY.”

            However, I will grant that, for example, people who live in areas that ALWAYS flood (Red River in N. Dakota comes to mind, also other river bottoms where rivers have been too tightly constrained and people have moved into historic flood plains) is a good example of places people should MOVE AWAY FROM, if not before disaster strikes, at least AFTER! Plus your point has some validity regarding some coastal areas.

            However, though I don’t approve of the tone of it, some of the criticism directed towards your remarks is valid, from my personal experience and also from simply reviewing available statistics.

            So yeah, provide us any list of locations you can where no recurring disasters ever happen.

      • Mattchutjian says:

        There are millions that live on or in the coastal areas. Paying thousands upon thousands for flood$900 annual and 4000+ wind and hail and ins,$600mo. 99% of the time, for the last 20+ years comes to…….$102k in premiums. We pay to live, work, raise families here. I hear caves are safe too, but not my cup of tea. I’ll pay the premiums….

        • Fred Williams says:

          I think 39% of the US population lives on the shorelines or “Shoreline counties” 80% live within 65 miles of the coast.

      • HeftyJo says:

        That’s why I think there should be a surtax on people that choose to live within say, 2.5 miles of the coast. After all it’s about paying your fair share right? I find it an especially appropriate justification considering that statistics show more people who vote Democrat live along the coast.

        • david says:

          they do pay their fair share. Look at the price of homeowners insurance in coastal areas prone to hurricanes.

          • marque2 says:

            Homeowner’s insurance is expensive due to property costs, and has nothing to do with floods. To have high insurance expense for flooding, you need to buy flood insurance, which is not part of the standard homeowner’s insurance. Flood insurance is heavily subsidized by the federal government to a tune of 2/3rds and most folks don’t bother with that, because they know FEMA will step in and give them money as well.

            No – they aren’t paying a fair shake.

      • jack says:

        If you think this is paradise, then you’re haven’t spent any time here during the summers.

      • Noodles says:

        This is ridiculous. Most of the US has some sort of disaster waiting to happen– earthquakes, hurricanes, blizzards, tornadoes, floods… The only place that really doesn’t is the Desert SW, but they have that whole NO WATER thing going on. And 117 degrees in June. If there’s ever a cyber-attack on the US that takes down the grid, the SW will definitely suffer then…so even they’re not “safe.”

        You can’t plan for a tornado, so that’s just ridiculous. I’d like to know where you feel all the safe “options” are.

        • Mike in AL says:

          I’ve lived in either tornado, hurricane or earthquake country all my life. When I was young and much stupider I lived within sight of water in Florida and rode out several hurricanes with no damage or injury. I learned from others to figure out where flooding occurs and have since always lived where my home would be one of the last flooded, i.e I look for higher ground away from water to live. For several years I lived in California and every year there were fires, more than once within sight of my house, and also went through earthquakes, but again with no harm. I learned to avoid areas where wildfires are a frequent occurrence and to avoid areas where earthquakes happen often (this required leaving Cali ;>). Now I live in tornado country, but, funny thing is there are places that seem to get hit multiple times by tornados and others that don’t so I picked one that didn’t. One neighborhood in the area has had major damage at least three times in the last 20 years, so it was never even considered when we were looking for a house. Bottom line is don’t buy a house on a barrier island in Florida, if you do, the rest of us shouldn’t have to pay for you to rebuild after is is swept away.

          • Bodhisattva says:

            I’ve lived in cities that had extensive potential flood zones. Before buying a house there I did the research – only considered locations that were completely out of any area marked as a potential flood zone even if it was marked as 1000 years, or more, between floods. Now if someone is commanded to build an ARK, all bets are off, but I was told the rainbow is a promise that won’t happen again, or something like that. SO beware the disappearance of rainbows?

        • ECM says:

          New England? What’s the worst we deal with? Occasional, weak, flooding? Bad snowstorms? I’m not being flip, you tell me what rises to the level of hurricanes, hellish flooding, wildfires, earthquakes, etc., in the northeast and New England? The worst thing I’ve experienced of 20-years of on-off living in this area (with ten on the West coast) have been multi-day power outages due to bad snowstorms, but the loss of life and property destruction pales, by orders of magnitude, just one, bad, hurricane or earthquake.

          (I’m not arguing people should up and move, but it is simply not true that there aren’t places in the USA vastly safer than those ‘regularly’ ravaged by ‘hand of God’ events.)

          • Noodles says:

            Ahh, I’d actually love to live in New England. But, still, there are Nor’easters and the floods, etc. that can follow.

            There are relatively few places that are completely and perfectly safe from Mother Nature. I think a lot of people just don’t realize that for many people, they have to go where the jobs are…just upping and leaving isn’t possible or realistic.

            I personally wouldn’t choose to live where we live (AZ) but that’s where the job is for us.

      • Bodhisattva says:

        Not so fast… while I agree that people often CHOOSE areas that are prone to disaster, I’ve lived in enough places here in the U.S. (and indeed outside it as well) to know that no place is entirely disaster-free. California has earthquakes, firestorms and mudslides, to name a few, plus this silly typical drought that is currently being over-hyped and is as much caused by government foolishness as any actual anthropogenic cause. There is a real threat of not just earthquake, but also tsunamis up on our northwest coast. Fire danger throughout the west. Flash flooding in many areas. Drought and deluge common across many states. Tornadic storms are quite common east of the Rockies and indeed we get some baby ones on the west coast occasionally, or at least minor waterspouts and pretty severe straight-line winds, which happen all over. Blizzards, ice storms… is there ANYWHERE that does not have SOME SORT of potential calamity?

        How about it- can you cite me ANYPLACE that has PERFECT weather and NO risks for ANYTHING BAD?

    • yes, this is a good point, Ray. Overwarning can lead to deaths just like underwarning can.

      • Chopper says:

        Well, Fred, as one who lives in Paradise, just let me set you straight. The insurance I pay for, not you, will not allow me to rebuild in another location. The government has not given me money to rebuild, that is ludicrous. Also uninformed. Twit.

        • Fred Williams says:

          Hear hear! Also, specify the Fred please!

        • Big storms increase insurance costs for everyone. Now, if people living in hurricane-prone areas are charged sufficiently high premiums so that coastal residents as a whole end up paying for hurricane damages, than I’m ok with that. Maybe that’s what you meant.

          • marque2 says:

            Unfortunately flood insurance is subsidized heavily by the government in flood zones. We all end up paying for it, with the homeowner merely thinking they are contributing their fair share.

            Recently the government instituted policies where the government will not help rebuild in a flood zone, but there are so many loopholes this rarely happens.

      • An Inquirer says:

        I do not remember the name right now, but there was a hurricane after Katrina where evacuations were ordered. The evacuation caused more deaths than the hurricane itself.

        • Fred Williams says:

          You may be thinking of Hurricane Rita, that hit west louisiana, Beaumont and Houston.

        • Rhee says:

          That was Hurricane Rita which caused the 30 hour traffic jam between Houston and Dallas when the Houston mayor initiated a full scale evacuation of the nation’s 4th largest metro area. He tried an orderly approach, telling people in the southernmost coastal areas to leave first and rolling north through the counties; immediately after the evac declaration, everyone jumped into their vehicles and loaded I-35 on both sides of the freeway, soon people were running out of gasoline and water as they sat for many hours running A/C in the intense heat and humidity.

          • Dave Henry says:

            I live just west of Houston and the evac for Rita was a disaster all it’s own Miles and miles of traffic stopped for days on I 10, out of gas, food and water. The rolling evac orders starting down the coast and moving north created a nightmare. I don’t know the answer but I think “prepare”, then evac when one day forecast shows landfall.

          • Noodles says:

            I lived in Houston during Rita. My parents lived in Beaumont. They evacuated– which was right. The Beaumont area had major damage and they couldn’t return for weeks.

            The majority of Houston did not need to evacuate. The Woodlands – 80 miles inland. Katy to coast (roughly) 80 miles. Pearland, 42, Sugarland 60 (via roads).

            With Rita…we had rain and that was it. Ike, we had power outage for about a week, but it was doable.

            Evacuations should be saved for COASTAL communities.

      • Scott says:

        Underwarning led to the worst natural, and unnatural disasters in our nation’s history. Galveston in 1900, and Obama in 2008.

    • Matt says:

      Well if you are unable to respond appropriately you should not live in an area subject to hurricanes. Under-warning would be a much bigger problem.

      • Bodhisattva says:

        I think the problem is knowing how to respond appropriately, and that includes remaining aware of the situation as it develops.

        Having a plan and knowing in advance what may go wrong with the plan, developing contingency plans to deal with that.

        But your main point – if you can’t handle it, don’t live there, is 100% valid and I cannot fault that in any way.

    • LT says:

      The Katrina Effect is exactly what is going on here. Katrina was the first hurricane to get politicized by a liberal media out on a witch hunt to blame a natural disaster on GW Bush.

      Weather forecasting has not and will never be an exact science. Katrina residents were warned to leave. New Orleans residents know they live in a city under sea level. The city was ordered by their Mayor to evacuate. The NHOA warned NO would likely be uninhabitable for weeks.

      The media backlash blaiming Bush was ridiculous. The guy didn’t land his plane there because the situation was dire and he didn’t want to divert already stressed local resources on security protocol for visiting presidents..

      It’s an election year and no politician is going to put their election in the hands of the media and the left who will skewer them if Matthew had made landfall as a Cat 4.

      Better to scream possible disaster from the rooftops. It sseems america has become so government dependent that it can’t think better safe than sorry for itself.

  8. GaryGary says:

    Another over hyped event that panicked millions ! Sooner or later citizens will become lull to these warnings then what ??

  9. Dude says:

    Lol. Drudge posted this link. He gleefully posted the link of him being a trash website and conspiracy theorist.

    The hyperbole and hysteria from the NOAA and talking heads regarding hurricanes since Katrina is a source of amusement to him and his readers

    • Pepper says:

      You have to admit, it is pretty funny. Not nearly as funny as causing the poor to fight for basic essentials because someone told them their children are going to be killed by a storm that will never reach them.

    • Bodhisattva says:

      Not sure what you are getting at. Drudge may be posting this to admit that he may have gone too far with his comments.

      You do seem to agree with him that NOAA went too far, and perhaps they did. It seems opinion on that is divided – and indeed I can see arguments both ways – and each of those arguments has some merit.

      I think Drudge does a good thing when he admits there are those who criticize, and even despise, him.

      Who else does that?

  10. John S Mosby says:

    Hillary Clinton has committed perjury while under oath to Congress. This is a felony; the same felony her husband was impeached for committing. If not for Obama and the MSM’s illegal protection, she’d be behind bars at this very moment.

    Try as she might, Hillary will never distance herself from Obama’s horrific middle class killing policies; the difference between the two is negligible. Hillary IS Barrack Hussein Obama. She is a narcissistic sociopath who lacks any ability to demonstrate actual compassion for another human being. She has no friends, just victims and potential victims. She epitomizes a totalitarian existentialist.

    Trump/Pence 2016!

    • Brrrrrrp says:

      What the hell does your post have to do with hurricanes?

      • John S Mosby says:

        “Last night a friend claimed that Donald Trump wouldnt make a good
        president; he is brash, he is racist, he is a loudmouth; you know the
        normal things people learn to recite after being programmed by
        television news. The one I loved was that,
        Trump is arrogant. My friend questioned if one man could make that
        much difference in the world today. To my friend’s credit, she was
        respectful enough to let me respond when she asked, Really, what has
        Trump done?

        I said, In June of last year, Trump
        entered the race for president. In just a little over a year, Trump has
        single handedly defeated the Republican party. He did so thoroughly. In
        fact, he did so in such a resounding way that the Republican Party now
        suffers from an identity crisis. He literally dismantled the party.
        Trump even dismantled and dismissed the brand and value of the Bush
        family.

        Trump has Obama petrified that Trump will dismiss programs that werent properly installed using proper law.

        Trump has single handedly debunked and disemboweled any value of news media
        as we knew itnews now suffering from an all-time level of distrust and
        disrespect.

        Trump has leaders from all over the
        world talking about him, whether good or bad. Trust me, powerful men who
        have been president before werent liked by the global community. I
        doubt Mikhail Gorbachev liked Reagan when Reagan said, “Tear down that
        wall.”

        Trump has expressly disclosed the fraud
        perpetrated on the American public by Hillary Clinton. He has, quite
        literally, brought Hillary to her kneesif you believe that nervous
        tension and disorders offer physical side effects and damage.

        Trump has unified the silent majority in a way that should be patently frightening to liberals.

        As the press accuses Trump of being a house of cards, Trump has proven the
        press is the real house of cards. He has whipped up the entire
        establishment into pure panic. Trump has exposed them for who they are
        and worse, what they are. George Clooney was right when he said Trump
        draws live news coverage of his podium that hes not yet approached.
        Thanks, George, you were perfectly correct.

