Oh, so it IS a local effect! No, wait, it's GLOBAL warming - er uh ...!
Even more confusing - isn't WATER vapor also a "greenhouse gas" and more abundant than CO_2 in the atmosphere? Oh! I forgot, water and cloud physics aren't included in the models!
Ivan, please set the record straight for us!
BTW - did you know that temperatures have been measured over only the tiniest fraction of the ocean's surface which makes it somewhat difficult to gauge any global effects or trends?
Please forward your requests to:
National Center for Atmospheric Research in Boulder, Colorado
Ivan, I know you're really busy right now, what with the destruction of the Gulf Coast and such, but could you be careful not to suck up and fling out so many jellyfish at people?
It really hurts when they hit you (stings like hell, really), especially if they hit you in the eye. I'm not trying to tell you how to do your job or anything..uhm.. just a suggestion.
The jelly may be getting too thick
The increase in hurricane activity is caused by increased Sea Surface temperatures, whiuch is attributed to an increase in the activitry of the global conveyor belt. This is a cyclic event, that occurs in multi decadal time frame. So easy to blame it on global warming. Everything can be blamed on global warming.
---and, for a less apocalyptic analysis, http://thor.cira.colostate.edu/tropics/surge/surge.html
Couple excerpts: " Figure 2.1 shows the numbers of named storms, hurricanes, and intense hurricanes in the past 56 years. Based on interpolation, a simple linear trend reveals that while the number of named storms has risen by about 1 every 83 years, the number of hurricanes has remained constant, and the number of intense hurricanes has actually been decreasing at a rate of 1 every 75 years;" and, "Figure 2.2 shows the extreme interannual variations in NTC. Consecutive years can sometimes be a factor of six more active than one another. However, a best-fit 6th–order polynomial applied to the data brings out a fascinating multi-decadal trend. One can clearly see an NTC maximum in the 1940s and 1950s, an NTC minimum in the 1980s, and a recent increase in the late 1990s.
Landsea et al (1999) investigated an even longer record and noted that 1900 through the mid-1920s was relatively quiescent, the mid-1920s through 1960 was relatively active, and 1960 through the mid-1990s was once again relatively quiescent. "
This is always my biggest complaint against global warming advocates. Since they are saying that global warming can cause both hot and cold weather, and more or less frequent storms, it can be blamed for absolutely every weather phenomena. That's just too convenient. Nine years ago (summer of '95), in the northeastern US, we went entire weeks with highs above 100F in July and August. This year, we went the entire month of July and most of August without a high above 90F. I guess you can blame both on global warming (as well as two years ago when we had record cold and snowfalls). Since all of these events are looked at indivdually (why didn't they list of all the Atlantic hurricanes for the past 50 years? edit: Bystander has it), you can blame absolutely anything on global warming without actually showing a link.
But the first sentence of that quote was absolutely hilarious:
So, if you pick a short enough timeframe, Ivan is among the most powerful storms? Ok, that's a meaningful statement how? Hey, Ivan is the most powerful