        What we see as headline news today are actually the last bubbles from the
        ship that is now sunkmeaning the standard news media, as a propaganda
        machine, has been exposed. They have no more value.

        In the same way Trump asked the African-American community this question, I
        asked my friend, At this point, what do you have to lose? We have
        mass cop shootings, riots in our streets, ambushed cops, double digit
        inflation, bombs blowing up in our cities, targeted police, #BLM,
        a skyrocketing jobless rate, no economic growth, privately owned land
        being seized by the federal government, the worst racial tension in my
        lifetime, no God in schools, more abortions than ever, illegal aliens
        pouring into our country, sick veterans receiving no care, and a debt
        that doubled in seven years to $19 trillion. Are you really happy with
        the condition of the current system?

        One man has done all of this in one yearone guy, and on his own dime. And with
        everything Ive written above, you believe Trump hasn’t done anything?
        You claim that you are afraid of Donald Trump? No wonder were in
        trouble. You can say that Trump is a lousy presidential candidate.
        Thats your right. Just dont ever say hes not effective.

        That Megan Kelly, FOX News, CNN, MSNBC, Washington Post, Rachel Maddow, the
        Huffington Post, the New York Times, Raleighs News and Observer, the
        AP, Don Lemon, Jake Tapper, and many more, failed to implement their
        collectively orchestrated lie on the American people against Trump, is
        actually a massive testament to Trump. The press colluded pure
        propaganda to accomplish his demise and they have collectively failed
        and miserably.

        Here’s just one example of how badly America is injured right now. There are high school football players on their knees during the national anthem simply because the press used as
        propaganda to program those kids to do that very thing. But, these kids
        are mimicking NFL stars the same way the same kids chooses which brand
        of football shoe to purchasethey’re overtly brain-washed to do that
        very thing.

        Now, we have a generation of children who hate America.

        Americas problem isnt that little children are on their knee in collective
        disrespect of America. Our problem is that America is on her knee from
        collective disrespect by Americans.

        You can disrespect America all you want. But, its high-time you respect the
        silent majority. Because theyre not simply the silent majority as
        youve been trained to believe when Hillary calls them deplorables.
        The fact is, they are simply the majority. And now they’re no longer
        silent either. Donald Trump changed all of that, single-handedly and
        within one year.’

        • Holly says:

          WOW. I’m giving you a standing ovation!!!! And I’ve copied this comment and will distribute to as many people as I possibly can!!!

          • John S Mosby says:

            Please Copy, Paste, Post and Pass it along, encouraging others to do the exact same thing.

          • Bodhisattva says:

            Hopefully, unless you were being sarcastic (I saw no at the end so I can’t be sure), you will at least do a bit of editing to fix the obvious line feed errors he failed to fix before he pasted it in.

        • Bodhisattva says:

          Maybe so… I only scanned your post, but this time I’ll just copy what Brrrrrrp said, as it applies here, too:

          What the hell does your post have to do with hurricanes?

          And I will add:

          And what does your post have to do with ANYTHING relevant to this discussion.

          You’re likely preaching to the choir here, for the most part.

          Go post it on Democratic Underground and other liberal moonbat sites.

          And get banned, but at least hopefully someone will see it first… and it won’t do much good because a growing number of Democrats are not only brain dead, but REALLY dead, if news reports of dead voters being registered and voting IN SEVERAL STATES are to be believed.

      • marque2 says:

        Hillary came out and claimed this storm was due to Global Warming, like we never had big hurricanes before 1970.

        I can see how this fits with Hillary just shooting off her mouth. When Trump does it, the media goes mad. When Hillary shoots off her mouth, crickets.

        • John S Mosby says:

          I knew someone would get the correlation.

        • Bodhisattva says:

          Though I am ON YOUR SIDE as far as being AGAINST HILLARY, no, she did not, at least not anywhere I can find, did she directly say Matthew was due to climate change. Trace the source back as far as you can and here’s what you get:

          Speaking to supporters in Tampa, Hillary Clinton says climate change is wreaking havoc on communities across America. Clinton warns that Hurricane Hermine is not the last one thats going to hit Florida given whats happening in the climate. She says, When it comes to protecting our country against natural disasters and the threat of climate change, once again, Donald Trump is totally unfit and unqualified.

          The chain of links I found went:

          DRUDGE > Gateway Pundit > Climate Depot > Blasting News and I stopped following it at that point (link, below) for reasons about to become clear.

          http://www.climatedepot.com/2016/09/06/hillary-blames-hurricane-on-climate-change-says-trump-unfit-to-protect-usa-from-the-threat-of-climate-change/

          I personally had little doubt that Hillary said something like, if not exactly, what she is quoted as saying, above, as claimed, even before I actually saw the video, heard the words come out of her mouth. But do we have proof, (I asked myself)?

          This time the answer is YES – see the video at the link given. Words out of her own mouth, so she did say them as stated.

          Now she does make a reference to ‘THE NEXT ONE’ and so in that sense yes, she did blame Matthew on climate change.

          However, going on and on about what we know about Obama and Clinton, while not giving a direct link to something directly relevant, really belongs in another venue, doesn’t it?

          Anyway, still I do want to thank the poster (Mr. Mosby) for sharing and just suggest there are more appropriate places to share those particular posts.

    • Bodhisattva says:

      Not that anything you said was wrong… but I agree with what BRRRRRP said about it.

      Even if I spelled BRRRRRP wrong because I didn’t cut and paste it like this:

      Brrrrrrp.

      Which, to me, is a lot like an A-10 after it’s rolled in on target.

      Or Puff the Magic Dragon, even though I’ve only seen that one in video, not in real life.

      • Lewis says:

        Trump, despite being a real human being, is better qualified to be president the Hillary. HRC has proven time and again she is a sociopath.

        Trump is a businessman with a penchant for women. What’s the problem? Romney got castigated for making money, Trump for losing money – what do the Democrats want? Control. Lies upon lies upon lies is their mantra.

        I tell you this, if a HRC or BHO says it, the exact opposite is most likely true.

        Trump wants the people to do well. The Democrats want the Democrat elite to do well. There is the difference.

        Those elite include the media, lobbyists and large businesses who have or will contribute to the party machine.

  11. Jerry Fox says:

    Having lived along the upper Gulf Coast for over 25 years, I’ve rode out many hurricanes. There is no such thing as a minimal hurricane. Hurricanes spawn many tornadoes when the hit land. Not a laughing matter.

    • Bodhisattva says:

      True… but a CAT I storm has much lower winds and, I would imagine, less wind damage, probably a lower number of tornadic storms as well. Or am I mistaken.

      Still, I see your point. I lived in hurricane country for a while and was not going to stick around to see if I could ride one out if there was any threat of being anywhere near the eye or within the primary wind field around it.

  12. dlmstl says:

    I long for the days when CBS sent Dan Blather to cover this types of events. He’s the originator of the news guy, in trench coat, hanging off a stop sign in the middle of a hurricane somewhere in Texas. I wonder, too, if they draw straws to see who is going to be the unlucky schlub that has to suffer this type of indignity.

    • SandMan00 says:

      What are you talking about? People can build entire careers off nothing more than hanging on that stop sign. Just ask Jim Cantore [sic?] from the Weather Channel. When he shows up, he is the Weather Channel equivalent of ESPN’s College Game Day.

  13. The Mike says:

    The media are hyperventilating over this storm for a few reasons: breathless prediction of the deaths of millions gets people to tune in and makes $$$, and you know, if some puffed up bureaucrats had signed some piece of paper, this wouldn’t have happened, so they should sign it now!

    The whole spectacle is comical in a sad sort of way.

    The purpose of reporting maximum sustained wind speeds is just to get some big number that will cause people to gasp and think they’re about to get blown away while they’re really just getting jerked around.

    • SandMan00 says:

      In other unrelated news, all those panicked citizens who were driven to the Weather Channel for news of the impending Armageddon, were met with wall-to-wall pro-Hillary Clinton campaign ads, after her operatives serendipitously dropped a major ad buy on the network.

      • Brrrrrrp says:

        Except they didn’t. I hate Hillary too, but lies help no one.

        • marque2 says:

          There is truth to his statement. Hillary’s campaign made a huge buy on the Weather Channel to spew propaganda during the storm. Reince Priebus called her out on the callus move, and so her campaign decided to pull the adds.

          • Bodhisattva says:

            I find it is best to back up your claims (which are backed up with evidence that is readily available) when possible.

            I did it for you, feel free to take this advice, ignore it, or ridicule it as you see fit!

        • Bodhisattva says:

          Yeah, she/they did. But then upon that fact being released, they reconsidered and pulled them.

          marque2 mentioned this.

          Here are a couple of the many links about it:

          https://www.yahoo.com/news/hillary-clinton-pulls-ads-florida-193234651.html

          http://time.com/4521766/hillary-clinton-hurricane-matthew-pulling-ads/

          Of course, pro-Hillary Time tried to spin this against Trump…

          (Disclosure – I was not a Trump supporter in the primary, am not currently a Trump supporter except for the fact it is my belief that he is perhaps the lesser of two evils, one of which will be elected. Trump supporters feel free to flame me and your responses will be duly ignored or perhaps at best ridiculed.)

          • marque2 says:

            Thanks for the backup, appreciated.

            I personally think if something is readily googleable, if someone is too lazy to look it up, if doubt it, especially if it is a recent event, they are hopeless anyway. And even if you post 100 sources and the persons would claim they are all lies.

            Anyway, thanks again.

          • RAH says:

            I’m in the same boat. I’m voting against Hilary and not so much for Trump. For me elections are quite often like that. The lesser of two evils. But to be frank, as time goes on I’m beginning to think Trump has more potential than I gave him credit for during the primary.

    • Bodhisattva says:

      Just imagine the global warming/anthropogenic cause hype that might have been possible had this turned into a mega-disaster!

      I’m sure they were hoping and praying. So much for their supposed compassion and concern, eh?

  14. jabusse says:

    The City of San Bernardino shut their city hall down because some yokel scientist gave a prediction of “increased chance of a magnitude 7 earthquake over the next 2 days because of a swarm of earthquakes 150 miles south of San Bernardino.)

    Our government is populated by people like that at all levels. Earthquakes in southern california, Who would have thought? And to shut down a city hall that has withstood 100 years of earthquakes because of a two lottery ticket prediction is impeachable.

    but a hurricane with 130 mph winds is nothing to sneeze at if you live near the coast. And since most all (since Andrew) new properties in Florida have hurricane windows and 150mph roofs and the old ones survived other hurricanes, then maybe over hype should be toned down.

    The newscasts sound more like Orson Wells’ “War of the Worlds” , than they do serious news.

    • Fred Williams says:

      As a guy who used to put up roofs in central Florida, those damn things will come off in a storm like matthew, even with the higher ratings, they’re rated to that speed for short term, but if you have prolonged exposure to winds of 120, even a 150mph roof will come off, it’s like a fire rating on a safe, it’ll withstand a fire, but only for “X” amount of time.

    • Bodhisattva says:

      Just to add some information, not to dispute or ridicule what you say, I believe the evacuation was due to the building being built long enough ago that it would be very likely to come down catastrophically in an earthquake or, for some similar reason, deemed not safe to inhabit during times of potentially elevated earthquake threat.

      I am of the opinion that some “over representation of factual presentations” about Matthew may have been appropriate for the sole purpose of ensuring populated areas most directly (POTENTIALLY) threatened took appropriate measures to avoid catastrophe in case Matthew decided to throw a left hook and hit them – fortunately that was not the case.

      Had the storm done so I think some of us might be singing a different tune about now.

      As far as deliberately over hyping the storm to support the fraudulent belief in Catastrophic Anthropogenic Climate Change Alarmism, I don’t see it that way.

      If you or anyone does I respect that, and I respectfully disagree absent more compelling evidence in support.

      • RAH says:

        Let’s add a little historical perspective here on Florida Hurricanes. Here is a list of the top 10 that I believe is pretty accurate:
        ————————————————————-
        http://www.winstonpersonalinjury.com/ten-deadliest-destructive-hurricanes-hit-florida/

        “Key West Key West was hit on September 10, 1919 with a storm that left more than 800 dead.

        Miami In 1926, one of the most destructive hurricanes in history struck Miami, Fort Lauderdale, Hollywood, Hallandale, and Dania. It left between 325 and 800 dead and caused more property damage than any previous hurricane.

        Okeechobee The 125 mph winds did not cause quite so much damage to the residents of Palm Beach when it struck on September 16, 1928. However, 40 miles away, Lake Okeechobee flooded and the dikes broke, causing a major flood that killed at least 2,000 people.

        The Florida Keys Labor Day In 1935, a Category 5 storm stuck on Labor Day, killing 408 people. Witnesses reported that the wind was so strong that blowing sand literally shredded the clothes from their bodies.

        Hurricane Donna This 1960 storm still holds the record for sustaining hurricane force winds through Florida, the Mid-Atlantic, and New England. It caused 13-foot surges in the Keys and 11-foot surges along the southwest coast.

        Hurricane Cleo In 1964, Cleo struck the Miami area, cutting power and causing at least 24 separate fires. It destroyed one quarter of the grapefruit crop, delayed the opening of Florida Atlantic University, and caused the Fort Lauderdale News to miss publication for the only time in its history.

        Hurricane Andrew This 1992 storm is the second costliest storm in U.S. history. It killed 23 people and caused $25 billion in damages.

        Hurricane Charley When this Category 4 storm struck in 2004, this hurricane was the strongest to hit Florida since the legendary Hurricane Andrew. Meteorologists originally thought it would strike Tampa, but instead it hit Northwest Florida near Port Charlotte, catching many residents off guard. The hurricane killed 10 people and caused $13 billion in damage across the state.

        Hurricane Frances Just three weeks after Charley, Frances ripped through the state. Though it caused much less damage than its predecessor, Frances was legendary for its size it covered the entire state.

        Hurricane Wilma The most recent of the major hurricanes struck in 2005, causing $16.8 billion in damages. The storm particularly impacted Broward and Palm Beach Counties and did significant damage to the Broward County Courthouse, the School Board Building, and taller downtown office buildings.”
        ————————————————————
        Seems to me that with the exception of Andrew the worst of the worst struck in the first 60 years of the last century. Matthew, despite it’s impressive history is not even a fire cracker compared to the dynamite that struck from 1919 to 1960.

  15. barak says:

    How can you pimp global warming without cataclysmic hurricanes?

  16. Political Hostage says:

    We sat up last night, listened to the NOAA tell us the storm was 130mph with hurricane winds extending 60mi from the center, the storm was 40 miles offshore, and yet the beaches altimeters were registering 20-35mph. It should have been about 300-400% stronger winds.

    I’m 50, have grown up in Florida, and have been surfing since I was about 10 years old, so I’m a bit of a weather freak. I and the people I’ve known in the surfing community are just as good as the bulk of the weatherman on TV at looking at charts, knowing the history, and predicting storm movements.

    They’re punking us. There’s no other real way to say it. We’re being duped.

    This started when the NOAA began naming sub-tropical storms to inflate the storm count per year. Remember they used a bunch of faulty models to predict more and more dire hurricanes because of the global warming (which is also a well proven fraud).

    • Chad says:

      Well said. I have been on both Gulf side and Atlantic side and these always get overblown (pun intended).

    • Andrew says:

      Same thing here up North. Every snow event is a cataclysmic, must be named, end of times event. By the time something serious is happening there will be a loss of life, as folk will be tuning it out.

    • Fred says:

      They have actually started naming winter storms. What a nation of effete metrosexuals America has become.

    • Mike M. says:

      Political Hostage wrote: “This started when the NOAA began naming sub-tropical storms to inflate the storm count per year.”

      What are you talking about? The winter storm names? Those come from the weather channel. I think that NOAA and the NWS are opposed to that practice.

      In general, the over-hyping dose not seem to be from the government; it is from the “news” media.

      • Evilibertarian says:

        “In general, the over-hyping dose not seem to be from the government; it is from the โ€œnewsโ€ media.”

        There is no difference between the two anymore.

    • Bob Reagan says:

      Couldn’t agree more. Matthew has gone on a straight line from it came off Cuba until where it is now. That straight line is North Northwest of the tip of Cuba versus the Northwest that National Hurricane Center was posting for two days. Their original projection would have brought the eye wall in contact around Fort Lauderdale. It was nearly 100 miles out to sea when it passed there last night. They knew all this and kept up the hype. I am 74 years old and have been hurricanes, typhoons and cyclones but I have never seen nor heard of a hurricane fish hooking as the NHC has projected Matthew to do over the next few days. I do believe it is done to hype the “Global [warming], climate change or whatever it is called this year. Political maneuvering more than likely.

    • Bodhisattva says:

      The statements were likely based on the precise paths flown by the planes that flew through various parts of the hurricane where the stated conditions existed.

      Though I can READILY UNDERSTAND your concerns that more and more government drones are deciding that politics and ideology trump (see how I worked that in there, even though I’m not actually a TRUMP supporter… and I worked it in there again!) honesty when it comes to this, and other, issues.

      People like me call them moonbats sometimes. And other things that might get my post deleted and me banned so…

  17. Quigley56 says:

    I confess I make fun of people who live in flood zones or anywhere they could have a Hurricane. But, I live in Tornado Alley; I totally ignore the government warnings & watches for Tornados, eh?

  18. Chad says:

    Amazing how quickly the MSM got that story out this morning. Sad and scary all in the same breath.

  19. JC says:

    Thanks for the maximum sustained wind speed information– that is something NOAA or local meteorologists fail to explain to journalists. (shhh! It’s a secret!) As a former reporter, I was FORCED by management to get out of the sheltered alcove and make sure I got drippy wet and windblown for the TV audience during hurricane coverage. A competitor TV reporter showed up with a story of how their news van was hit by a large piece of flying wood that shattered their window. They went “LIVE” to show the audience the broken window. Trouble was, there wasn’t any glass shards inside the van… I think they faked it, “hyping the storm,” a common thing amongst the shadiest of reporters…

    • Bodhisattva says:

      Well maybe the wood broke the windshield to the point where they could not see to drive so they kicked it out from the inside?

      With modern “laminated” safety class that is likely what happened.

      Or you could be right.

      We may never know.

  20. Grumpy the Deplorable says:

    I donโ€™t think we will solve the over-warning problem of severe weather events any time soon.
    Of course we will not solve this. There is no intention of solving it. Over-warning is responsible for Lots and Lots of business. Selling plywood to bread, and gas, over-warning is a HUGE boost to certain elements of the economy.
    AND think of the ratings! WOW, how many people are glued to the weather channel!?

    • Bodhisattva says:

      I think it cuts both ways.

      NOAA may have felt that over warning was appropriate, given that we haven’t had a CAT III or greater storm in what, 4001 days, and America in general and Florida specifically may have become over complacent.

      I’m not sure I agree with that, but I accept it’s possible.

  21. Leslie says:

    I would much rather leave and not have anything happen then stay and chance it.

    • Bodhisattva says:

      An application of Paschal’s Wager?

      And, in fact, the same logic FALSELY applied to the theory of Catastrophic Anthropogenic Climate Change Alarmism when they say it’s madness NOT to believe it due to the consequences if it turns out to be true.

      Particularly because we know it to be false.

  22. jimc says:

    Hindsight is always perfect. I sympathize with the forecasters. But, the media, statist politicians, government, and UN will generally try to advance their agendas on hype (e.g. see the Ferguson, etc. narratives). Its up to us to question the source and inject some sanity and common sense.

  23. Ralph says:

    I live on the gulf coast and have been through many hurricanes. Overwarning is accepted as the norm by coastal residents now. It exists for a very simple reason–to keep people glued to their TV sets for ratings and future advertisement sales. Nothing else.

    • Bodhisattva says:

      “Nothing else.”

      I do not concur.

      After 4001 days too many people were perhaps too complacent and had Matthew taken the tiniest (relative) jaunt to the left this might have been MUCH WORSE than it was.

      I do not assert that over hyping this storm was justified, I simply accept perhaps it was, given all the circumstances.

  24. GlobalWrench says:

    Research – At the 2010 American Meteorological Association meeting it was revealed that aerosol geoengineering was applied to Hurricane Katrina to modify the intensity of the storm – DHS HAMP (Hurricane Aerosol Microphysics Program).

  25. The voice of reason says:

    Maybe if it’s all hype and exaggerated we should go back to no weather warnings at all. So what if people die…at least then maybe the fools won’t feel like they are lied to. There are a lot of lies out there but weather warnings are just that warnings of what “could” happen and not what “is exactly” what will happen. I’m a skeptic about a lot of things but foolish is foolish.

    • Matt says:

      The people who are complaining the hurricane did not do much damage to a particular area that was evacuated are as cooky as the people that believes that this (or any hurricane) has anything at all to do with climate change.

    • Bodhisattva says:

      When it comes down to it, unless FORCED OUT by some level of government goon, it remains an INDIVIDUAL CHOICE whether to stay or go.

      I prefer we err on the side of TOO MUCH INFORMATION and rely on the individual to sift through it and make the best decision, if only because natural selection then ensures those who do survive will tend to be the smarter for sure, along with those who are too easily frightened perhaps, but I can live with that second group. Those who are, in the end, too dumb to get when the going is good and who pay for it, unfortunately, are probably better off gone for good, as callous as that may sound.

  26. R. L. Hails Sr. P. E. (ret.) says:

    My knowledgeable insight came when Andrew, a Cat 5 hurricane hit below Miami. It hit two nukes, located immediately on the shore, and plowed through miles of destroyed homes. In the sea of devastation stood several houses with minor damage.
    Subsequent investigations revealed that, in spite of a good hurricane code, there had been no structural inspections in a generation. Then reporters ran down the builder of the surviving houses and asked why? Why tens of thousands of structures were totally destroyed and his withstood the blow.

    We put in the nails.

    Within a few hours, the nukes, which per procedure had shut down, roared back to life. Without their juice, Miami may not have made it. The only neighbor who could supply juice was Cuba. Consider if wind mills or solar panels sustained life after a major storm. This recently happened in southwest Australia; its isolated grid collapsed.

    There is truth and reported truth.

    • Bodhisattva says:

      “Consider if wind mills or solar panels sustained life after a major storm. This recently happened in southwest Australia; its isolated grid collapsed.”

      I would be interested in links to stories about that, if you can present them. That is an interesting take on this, one I would like to be able to share if supporting evidence is available.

      • dlb says:

        An initial assessment by the “Australian Energy Market Operator” has not given a yes or no as to whether wind power contributed to the blackout. Needless to say the blackout has become a rancorous political football between proponents and critics of renewable energy.

        For a balanced view see http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-10-06/uhlmann-on-power-blackout-in-south-australia/7906844
        For views from a climate sceptic angle see Jo Nova’s blog. For “progressive” views go to the Guardian Australia.

        On over predicting of hurricane wind speeds we had an example of this in Australia in 2015, with Cyclone Marcia. The met bureau was claiming the cyclone was a Cat 5 on land fall, but observable damage did not seem to support the claim. The Bureau are still refusing to admit they may have got this wrong.

  27. TA says:

    4001 days. The count continues. Close, but no cigar.

    • Bodhisattva says:

      Well… this was certainly a “GRAZE” as I pointed out already – but a “HIT”? Maybe not.

      So does the count continue? Judges?

      And what if the hurricane does it’s predicted pirouette but does not weaken as predicted and comes back to strike a second time, this time more head on?

      I hope you’re right – it would be more to my liking if we could REASONABLY call this one a miss – but can we?

  28. Dodger says:

    I live in tornado country. We get so many tornado watches and warnings every year that I, and every one I know, pay no attention to them. I’ve lived in this area for all of my 66 years and I’ve yet to see one of the damned things.

    • Bodhisattva says:

      Well that’s your choice – and could one day cost you your life along with anyone else who is with you at the time and follows your lead.

      Then again, you may never actually see one close up – we hope!

      I think… I HOPE that should that day come you will know what to do and you will do it.

      Good luck!

  29. YawnAndYawnAgain says:

    The sky is falling! The sky is falling!

    Oh, wait… no it’s not.

    If it’s too warm, it’s mankind’s fault.

    If it’s too cold, it’s mankind’s fault.

    If it’s a hysterical reaction to “do something” for the sake of labeling a situation as a “crisis” in order to advance an agenda of destabilizing industry, raising taxes, enacting needless legislation and redistributing wealth then it’s the fault of the LEFT.

    “If it isn’t one thing, it’s another.” — Rosanne Rosanadana

    • John says:

      Are you saying that naming every winter storm, every cold snap, every thunderstorm, every heat wave and calling each one “historic” is hype?

      • Lewis says:

        HYPE!

        IT’s a scary monster!

        I saw a report a month or so ago saying some storm was the worst one of – in small type – this year. A monster storm, biggest since, 2015.

        HYPE.

        The news media is now entertainment. It started with the advent of TV about the time of the Vietnam War.

        I don’t watch TV anymore. Haven’t much since college – I’m 64. Hardly read the newspaper for the same reason. I get along fine.

        As an aside:

        In our political world there are 4 types of people:
        The Warrior Class – which includes armed service, police, and jocks.

        The worker class

        The Political Class

        And the Intelligentsia

        The job of the intelligentsia is to rationalize why the political class is in power. If they don’t do that, the political class will get rid of them because they are not serving their purpose – Do you need examples?

        The intelligentsia includes lawyers, journalists, professors, pundits etc, those who talk for a living.

    • Californian Seven says:

      No Coke, Pepsi….cheeseburger, cheeseburger, cheeseburger…that was a great skit…

    • Bodhisattva says:

      I think that a larger part of the quote went:

      “It’s always something. If it’s not one thing, it’s another. Either [A] or [B].” And it went on from there, incoherently rambling on (much like my own posts) with someone else (Jane Curtin) stunned into silence, unable to respond until she ran out of steam, finally.

      And there was this gem:

      “The trouble with bein early is that nobody’s there to appreciate it but then again if you’re late everyone’s there to be unappreciative.”

      And who can forget the best of all:

      “NEVER MIND!” (Or was that one actually her as Emily Lettela? Yes, I believe it was.)

      Which is, perhaps, what NOAA might be thinking about saying about right now, or so.

      “NEVER MIND!”

  30. Physics Turk says:

    Does National Hurricane Center make their data publically available or do they just publish their results?

    They state wind speeds but do not seem to release the data that supports their claim. This would go a long way in improving public relations.

    • Bodhisattva says:

      Well if they can lie about it in a press release, can’t they just release “adjusted” wind speed figures?

      After all, that’s what JONES (UEA/CRU), Hansen (NASA/GISS) and Karl (somewhere over at NOAA) have done with temperature data and yet we don’t do anything about it!

  31. Wally says:

    LOL Of course they have to over warn. If they didn’t nobody would evacuate and in the event the storm takes a sudden turn over land they would be blamed for not warning the public.

    So, it’s always looked at and announced as the worst case scenario.

  32. Hillel says:

    Some leaves fell off trees in my neighborhood! OMG!

  33. Lester says:

    While Katrina was a big storm and the Gulf Coast of Mississippi and Alabama got hit with high winds and surge, the winds in NOLA were less than hurricane force.

    What got people in NOLA killed, and so much property damaged, was the pure stupidity of the people and the politicians.

    • Bodhisattva says:

      Actually, and this is from a guy who lived in the greater New Orleans area, actually near the levee breach on the parish line between there and Metairie, well before Katrina hit, mind you…

      We talked at length about what storm it might take, and what angle it might approach at, under what conditions, to really nail New Orleans.

      Remember, while Katrina may have REACHED CAT V at some point, it was not CAT V when it made landfall. On August 29, Hurricane Katrina made landfall near Buras-Triumph, Louisiana with 125 mph winds, then continued to a second landfall near the state line (LA-MS, near Bay St. Louis and Waveland) as a strong Category 3 storm. Due to power failures there were few accurate measurements of wind speeds in New Orleans and surrounding areas, but it is estimated much of the city experienced sustained winds of Category 1 or Category 2 strength (sustained winds of 74-110 mph). This wind impact was significant not only because it was sustained, but because of it’s impact on storm surge. The track of the hurricane sent the surge up into Lake Borgne and Lake Ponchartrain and thence via the intercoastal waterway and major canals into the city and it’s suburbs. Nearly every levee in metro New Orleans was breached (53 breaches) and the 40 Arpent Canal levee failed catastrophically. Interesting details are given here, for those who are interested:

      http://www.nola.com/katrina/articles/citys_fate_sealed_in_hours.html

      Also, though I did not receive credit, I may have been at least partly responsible for some quick action that helped speed up the recovery at one major levee breach, as I still had family and friends there and was watching developments closely, but that’s another story for some other post, somewhere else.

      It was these storm surges, the resulting levee failures and the massive flooding that resulted, combined with the complacent attitudes of not only the people, BUT THEIR CIVIC LEADERS, who failed to arrange an evacuation or to impress the need for one on the locals, that ultimately led to many deaths. The destruction was simply due to the failure of people to realize you cannot depend on government and have to consider the worst case scenario and prepare accordingly.

      The gist of this last is that the levee system was not designed for a storm like Katrina, which is what we discussed long before Katrina eve hit. I am not a psychic, just a realist – I predicted Katrina, as it was obviously going to happen, long before it did happen.

      And I will end by saying we have not learned our lesson. New Orleans needs to be radically redesigned. To be better served the next time a Katrina type storm comes, the levee system needs to be totally redesigned, such that single breaches cannot cause such widespread catastrophe. Of course this costs more than will probably ever be considered “worth it” (see earlier complaints in other posts about how some resent paying so much federal tax to be “wasted” in repeated disaster prone areas – New Orleans certainly proving it can be one of those).

      OK, I’ve rambled enough.

  34. Mikey says:

    I disagree with Hillary, I think that hurricane Matthew was caused by a Youtube video.

  35. Major Johnson says:

    Remember, these are the same guys who keep telling us we’ve had the warmest year ever in history, but fail to tell us it’s warmer by 0.001 degrees Celsius on a globe that varies by over 100 degrees from pole to equator at any given time, and that’s with data manipulated to ensure that it’s the warmest in history.

    • Robert says:

      Yes. And to arrive at those figures, they conveniently omit satellite data. It tells a different story.

    • Bodhisattva says:

      You left out that the instruments used to come to those conclusions often cannot measure to more than 0.1 or maybe 0.01 degrees of reliable accuracy? Or am I mistaken? What is their actual admitted margin of uncertainty there?

      And at one point I was under the impression, from something I saw from the IPCC, that we’ve gotten worse (the uncertainty bar is now WIDER) as time has passed.

      Someone want to check my math and tell me I’m simply wrong?

      Here it is:

      … the rate of warming over the past 15 years (19982012; 0.05 [0.05 to 0.15] C per decade) … is smaller than the rate calculated since 1951 (19512012; 0.12 [0.08 to 0.14] C per decade).

      SOURCE: https://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar5/syr/SYR_AR5_FINAL_full.pdf (page 2, bottom, is where it starts)

      Now they say that for the time period from 1951 – 2012 the reading had an uncertainty that ranged from 0.08 to 0.14, so subtracting the larger from the smaller we get what, 0.06?

      And from 1998 to 2012 the uncertainty was -0.05 to 0.15, or 0.2? And so dividing the latter by the former, we are over 3x less sure of our measurements as time went by?

      Am I just confused?

      Anyone?

      • Lewis says:

        You see here another showing of the intelligentsia providing support for the political class.

        Move along.

  36. Robert says:

    I believe he was referring to those that receive FEMA aid to rebuild multiple times in flood zones, especially those located adjacent to rivers and lakes. Privately insured citizens may do as they please but the FEMA multi-bailouts have to stop.

    • Vid says:

      FEMA no longer pays more than once in flood zones. The recent Louisiana Flood is an example. People previously paid were not eligible. They did however blow millions of dollars giving grants to people with “flooded” cars. Funny how all the people who had scheduled for me to fix their cars instantly had flooded cars. Cost me thousands and taxpayers millions.

  37. Chelsea Hubbell says:

    Hillary caused this, when the hot air she’s been spouting converged with her frigid libido.

  38. HazelP says:

    Thanks Dr. Spencer! I’m hopeful this will be a no-show storm for Atlantic coast.

  39. IRock says:

    We were all warned more than ten years ago. The effects of global warming continue. Ehhh huricaine drought? Ehh no major hurricane landfall since 2005? Is this the result of global warming?

  40. Scott Slanda says:

    I’m still trying to figure out why people keep saying this is the first major hurricane since 2005. The second and third most expensive hurricanes in US history (Ike, Sandy) have BOTH occurred since then.

    • “major hurricane” is an official meteorological term for Cat 3 or stronger, requires 111+ mph sustained winds. Ike was Cat 2, Sandy Cat 1.

      • Mark Ping says:

        Plus Sandy wasn’t a hurricane when it made landfall. Northeast politicians pressured the categorization so that their constituents would have insurance coverage.

      • Bodhisattva says:

        We were told what – that there would be more (wrong) storms, more powerful storms on average (wrong) or a greater number of more powerful (wrong) storms as global warming got worse. Or all three. But since they’ve all been proven wrong… haven’t they?

        We HAVE become better at detecting and measuring storms, so any success in those predictions is likely due to the fact we’ve gotten better as I said, not because they didn’t happen before.

        • barry says:

          Only number 2. And this was not a prediction made for 10 years hence but decades. With medium confidence.

          But nuance is too hard for some people.

    • Bodhisattva says:

      Sandy was not a hurricane when it hit and was only significant because it A) combined with a nor’easter B) hit during a very high tide.

      Expense has nothing to do with climate change – this is a typical lie, propaganda, talking point spread by those who either don’t know or who are attempting to deliberately deceive. As time goes by more and more money is spent building more and more in places where it was foolish to build in the first place. Statistically those places will EVENTUALLY be hit and even a weak storm will do very great damage.

      Dr. Spencer pointed out the significance you apparently missed, as did Mark Ping in his response to that response.

      In fact it may have been Dr. Spencer – I know someone did, anyway – who pointed out the absolutely FALSE nature of trying to claim increased costs have ANYTHING to do with climate change – they are due as I said to poor decisions leading to poor building practices AND to inflation. Nothing more.

  41. Janet Martin says:

    I lived through 5 or 6 hurricanes in South Florida, one of which, Cleo in 1964, was comparable to this one. Damage in all of those I experienced was limited to ancillary structures on well built homes, but took out signage and damaged mobile homes, in some cases quite seriously. Long term power outages and standing water for more than a day or two was usually in places that never ought have been built on in the first place, but towns are overeager to add to their tax roles and issue building permits irresponsibly. Storm surge along the lower east coast of Florida is less of a concern than it is in the Gulf region because of the short continental shelf, as little as 2-3 miles in places–dangerous surges build up in relatively shallow water, while deep water shows much less fluctuation. If you live in a fragile area or fragile structure you ought to evacuate, but most Atlantic coast residents will be just fine with ordinary measures, ie storm shutters, pick up anything outside that might blow, including furniture, have a little extra food and water, and then hunker down

  42. Mark says:

    But we do know from tree rings the warmest period in history was during the renaissance which did predate the industrial revolution. Which blows the global warming theory out of the water. Add to that the Maunder Minimum whocj occurred from about 1645 to about 1715 and it is the death nail to the theory. Apparentlynthe cycles ofnthensunnhave more to do with the climate than CO2 which is a colorless odorless gas that only makes up about 0.033% of the earth’s atmosphere. However, Argon which is used in most low E windows to block sun rays from entering your home makes up about 0.93% of the earth’s atmosphere. Scientifically the argument for CO2 being a major contributor is weak unless you just simply discount all other factors. That ignorance is amplified by politicians calling it carbon which is a completely different element in the periodic table that only becomes a gas at over 8000 degrees Fahrenheit.

    • Bodhisattva says:

      Not to disagree, but as I understand it, reword it thus:

      “…we do know from tree rings AND OTHER PROXIES the warmest period in RECENT history DESPITE REPEATED FALSE CLAIMS TO THE CONTRARY MADE BY REVISIONISTS POSING AS SCIENTISTS…”

  43. Ovi Sinclair says:

    I was 100 miles due west of the eye of this storm at 7:30AM, no rain and just a 10mph breeze. NOAA just like every other department in this criminal administration has been politicized. They had some moronic spade on TV yesterday saying these storms are like this because we haven’t been paying our carbon tax to the UN. These are some shameless no account LIARS we have in our government, some of the pictures of the east coast have been coming in this morning, most of which are old termite ridden oak tree damage. I live in Florida, these trees when they become big, old, well branched out all are riddled with termites, termites and roaches should be the state bugs. It’s something we all have to live with and for the most part do unless you are an idiot snow bird from NJ, NY, Ohio, or your Black.

    • Bodhisattva says:

      Many oaks tend to just rot from the inside out anyway – like some other types of trees (Eucalyptus, at least here in CA), they tend to drop major limbs without any real warning.

      Termite damage or not.

  44. cgomez says:

    I thought Sandy made landfall as a tropical storm. It did a fair amount of damage, and there is little consolation to the people that are harmed if the majority decides later that it was no big deal.

    But certainly there was a unified change to the narrative once Sandy made landfall to start referring to it as “Superstorm Sandy” so we could continue along the narratives of climate change, destruction, and immediate appropriation of federal funds before we knew what was truly needed. That way the bureaucracy could take over and fund pet projects and unrelated expenditures.

    Don’t get me wrong, people were harmed and some funds were spent well… but I think we know now as much as half was wasted on the “see no evil” bureaucracy that allows unrelated pet projects to apply for funding and pretends they couldn’t tell what was right or wrong. So a new “small business” under the shell of a corporation goes ambulance chasing and gets funding to build and open anew to promote “renewal” but a family home destroyed one block outside of the arbitrary line drawn is denied… that kind of amoral judgment that bureaucrats make.

    • Meteorologically, Sandy was an impressive mostly-extratropical storm, but several storms like it happen every year in all major ocean basins. They just almost never hit a highly populated area, with the wind at just the right (wrong?) direction and at high tide that causes so much flooding damage.

      • Rick says:

        My daughter lives on Barnegat bay and lost her house in Sandy. There was no wind damage but there was 11 feet of water in the house. The whole neighborhood was wiped out for miles. This was storm surge, wind and high tide all occurring at once just as you say. The New York City subways flooded for exactly th same reason.

      • Bodhisattva says:

        Suggestion – since “almost never” is a blatant contradiction, try “rarely if ever” though that’s not much better. I simply say “rarely”.

        Though I defer to you generally…

    • Ric Werme says:

      While I dislike the “Superstorm” name, the accurate description of “Cat-1 hurricane transitioning to very strong post-tropical storm formerly known as Sandy” was awkward and wouldn’t fit on a headline.

      A better term would have been helpful.

      Better preparation in New York City would have been better.

      • RAH says:

        The only reason Sandy was a “Super Storm” is because it hit a highly developed and populated area near where the most of the major press organs have HQ. Had the same storm hit further south along the I-95 corridor such as Hampton Roads under the same circumstances of high tide and funnel effect, does anyone believe it would have been given that name?

    • Bodhisattva says:

      “… there is little consolation to the people that are harmed if the majority decides later that it was no big deal.”

      I know of NO ONE who EVER claimed or said (well, other than YOU) that Sandy was “no big deal”.

      It was not a tropical storm, it was, as noted, “extra-tropical” at the time it combined with a nor’easter and came in during an unusually high tide and winds that compounded the surge – and thus produced a total change in LOCAL sea level that has allowed for all sorts of lies, propaganda and talking points, but really WAS a big deal but not in any way proof of CLIMATE CHANGE or any cause of same.

  45. Joe says:

    I’ve lived in south Florida since 1989. I’ve been a weather enthusiast and hurricane “observer” a lot longer than that. A simple understanding how to read maps, pressure gradients and wind directions helps to drown out the hyperbole. For me, the most important observation is the storm’s wind field. Knowing that, with knowing how to multiply and add can save a ton of undue stress.

    Since then, I’m batting a thousand on when to “panic”. The one and only time I truly felt there was a chance we would suffer was with Wilma. That was the only time, so far, that I made sure we had enough supplies and boarded up. And that was more because of a gut feeling then it was my educated guess.

    Yesterday, I gave it a “keeping one eye open” look only because when Matthew hit Freeport, it made a brief left hand turn that could have been a direct hit.

    Here’s the interesting thing about that. The turn came right after the 5pm advisory. It could be clearly seen on any radar app. I watched all of the local news stations and NOT ONE of them reported the turn…NONE. They all talked all over their idiot field correspondents while the radar sat in the corner of the screen, and NO ONE mentioned the turn.

    Now, we just have to watch and see what Matthew does over the next week. Should be fun to watch them all over again.

  46. Silversurferdude says:

    Man use to fear nature’s wrath. Now man pretends to control nature, for political expediency. Man’s fake science of “global weather change caused by human activity” is ironically more expensive and dangerous than the actual weather.

    • Bodhisattva says:

      Those who are full of Catastrophic Anthropogenic Climate Change Alarmism (none of whom seem to have bothered to work out that acronym, or if they have, certainly seem to have failed to understand it) do seem to have returned to the belief that man is the absolute center of everything, so important as to be the single point from which all other things MUST be measured.

      And they claim to not believe in higher powers, most of them, anyway.

      Humans are now the equivalent of the gods the Romans, Greeks and others looked to for assistance when the chips were down.

      Yes, they truly believe humans have usurped the vastly more powerful forces of nature that are the primary determining factors when it comes to weather, temperature and climate.

      Among the more reasonable minds there is some disagreement as to the role humans play in such matters – the point I make is that no living organism can exist without having some influence on it’s environment and, in fact, even a humble rock plays an important role in affecting the atmosphere, the water, and the very soil within it’s sphere of influence – among other things.

  47. JMW says:

    And the river will rise so high you can see under it.

  48. Bob Redman says:

    “Media hype also exaggerates the problem.”

    Dim politics further exaggerates the problem.

  49. An Inquirer says:

    “Research airplanes . . . measure winds at flight level in the regions most likely to have the highest winds . . .”

    Yes, and I wonder whether hurricanes from previous decades have underestimated wind speeds. Before Hurricane Hunter aircraft, were the winds measured just a chance encounter between the area of high wind speeds and anemometer? And before today’s technology to guide them, is it more likely that Hurricane Hunters missed the high wind region? And Doppler radar was developed in my lifetime — NOAA has not always had that available.

    I do recognize that the west coast of Mexico recently had an unprecedented hurricane relatively recently, but I suspect that the intensity of old hurricanes might be underreported.

    • yes, that’s very possible. We already know that more weak systems (Tropical Storms) are identified since we got routine satellite monitoring the in early 1970s. Some of those are quite small, in remote locations out of shipping lanes, and would never have been observed 50-100 years ago.

    • Bodhisattva says:

      You make a great point. There is no proof that any storm hunter flight has properly measured wind speeds in order to really say which storm was ever the greatest known or, for that matter, not known.

      Further, I would tend to rely more on measurements of minimum pressure, perhaps, as a better predictor of relative storm strength – but we don’t have proper pressure measurements, or 100% continuous ones, for many (if any) storms – do we?

      IT comes down to estimates, attribution and maybe a little old fashioned guessing and, unfortunately, the trend seems to be towards exaggeration, sometimes deliberate, if not outright fraud.

    • RAH says:

      Remember that the capability of the dropsondes used by the Hurricane hunters has greatly improved over the years.

  50. James says:

    Rita was the name. Thousands packed the highways to evacuate from Galveston, Houston, other towns and cities in the area. Busload of seniors and people with disabilities caught on fire. Hurricane didn’t get close. Some people sat in traffic for over 20 hours and drove northeast, and ended up directly in the storms path.

  51. Phil C says:

    Thanks for the Ohio people in SE comment. That was so funny, I needed a good laugh. Thanks for the humor and good comments.

    • Bodhisattva says:

      What? They don’t get hurricanes in Ohio? That’s blatant bigotry if you ask me! Why should Ohio be spared? Looks like unfair Ohio privilege to me! THIS CANNOT STAND! I demand hurricane justice! Hurricane Lives Matter! I need a safe space, this has triggered me!

  52. Jon says:

    I live in florida also where officials and media grossly overhype everything. Their reaction was vastly overdone with idiotic curfews, evacuations, and every weatherman salivating as they warned of the horrible dangers of mathew.

  53. I agree – too much hype. I’m just north of Orlando and about 60 miles from the hurricane’s center. It’s rained for the last 18 hours but the winds have not been too bad; maybe maximum gusts of 25 mph.

    Here are some videos I did to document the storm:

    https://www.facebook.com/steve.maughan/videos/10153815656051456/?l=8886061643119409337

    https://www.facebook.com/steve.maughan/videos/10153817090151456/?__mref=message_bubble

    https://www.facebook.com/steve.maughan/videos/10153817277766456/?__mref=message_bubble

    Steve

    • John says:

      Did you notice that neither TWC nor the local stations would say anything about predicted wind impacts county by county…as they used to? I found one “county by county” on WESH but it was from Oct 5th. The hype was the only important thing.

  54. Henry says:

    The point here is that global warming is an agenda for maximum fear leading to taxation for the total benefit to oligarchs.Paralyzing fear causes citizens to abandon reason and critical thinking. These are replaced with severe hyped mind controlled monopoly weather monitoring so-defined authorities masquerading as truth in science . Where are the independent sources of science weather analysis of approaching storms? Competitive cross checking data is prudent to the well being of the lives in America and nearby nations. We have that capacity for this kind of competition in scientific news studies. Rick Scott is entitled to have the best competitive science available to him or to governors going forward. He did the best he could do given the monopoly weather report hype and fear mongering.

    • Bodhisattva says:

      Appeals to emotion, as you say (in different words) are calculated to short circuit calm, logical, critical thinking and put one into a knee-jerk, fight or flight mode of thinking where action-reaction is the rule without any time wasted on facts, truth or logic in between.

      It goes a long way towards explaining liberal logic when you think about that.

      Plus when they can push a conservative/Republican Mayor or Governor into overreacting they have a GREAT talking point next election cycle.

      • Bodhisattva says:

        And suppose that same conservative/Republican Mayor or Governor errs on the side of caution by being too conservative in warnings and actions (i.e. does not tell people it’s going to be as bad as it turns out to be), lives are lost… political suicide!

  55. John says:

    I live here. We have some 50 mph gusts in Central Fl but not much else. I noticed that this time, it was just about impossible to find out what the wind impacts were going to be county by county. TWC and all the locals refused to say anything more than “120 mph winds” and then glossed over the rest…pointing to the huge cone. There was no discussion of local impact…just “”We’re all going to die!”

    • Bob Nicks says:

      True. “We’re all doing to die” so “listen to the authorities!”

      I must have heard “listen to the authorities” a thousand times today.

      Meanwhile, I evacuated my home and am sleeping in a gymnasium, and I see none of those “authorities” here.

      I wonder when the “authorities” will let me return to my home. There will be some leaves to sweep up…

    • Bodhisattva says:

      Well… I do believe it is true we are all going to die… some day… some way!

  56. Jenni says:

    Those people are more likely to be killed in an automobile accident than in a hurricane.

    • Bodhisattva says:

      Speaking of which… and yes, it’s a bit off topic, but if we start banning things (guns) because of the number of people who die as a result of their use… would we have any cars in the U.S.?

      • Bodhisattva says:

        Time to ban lightning, hurricanes, the humble tornado and a number of other things as well. Bodies of water (drowning), for instance. Trees, because their limbs might fall and kill an innocent who happens to be there randomly when they do. Ah, there’s no end to the things we need to ban here in the U.S. Congress has their work cut out for them!

      • David Appell says:

        Bodi: Guns are intended to kill people. Car’s aren’t.

        • RAH says:

          Actually that is a myth created by the left. The majority of general issue modern combat firearms are intended to wound, not to kill. Dead need far less attention and cost the enemy far less resources to deal with than wounded. Hunting firearms are made to kill the particular size and type prey that they are intended for.

          BTW, in general from WW I on Artillery has killed and wounded far more combatants than firearms during major wars/conflicts on land.

  57. Golfnut says:

    Naming hurricanes is good because it provides a good reference; as in what did you do during Hurricane Carla? How giving names to urban riots for the same perspective. The last one could be named Riot Lamont. Where were you for Riot Lamont?

  58. Tontine says:

    Couldn’t agree more… Last years snowstorms that swept across country brought first year of naming big storms like hurricanes… The I’ve hyping of weather and emotional level that rise in proportion to that hysteria is for a reason- better to lay foundation of hype associated with anthropomorphic global warming bs. To train people that global weather change cause by man is an easier ‘sell’ when surrounded by hysteria.

  59. Randy B says:

    A hurricane measurably extracts energy from the ocean and transports it to the atmosphere. It would therefore seem some measurably ‘extra’ energy is radiated to space[right ?] The SST display at Remote Sensing [ http://images.remss.com/sst/sst_data_daily.html north atlantic region] show a slight temp drop along the path. But to what extent is the ‘extra’ energy radiated to space confirmed and/or quantified?

  60. Don says:

    Now the hurricane center has been taken over by the “Global Warming” crowd. Shame.

  61. Josh says:

    Over-hyping is certainly the norm, I live in Austin, TX, (hundreds of miles from the coast). And I recall attending UT and there were classes canceled because of a hurricane a couple of years back. Seriously, there is no way a hurricane is going to hit Austin with 111mph winds….

  62. ticktock says:

    The simple fact that huge sums of money are made from the scare of a hurricane is relevant. The people who start buying crap they will likely never need or use and an over abundance of foodstuffs make for a great scare market.
    Then there is the evacuees that fill their tanks and drive for hours and spend money on hotels/motels for minimum required days is certainly a blessing to those businesses out of season.
    Since our entire civil structure in this day of corruption of government is tied into the money racket, it is logical to believe that if a hurricane can be overblown and the scare is on, those crooks that seem to be running the show will stand to make lots of money. And this isn’t even getting into the stock market or the derivatives.

  63. winston smith says:

    the hype is a way great to increase TV ratings and thus how much they can charge advertisers for media time

    for the govt agencies hype results in panic and chaos and thus justifies bigger annual budgets to prevent the very situation that it caused

    you are being played for fools

  64. Ossqss says:

    I believe Sandy was extra-tropical at landfall.

  65. Jack says:

    Tabloid weather.

  66. Bob Nicks says:

    Fact remains that the storm was over-hyped. All day long I was told “listen to the authorities” — well, I did, and they were wrong, just like last time.

  67. ren says:

    Matthew will meet with a cool front from the west.
    http://www.weatherplaza.com/en-US/sat/?region=usa.ir

  68. AmyRinPA says:

    I don’t think the storm was overhyped, I thought the accuracy and effectiveness of reporting was subpar. Where my kids and grandkids live, there was a forecast for up to 117 MPH winds for their towns. The problem is where was that wind predicted? Barrier Island or ?
    I thought the warnings were dumbed down and too generalized.
    Things could have gone much much worse if the storm had hit West Palm Beach and stayed inland.

  69. SteChate says:

    My daughter lives in Miami, 3 miles from the Coast. She couldn’t leave town early because she has A JOB and would get fired. Thursday, she couldn’t get out of Miami if she wanted to because all the roads were full of stopped cars. But seriously, evacuate where? Florida is at sea level all the way across the state. Are all these salvation shelters impervious to massive flooding? Regardless, Rick Scott and Co. has not the capacity to bomb-shelter the entire metro population of South Florida. So my daughter sat in her interior closet and waited it out. Fortunately, the storm mostly skipped Miami. It wasn’t even raining by 2 am Friday! As a dad, I was freaking out. All I heard from their stupid Governor was: “Evacuate!” Well, who should evacuate exactly? Then I heard some vague mention of “evacuation zones,” which my daughter had never heard of in six years of living there, and for which I found one obscure, clunky, circa-1990s layout, government website that indicated by static, undetailed map where these zones were. I couldn’t even tell which zone my daughter lived in!

    Florida Emergency Management is mostly incompetent. Rick Scott is a typical hapless, clueless, sound-bite, organ-grinder monkey politician. Other than showing the radar/satellite models, the ratings-obsessed Media hype was absolutely useless to people on the ground. All it did was cause impassable evacuation routes that were going nowhere really safe anyway. Hurricanes go where they want to go, and they wipe out what they want. Aftermath is the real killer, and for that, a strong building on high, solid ground is your best defense. There isn’t any high ground in Florida, but at least it’s not below sea level. Only abject idiots would live near the coast below sea level. Something unforgettably disastrous is bound to happen to such fools…oh wait!

  70. fonzarelli says:

    Duh, uh, Doctor Roy, uh, whut about SANDY, huh? (☺)

    • An Inquirer says:

      fonzarelli, I do trust that was sarcastic. Even time, I read blogs, I marvel — actually, shudder — at how the educational system has failed so many posters. I would be interested in knowing whether those who continue to say Sandy was a major hurricane were mostly educated in the public school system. I know a hundred home schoolers, and none of them make such mistakes. It is important to have both knowledge and analytical capability before taking on the emotional competence skill!

  71. sue says:

    NOAA is a pretty useless bureaucracy when they can’t even predict the weather 18 hours in advance – forget next week, next spring or five years from now.

  72. Mike G says:

    Having grown up in Mississippi during the time of Camille, it does not take a rocket scientist to know that the worst damage from a hurricane is the eye wall and the highest winds are on the east side of the eye. The main damage from Matthew in Haiti was from the eye wall and the winds to the east of it. In the case of Florida, the eye wall is off the east coast and the winds coming ashore are on the west side of the eye. So long as the eye stayed off the east coast of Florida, the hysteria about massive damage was misplaced. The problem though is that hurricanes are unpredictable and can change course so some precautions were warranted.

  73. Thirdwatch2020 says:

    It’s all about tv ratings. More hysteria = higher ratings and more ad revenue. Mathew is just a scam. Get over it

  74. Dave Lavelle says:

    Overhyped? Tell that to the 400+ dead (& counting) in Haiti.
    And don’t tell me it was different there – hurricanes are unpredictable, and no-one can forecast their path with any degree of certainty.

    • Big difference in Haiti:
      1) storm was stronger there
      2) east side of eyewall (worst part for a northward-moving hurricane) made a direct hit
      3) Haiti is EXTREMELY poor, no infrastructure to provide protection of people. Guaranteed deaths there.

    • An Inquirer says:

      Dave Lavelle,
      Any idea what to do about Haiti? Even if we in the U.S. could do anything about Haiti, what could we do? Haiti faces many challenges, not the least of which is that for decades it was led by a morally-bankrupt government that fed its people a victimhood mentality. There is no more effective way to keep a people down than to tell them that a major determinant of their lives is a victimhood status.
      In addition, Haiti is in the path where hurricanes will cross often. And hurricanes will often be stronger there than the in the U.S. Its geography and demographics make hurricanes so much worse there.
      So what can we do?

      • Generally speaking, you can’t help people who don’t want to change.

        • David Appell says:

          So, Roy, you think Haitians just love being poor?

          Aren’t you supposed to be a Christian? What did Jesus say about the poor?

          • To help those who can’t help themselves. I’ve been to Haiti. As far as I can tell yes most of them choose to be poor.

          • An Inquirer says:

            David Appell, Of course I do not know your background and your activities, but your comment sounds typical for an armchair advocate who lacks experience of being in the trenches of trying to help the poor. Of course, I am not thrilled with Dr. Spencer’s response, but perhaps he was trying to say in 14 words what can only be explained in 1400 words. As someone who has devoted huge chunks of his life to helping the poor, I will give you six key reasons for entrenched poverty in this country:
            1. Victimhood identity. “My status as a victim swamps anything that I can do.”
            2. Entitlement mentality. “I deserve _________ because I am here or because I want it.”
            3. Criminality temperament. Most people get this backwards. Poverty does not cause criminal behavior as much as criminal behavior causes poverty.
            4. Lack of “Puritan work ethic” attitudes. Temperaments such as diligence, reliability, timeliness, initiative, solution-focused.
            5. Lack of appreciation. When donations are disdained because they are not Nikes or because they came from K-Mart, that is going to undermine future help.
            6. Preference for a hand-out rather than hand-up. “Just give me the food/housing/$/whatever and let me get back to my lifestyle.”

            Every individual case is different and unique, but these six themes are strong in pockets of persistent poverty. As you reflect on these 6 reasons, you can a strong element of choice. Perhaps these attitudes are cultural in nature, but a person does choose which cultural attitudes to adopt and maintain.

    • Oh, yes it was different there. And, yes, the track of hurricanes can be pretty accurately predicted in many cases. The path Matthew is taking right now is very close to what the GFS model has been predicting for days. Granted, history tells us there is uncertainty. But its not like hurricanes go wherever they want and just ignore the steering currents they are embedded in. That doesn’t happen.

  75. Dennis Wayne Smith says:

    Same old story. Panic the people so they’ll beg the government (big brother) to save them. Nothing new about it. It’s been going on around the world for centuries.

  76. Sick Willie says:

    “Never let a good crisis go to waste. And if you don’t have a good crisis, create one.” – Hillary Clinton

  77. John R Smith says:

    just a lit bet …
    No landfall … storm fizzles
    lots of angry evacuees
    embarrassed media (if there are capable of shame)
    more ordinary folk take a critical look at CAGW
    “climate change” becomes more a joke than it already is
    Sorry, I’m deplorable
    I think it’s a joke
    (no offense to real scientists like Dr. Roy)

  78. Brazye says:

    Tell the 500 dead in Hati this.

    • Haiti was a different situation from Florida…east eyewall made a direct hit, the hurricane was stronger, and the place is so poor it has no infrastructure. Guaranteed deaths.

      • Mamacita says:

        And the homes in Haiti aren’t capable of withstanding much more than a tropical storm. The houses are simple cinder blocks. The reason people die is because they are on the water’s edge in a home that doesn’t provide any protection.

      • RAH says:

        Your right of course Doc but there is more too it that. I think it is best summed up in the truism that where life is cheaper, more will die.

      • David Appell says:

        Roy wrote:
        “…and the place is so poor it has no infrastructure. Guaranteed deaths.”

        A very good example of how climate change will impact the poor much more than the rich.

        A shrug of the shoulders is an inadequate response.

        • RAH says:

          Scientific evidence that Matthew was caused or at least more likely to have occurred due to “climate change” since your using the deaths caused by that hurricane as your “example” of the “impact” of “climate change”.

        • RAH says:

          David Appell

          Provide the scientific evidence for your claim that hurricane Matthew causing a higher death toll in Haiti than anywhere else was “A very good example of how climate change will impact the poor much more than the rich.”
          Matthew was a CAT IV at very near it’s peak strength when it hit Haiti. Is there scientific evidence that Matthew was caused by or made more powerful by “Climate Change”? I ask this because it is a fact that there is no correlation between CO2 levels and the frequency or intensity of tropical cyclones.

          Is that CLEAR ENOUGH for you?

          • Actually, is is a good example of how WEATHER disasters disproportionately affect the poor. Which is why increased prosperity, through the use of abundant and affordable energy (primarily fossil fuels), is so important. That probably won’t happen in Haiti, though, for mostly cultural reasons. But David would rather we make decisions that reduce prosperity, making even more people poor and thus vulnerable to severe WEATHER. Poverty is a REAL threat to humanity, as demonstrated by throusands of years of human history…climate change is, so far, an imaginary threat that exists in the future.

          • RAH says:

            I agree Roy. Pretty much all natural disasters have worse effects on the poor as do wars and conflicts. Those that live closer to the line between survival and oblivion will always be more susceptible to being pushed over that line. And it’s not just the immediate effects of the disaster. As I write this the incidence and mortality of Cholera is increasing in the area where Matthew struck.

            What incenses me is that I have treated Malarial babies in Liberia. There mothers bring them to you covered in mud because their local Shaman have them do that to help keep their temp down when the fever spikes. Malaria has killed far more humans over the history of mankind than anything else. It is preventable and yet to this day it ravages much of Africa and other places. But instead of spending their time and effort hyping a problem that could be solved and which has gone on through out history, the likes of Appell choose to go on and on about a problem that has not even materialized yet and may not. The only way such behavior can be deemed logical is if there is some factor(s) other than a true concern for human life involved. And that is why the claims of concern for human life from the likes of Appell ring so hollow as to be insulting.

          • Nate says:

            Roy,

            Your statement that “Poverty is a REAL threat to humanity” is an obvious truism.

            But it is also completely inconsistent with your earlier, utterly ignorant comment that certain people “choose to be poor”.

          • How can you say it’s ignorant, when it is fact? Some cultures choose to remain poor…there is nothing inherently wrong with that. I’ve known poor people who are happy to make enough just to get to the weekend and kick back and have fun, living in a cheap apartment. I came from a poor family…by necessity we grew at least half of our food…my best friend lived in little more than a shack….and I was determined to do better, so I went into debt and went as far in college as I could go. But when a culture chooses to remain poor, it takes on certain risks (e.g. lower life expectancy). Similarly, when a culture decides to pursue wealth, it also comes with a downside (e.g. more mental illness).

          • Nate says:

            Look, if you are born into poverty in Haiti in a village liked this one http://www.chances4children.org/c4c/haiti/haiti_overview,

            the challenges that you would need to overcome to become a stockbroker are rather more immense than they are for your or my children.

          • That’s very true. But the *culture* and its traditions and mores are what keep many of the world’s poor in poverty. It isn’t just some geographic accident.

          • Nate says:

            Roy,

            ‘culture’ could be a factor in poverty.

            But in fingering culture, you are choosing to ignore all other dimensions of complex sociological problem: political, historical, climate, natural resources..

            China circa 1970 vs China 2000. N. Korea vs. South Korea.

            Same cultures, very different levels of prosperity.

            I don’t think you can say N. Koreans are choosing extreme poverty.

    • An Inquirer says:

      I do not think anyone is saying to underhype a storm. The authorities have a tough choice. Underhyping is bad, but they must recognize that every time they overhype — every time they cause excessive reactions by people — they are increasing the probability that people will under react in the next crisis.

  79. Mamacita says:

    You are so right! We lived in Pearland, south of Houston, about 35 miles inland. We evacuated for Rita, but waited until the last minute. I had 2 young kids and convinced my husband we should leave. We decided We would head to east Texas via I-10 and US 69.

    We left about 5 am the day of landfall, only to get to Winnie and find out the storm had changed courses and now the entire Beaumont-Port Arthur-Winnie triangle was being evacuated and we were caught in the middle of it. Once we reached our destination, the storm was headed straight for us. We ended up going home. Our house never lost power.

    When Ike hit, we stayed home. Lost a handful of shingles off the roof, lots of branches on the trees, and a few leaks popped up in the roof. We lost power about 6 hours before landfall (we were taken off the grid. We found out we were on the same grid as the water treatment plant and kidney dialysis center.) We were without power a total of 27 hours. Totally tolerable. The hype was insane. 24 hour coverage on local tv the day before the storm, Geraldo Rivera reported from the seawall. Ok, that was totally worth it when he got slammed by the wave and bowled over. I still watch that clip for giggles!

    And we had days of coverage afterward. Yes, the coast got slammed, but those of us 35 miles inland didn’t really need to leave. Most with major damage came from roof leaks and water coming in.

    I won’t evacuate again. I refuse to jam the roads when there are so many elderly and coastal residents that need to leave. My car won’t be there to delay their evacuation ever again.

  80. ads says:

    This is no cat 4. Just look at the Bahamas for proof. If it was, those islands would be a disaster area. It was reported higher with hopes it would hit us and then there would be no more 11 years since a major one hit. This week Obama and the left have been trying to blame a hurricane on man made gw. What a joke. Ridiculous.

  81. Scott says:

    The incentives are to over-hype. Whether it is bird flu, mad cow disease, SARS, zika, terrorism, Y2K, fracking, vaccines, GMOs, nuclear energy and weaponry, the government is always going to over-hype the threat to increase it’s power and its budget. On top of that, the media excoriated GWB for his perceived inadequate response to Katrina. Politicians learned the lesson that it is better to over-hype a threat than not to.

    People will complain that the risks were exaggerated. But they’ll forget soon enough.

    How many recall the exaggerated hyperbolic language used to warn about Hurricane Patricia just last year? The media talked about it using language similar to that used for Matthew: the strongest hurricane on record; maximum wind speeds of over 200mph; huge loss of life expected. The Mexican government evacuated thousands of people. Yet Patricia lost its energy as soon as it made landfall over Mexico, and nobody died. But I bet many have forgotten about Patricia, but they won’t forget about Katrina for a long time.

  82. DJ says:

    Im a lifelong Broward county FL resident. Im used to hurricanes, close calls with hurricanes and the hysteria created.

    The reality is that most stores and gas stations will open within 2 to 3 days of a hurricane unless its a katrina or andrew like storm. If its looking like a cat 5 you should be heading out of town anyway and not worrying so much about prep. Most people already have 3 days to a weeks worth of food in their cabinets and refrigerators anyway so theres no need to rush the supermarket and fight over cans of chef boyardee. As for water most people that live in hurricane zones should keep water purification tablets on hand. You can purify pond or canal water to survive on and not get caught up looking for bottle water amidst the panic.

    The media always plays up the panic, people should be prepared but the media fans the flames and makes people think that the zombie apocalypse is upon us

  83. ken henson says:

    We “weathered” three typhoons in Tokyo(Johnson AFB) and two on Guam(Anderson AFB).
    I do not recall much about the Tokyo typhoons(possible derivation from Cantonese for great wind), but I do remember one on Guam rather well. We stayed in our quarters which had solid walls, flat roofs and wooden louvers with screens rather that glass windows. We were in the “new” quarters. People in the “old” quarters, quonset huts with push-to-open windows, came to our quarters for their safety. I was moved from my bed to a cot to accommodate our “guests” and I remember the more than ankle deep water inside our house. I remember the howling wind, but we went outside during the eye. It was ominously dark, almost black clouds, for 360 degrees, but if we could see blue sky as we looked directly overhead. Our guests went home to much drier quarters. Obviously, I survived. I also feel certain there was significant damage, however, to property and probable loss of life among the civilian populations.
    The Tokyo typhoons were 1948-49 and Guam typhoons were 1952-53, before “climate change clamor” days, but our shelter was certainly no more storm-proof than is available now.
    I also cringed through the Topeka tornado, 060866, which had gone back into the clouds just before it passed directly over our house. It sounded more like a Saturn rocket launch than a freight train. It sucked back to earth at Burnett’s Mound and remained there as it ravaged the city. It killed 17 people and did $250-million(1966 $) damage. I was also caught at work in 1999 when tornadic peripheral winds knocked a hole in the radar dome and sucked our external electric door on the newsroom open. I was caught in like storms since.

  84. MikeN says:

    Is it now likely that the hurricane will not reach the US?

  85. Bobby R. says:

    As a Florida resident, I stopped listening to their forecasts years ago. It’s ALL hype.
    Publix and Home Depot are ALWAYS the BIG winners with these things.
    With this storm, we were told to prepare for 60 mph sustained winds, and 100 mph wind gusts.
    I don’t believe that the winds exceeded 25 mph.
    Meanwhile, my neighbors that live paycheck to paycheck, just spent all of their money, and lost a lot of sleep with the panic that the media instilled in them.
    F*ing Shame!!!!

  86. noylj says:

    As the Gov. of Florida said, “It is never too early to evacuate.”
    Based on that, why wasn’t Florida evacuated about 100 years ago and no one allowed to re-settle.
    OF COURSE there is such a thing as over-hyped and such a thing as politically-driven.
    Now, the best guess is the storm is going to loop back to Haiti or something.
    Remember Shepard Smith–you’re all going to die if the storm reaches land.

    • dave says:

      “It is never too early to evacuate.”

      First, locate the toilet paper (or a bidet, if you are a sophisticate.)

  87. Alan J. Perrick says:

    People say there is a RACE problem. People say this RACE problem will be solved when the third world pours into EVERY and ONLY into White countries.

    People say the only solution to the RACE problem is if ALL and ONLY White countries “assimilate,” i.e., intermarry, with all those non-Whites.

    But if I tell that obvious truth about the ongoing program of genocide against White people, Anti-Whites agree that I am a naziwhowantstokillsixmillionjews.

    Anti-racist is a codeword for anti-White.

  88. Andy Cutler says:

    We have the common problem of collectivists everywhere. How can they get away with making bad decisions for you? After all, you’re not as stupid as them, so you’ll figure out after the first few times they’re usually lying and ignore what they tell you to do.

    Then something real happens and nobody listens.

    A problem so old there is a parable – the boy who cried wolf – about it.

    The solution is to criminalize government involvement in these sorts of private economic decisions. Leave it to people and their insurance companies to make the appropriate decision regarding the risks and costs of fleeing versus the risks and costs of staying.

  89. Mark says:

    It’s not the NWS that’s the problem. It’s The Weather Channel, and idiots like Shep Smith who are pushing people to ignore this type of hypernonsense. Governors, like the Georgia idiot, are not helping.

    • David Appell says:

      How many panicked in the New England Hurricane of 1938 (up to 800 deaths)?

      • ray says:

        “How many panicked [in] 1938…?”

        I would imagine none – because it was hardly forecast. The failure to give a warning that the storm was turning into a hurricane may have been a blessing in disguise, since the eye of the system moved so quickly up the coast (60-70 mph) that any general attempt to flee would have put immense numbers of people in harm’s way.

        • ray says:

          “…the storm was turning into a hurricane…”

          meaning:

          “…the expected diminution of a hurricane into a storm was not happening…

        • David Appell says:

          “…any general attempt to flee would have put immense numbers of people in harms way.”

          You’re right — the hurricane of ’38 wasn’t forecast.

          How many lives could have been saved if it had been?

  90. Reasonable Skeptic says:

    This “over warning” applies to all severe weather. Every storm I recall was less intense than the warming. You present the worst scenario because you could lose your job if you “under-warn).

    This bring to mind the trial of the 3 geologists in Italy and the earthquake.

    • David Appell says:

      Reasonable Skeptic says:
      “This over warning applies to all severe weather. Every storm I recall was less intense than the warming.”

      Sure, that sounds unbiased and scientific.

      Ironically, the government haters would be the first to whine if authorities “under warned” severe storms.

      Complaining is their only interest.

      • Lewis says:

        Yes David, We are completely dependent upon government to tell us what to do. Without government we would be lost in the wilderness.

        Bah! Government is just people protecting their turf. As the writer said, they’re worried about their jobs.

        • Nate says:

          Lewis,

          I’m guessing you’re into DIY hurricane tracking and forecasting? Cool!

          Your Cessna flights through the eye should be a blast.

          And have fun setting up your laptop to run the weather prediction models that I assume you’ve got all worked out.

          Oh yeah, glad to hear you’re building your own weather satellites, rockets, launch pads, and monitoring program.

          Best of luck with all that!

        • David Appell says:

          Of course, Nate — essentially all of the information available to Lewis comes from government sensors, airplanes, and satellites.

  91. Leon Huffman says:

    I have lived in Winter Park Florida years all my ife. I experienced the eye of Donna and Charlie and witnessed their devastation first hand. I take these storm seriously and I finished my preparations for Matthew by 5:00 PM on Thursday October 6th including getting the generator to run. I then watched pretty much nonstop the coverage of the storm on the Weather Channel for the next 24 hours. I did supplement this coverage with visits to various websites. I do not recall even once any mention of any recorded sustained hurricane force winds anywhere in the storm area from Ft. Lauderdale to Jacksonville. In fact there was never any discussion of actual recordings of sustained winds. There was a gust of 109 MPH that was recorded at Cape Canaveral where the costs extends an extra 15 miles from the mainland. That recorded gust was repeatedly mentioned in the crawl on the bottom of the screen and by the on air reporters. Hours into the repeated breathless mention of this gust someone mentioned that this was recorded by one of the wind towers on the cape by an instrument 54 feet into the air. My anemometer is 20 feet in the air on the west wide of a lake 50 miles from the cape. I never recorded any sustained winds in excess of 25 MPH and never had a tropical storm gust. My gage was somewhat sheltered from the prevailing direction of the storm winds when the center of circulation was closes to my location so I have no doubt that there were tropical storm gusts in my area. Here is my point. There are at least 6 recording wind towers on the cape which was the closest piece of land to the center of circulation to that point. Some of these towers are 200 feet high. Why did we NEVER get any information on the sustained winds recorded by any of these wind towers? I believe they were not reported because they did not fit the narrative of the story. The story was that we have a dangerous Cat 4 storm with 130 MPH winds that is going to bring death and destruction to every human creature its path. I am not going to say that there were not 130 MPH winds somewhere in the circulation of that storm but I bet you would have to look pretty hard to find them. What were the sustained winds 10, 15, 20, 15 and 30 miles from the center of the circulation in all quadrants? Now that might be useful information. The weather Channel never bothered to report the sustained winds recorded at the dozens and dozens of reporting station located all along the east coast of Florida. They were too busy spreading fear to let the actual facts about storm intensity get in the way. At least they did not mention change.

  92. RAH says:

    Here is an interesting paper on “the Hurricane-Tornado”.

    I already knew that the vast majority of tornadoes in the US travel in a North Easterly direction.

    http://io9.gizmodo.com/when-tornados-strike-which-way-do-they-travel-513093207

    But I guessed that tornadoes spawned from hurricanes had more random vectors. Apparently I was mistaken.

    http://docs.lib.noaa.gov/rescue/mwr/093/mwr-093-07-0453.pdf

  93. David Appell says:

    Roy wrote:
    “And it looks like the major hurricane drought for the U.S. is probably going to continue.”

    This tabulation is starting to look ever more crude and insensitive, given 800 deaths in Haiti, and all the damage and deaths caused by Katrina, Sandy, and Ike.

    And Roy, I have yet to see you comment on this:

    The Arbitrary Definition of the Current Atlantic Major Hurricane Landfall Drought, Robert E. Hart et al, BAMS (May 2016).
    http://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/pdf/10.1175/BAMS-D-15-00185.1

    • Funny how definitions are fine until they don’t fit a narrative, David. Then the goalposts are moved so the narrative can be preserved.

      • David Appell says:

        Is that really your only comment on this scientific paper?

        It sounds like you’re more interested in scoring political points.

        • John Bills says:

          more comments are not needed on that paper

        • RAH says:

          Roy states the obvious and Appell objects. I imagine that Roy, like I and many others, rate this “scientific paper” as those written by Peter Wadham about the end of Arctic sea ice. You, on the other hand……..

          • David Appell says:

            RAH: Do you have any meaningful comments?

          • Lewis says:

            What Dr. Spencer commented on was ‘being consistent’. He didn’t comment on the paper itself.

            Try this:

            Definitions are used to define terms. A term should be specific so that useful (correct) information is conveyed and received. When people define terms differently, then they misunderstand each other; for practical purposes they are speaking a different language.
            This is true in any endeavor, social or science.
            So when David attempts to change the meaning of the terms, he is trying to change the language to suit himself, but then others will no longer understand accurately. But, since his is an argument based on semantics, he can then have people saying they agree with him, even when they dont understand what he really said. They only know how to repeat the sounds of the words.
            This is propaganda in the style of Goebbels. Good work David. Are you paid well?

          • David Appell says:

            Lewis: You completely avoided discussing the points raised in the Hart et al BAMS paper. Which is also typical.

  94. Norman says:

    David Appell

    I looked through your linked paper. The authors would like to use damage as a measure of storm metric.

    Does this mean the modest warming of the globe caused Matthew to be a more severe storm?

    I looked into it. Here is some links to show total energy of tropical storms is not increasing.
    http://models.weatherbell.com/tropical.php

    Here is one that looks at detail at hurricanes. Warmer water can intensify hurricanes but other factors can suppress their formation.

    Lots of graphs on hurricane numbers.

    http://www.euronet.nl/users/e_wesker/atlhur.html

  95. Norman says:

    David Appell

    I also link to the formation of Matthew
    https://weather.com/storms/hurricane/news/hurricane-matthew-track-history

    It hit Haiti October 4th
    http://www.ospo.noaa.gov/data/sst/anomaly/2016/anoma.10.3.2016.gif

    Sea Surface temperatures were very close to normal temperatures so Global Warming does not seem to have anything to do with the intensity of the storm.
    http://www.ospo.noaa.gov/data/sst/anomaly/2016/anoma.10.3.2016.gif

    I do not think science supports your hypothesis that Matthew was in any way more intense because of global warming and the deaths in Haiti had anything to do with releasing carbon dioxide into the atmosphere by burning fossil fuels.

  96. barry says:

    To all the experts, when is the best time to issue the warning to evacuate?

    Is it 5 minutes before the storm hits? 30 minutes? A day before it might to give time for traffic snarls? Or what is prudent, exactly?

    How fast can a hurricane move?

  97. nigel says:

    “How fast can a hurricane move?”

    From 0 to 70 mph. Usually between 10 and 25 mph.

    “…the warning to evacuate…”

    There is no such thing as THE warning. There will be a succession of more urgent warnings when and if the conditions warrant.

    The first definite warning at a given place is usually given when the the three-day cone of tracks from the National Hurricane Center includes the locale. A “worst case, but not absurd, scenario” is adopted as a basis for warnings.

    The main issue is always the danger from storm surges near the coast*. Local evacuation is considered** when there is a realistic chance of a storm surge of more than four feet.
    Thereafter, a lot depends on the local relief. A sensible person looks carefully at the local emergency plan. For example…

    https://www.pinellascounty.org/emergency/knowyourzone.htm

    Mobile home owners are always advised to evacuate if high winds are expected, whether or not a surge is expected.

    *Heavy rains can also bring the danger of floods and mudslides inland.

    ** A general evacuation, say of a whole county, is not a realistic option.

    • barry says:

      There is no such thing as THE warning. There will be a succession of more urgent warnings when and if the conditions warrant.

      I think many commenters here would say that’s already overkill…

      It occurred to me that the people charged with giving enough time for an orderly evacuation would have to consider quite a few things, with uncommon denominators such as disabled people, people hooked up to life support at home, the elderly and infirm. Then there is the traffic to consider, how many ways out of an area, how clogged it could get if the warning came too late etc.

      Sure, there will be plenty of times when the threat did not materialize, but you just know that if the people with that duty didn’t err on the side of caution, the litigation would come fiercer than the storm surges, and especially from the people who grizzled in the past about hyped threats. It’s always the complainers who litigate. The stoics wouldn’t be getting their knickers in a twist about news media

  98. ren says:

    There is now very strong ionization of the atmosphere. The strongest where there is less ozone.
    Strong pressure anomalies over the polar circle. Weak solar wind.
    http://sol.spacenvironment.net/nairas/Dose_Rates.html
    http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/stratosphere/strat-trop/gif_files/time_pres_HGT_ANOM_OND_NH_2016.png

  99. ren says:

    Roy W. Spencer, dr
    This is a radiation doses for one hour at each point.
    http://images.tinypic.pl/i/00828/9djnbmy6lvho.png

  100. ren says:

    Let’s see the current distribution of ozone in the southern hemisphere.
    http://ozonewatch.gsfc.nasa.gov/Scripts/big_image.php?date=2016-10-08&hem=S

  101. Mike Flynn says:

    Just as a matter of interest to anyone concerned about ozone depletion –

    “Ozone is formed in the atmosphere when energetic ultraviolet (UV) radiation dissociates molecules of oxygen, O2 , into separate oxygen atoms. Free oxygen atoms can recombine to form oxygen molecules but if a free oxygen atom collides with an oxygen molecule, it joins up, forming ozone. Ozone molecules can also be decomposed by ultraviolet radiation into a free atom and an oxygen molecule. Ozone is thus continuously created and destroyed in the atmosphere by UV radiation coming from the sun.”

    As long as you have oxygen and sunlight, you have ozone.

    It cannot be removed or destroyed in any long term sense. Where there is a prolonged lack of sunlight, eg, Antarctica during the winter, where sunlight is almost nil due to the Earth’s inclination, atmospheric ozone concentrations drop to very low levels.

    Rowland and Molina shared a Nobel Prize by convincing almost everybody that fantasy supercedes fact.

    Hurricanes come and go. Unpredictably, as far as is currently known. Make up your own mind about what you need to do. Accept the consequences.

    Or locate elsewhere, where you can worry about earthquakes, floods, tornados or droughts instead. Life is uncertain. One approach might be to enjoy life while you have it.

    Cheers.

  102. barry says:

    Ah. Ozone dent denial. Let’s just cut to the chase and deny science.

    • ren says:

      Ozone and water vapor present in the atmosphere in large “sets”. Water vapor has a lower density than air, ozone is heavier than air.

  103. ren says:

    Distribution of ozone is important in practice, if he wants to have an early weather forecast. Circulation in the stratosphere, especially in winter, ahead of the situation in the troposphere.

  104. ren says:

    Strong ionization by galactic radiation changes the chemical composition of the atmosphere. Increases in the stratosphere, the amount of oxides of nitrogen in particular N2O.

  105. ren says:

    In the coming days, the winter hit in Canada and Russia.

  106. ren says:

    When solar activity decreases in the stratosphere show up two centers of low pressure, one over Canada, the other on the eastern Siberia. This is due to the fact that the Earth’s magnetic field in the north has two centers.
    http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/stratosphere/strat_a_f/gif_files/gfs_z100_nh_f00.png
    http://www.geomag.bgs.ac.uk/data_service/models_compass/polarnorth.html

  107. David says:

    I have a suggestion: Graphics are one of the most powerful communication tools. So, have the NHC change their famous “Cone of Uncertainty” graphic to eliminate the cone with the track in the middle. Rather, show 3 tracks! One on either edge and one in the middle. There is a written and sometimes spoken disclaimer about not paying attention to the actual track on the graphic. But, that goes totally against human nature. Either show multiple tracks, or only show the cone, without the track.

    • RAH says:

      Track or no track, the NHC cone of death shifts over time. So even the graphic intended to convey uncertainty as to the areas that may be effected is it’s self uncertain.

  108. Dean Whitte says:

    Roy has gone quiet. I imagine that he is praying for the dozens of people who lost their life in the US from Matthew. It is possible that at least one of these people died because of the oft repeated meme on alt-right websites that Matthew was being over-hyped due to some sort of liberal media conspiracy. Rush Limbaugh went off on his radio show the other day about how we haven’t had a major hurricane in 11 years (I wonder where he got his data?). Drudge blamed Matthew on the Clinton campaign. Perhaps someone heard this and decided to do some due diligence research by reading a more scientific website like drroyspencer. Then they decided that they should not evacuate because of the ‘over-warning’. If they had the stamina to read the comments, then they surely would have been inclined to think that Matthew was nothing to fear.

    I think drroyspencer is probably complicit in a least one fatality, and that is manslaughter. When Trump is president, he will be in jail.

  109. Geo says:

    What is the relevance of counting hurricanes that hit the U.S. alone when there have been dozens of powerful ones that have been hitting nations in the Pacific Ocean?

    It’s GLOBAL warming, not U.S. warming (2% of the world’s surface area). Yet another example of not wanting to see the big picture.

    • RAH says:

      The relevance is that after Katrina there were many that claimed strong hurricanes strikes on the US would become more common due to global warming. The exact opposite has happened.

      As for typhoons (Not Hurricanes)in the Pacific, this is nothing unusual.

      There is no long term trend in Global ACE.
      http://models.weatherbell.com/tropical.php
      And the short term uptick in the Pacific ACE can be accounted for by the El Nino conditions that persisted last year and the effects of which linger on.

      Oh BTW if it is GLOBAL warming perhaps you can explain why it has not been getting warmer in the Antarctic? It is after all about 10% of the earths surface.

      • David Appell says:

        RAH says:
        “There is no long term trend in Global ACE.
        http://models.weatherbell.com/tropical.php

        ACE is about the worst metric imaginable, since it does not include the size of a storm.

        A baseball thrown at 90 mph and a storm with 90 mph maximum sustained winds have the exact same ACE.

      • David Appell says:

        And actually, since 1970 global ACE has been increasing by 2.3% per decade.

        data:
        http://models.weatherbell.com/global_ace_monthly.dat

        • ray says:

          “…2.3% per decade.”

          What is the 95% confidence interval for this estimate?

          • nigel says:

            Ray, a quick and dirty calculation (reading the annuals off of a graph of Maue, and adding) shows the following:

            We have FOUR decadal ACE, namely:

            1970-1979 inclusive 6570
            1980-1989 inclusive 7000
            1990-1999 inclusive 8810
            2000-2009 inclusive 7380.

            (If anyone needs reminding, ACE is a number with unit 10^4 kn^2, produced by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Agency for each storm, and is designed to be proportional to, and therefore a proxy for, the energy produced by that system.)

            If one puts a regression line through the four points then one obtains an equation

            ACE = 6804 + 424 x (number of decades*)

            with 95% confidence intervals for the coefficients,

            intercept 327 to 1034
            slope -1467 to 2315 .

            * It makes a slight difference to the intercept whether you number the decades 0,1,2,3 or 1,2,3,4.

          • ray says:

            So, the interval of the slope coefficient includes zero.
            For a volatile time series of four points, that would be expected.

          • ray says:

            Using annual global figures, another way of looking at it is:

            1970-1979 there were 0 ACE years over 1000

            1980-1989 there were 0 ACE years over 1000

            1990-1999 there were 3 ACE years over 1000

            2000-2009 there was 1 ACE year over 1000

            2010-2016 there was 1 ACE year over 1000.

            (I am assuming 2016 will not exceed 1000.)

            The 1990s seem to be a crest of some sort (i.e. either randomly or with an explanation.)

            Actual numbers (approx.)

            1992 1130
            1994 1020
            1997 1070

            2004 1010

            2015 1140

          • nigel says:

            I want to make it definite – because the format is unclear – that the interval for the slope coefficient in that little regression is from negative 1467 to positive 2315.

          • nigel says:

            By the way, ACE emphazises on the INTENSITY of cyclones. As such it seems a good thing to look at when the scientific interest is an effect (canary in the coal mine) of putative global warming. Something called Track Integrated Kinetic Energy does take specific account of size; and numbers of tropical cyclones is a measure which can be easily agreed upon and observed.

            As regards inter-annual variability in the Atlantic, ACE correlates as follows with these measures:

            ACE and number of tropical cyclones 0.78

            ACE and TIKE 0.86.

            https://www.researchgate.net/publication/258698790_The_Track_Integrated_Kinetic_Energy_of_Atlantic_Tropical_Cyclones

          • David Appell says:

            nigel wrote:
            “(If anyone needs reminding, ACE is a number with unit 10^4 kn^2, produced by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Agency for each storm, and is designed to be proportional to, and therefore a proxy for, the energy produced by that system.)”

            No, it isn’t.

            In fact, ACE doesn’t even have the units of energy.

          • David Appell says:

            Again, nigel, a baseball thrown at 90 mph and a storm with 90 mph maximum sustained winds have the exact same ACE.

        • David Appell says:

          nigel wrote:
          “By the way, ACE emphazises on the INTENSITY of cyclones.”

          What is the scientific definition of “intensity?”

        • David Appell says:

          ray says:
          2.3% per decade.
          “What is the 95% confidence interval for this estimate?”

          Without autocorrelation, 4.9%/dec.

          • nigel says:

            David Appell says:

            “…4.9%/dec….”

            I presume you mean PLUS OR MINUS 4.9%, so that ZERO is included in the interval.

            David Appell says:

            “What is the scientific definition of “intensity?””

            According to the Australian Bureau of Meteorology:

            “Tropical cyclone intensity is defined [sic] by the maximum wind speed over open flat land or water.”

            http://www.bom.gov.au/cyclone/about/intensity.shtml

      • Toneb says:

        “Oh BTW if it is GLOBAL warming perhaps you can explain why it has not been getting warmer in the Antarctic? It is after all about 10% of the earths surface.”

        Oh, BTW:
        I assume you mean the interior?
        And why would you expect the entire global surface to exhibit the same warming from the off (only noticeable against background -ve forcings since ~1970) of anthro CO2 rising ?
        You are aware of the geography of the Antarctic – it’s isolation from the climate system in many respects. The O3 hole not withstanding?

        Just like sceptics expect a monotonic straight line rise in GMT, and cannot comprehend the natural variation of system that stores 93% of it’s received energy in the ocean before passing it to the atmosphere.
        Climate and life my friend is a tad more complicated.

        • RAH says:

          Toneb

          Take my comment in the context clearly intended. That is as the reply to Geo referencing the US as 2% of the earths surface. It was HIS emphasis on it being “GLOBAL” warming after all and my intent to point out that the warming is not global thus bursting his far too expansive bubble. Typical of an activist to project as you just have. And typical of activists to defend a term that is inaccurate. The use of which is obviously intended to deceive.

          • David Appell says:

            RAH: What would be the trend in Antarctic temperatures without AGW, i.e. from natural factors alone?

          • RAH says:

            I have yet to see anyone prove that the little bit of general warming we are experiencing is a result of anything other than natural factors. So your question is based on the presumption of facts not in evidence.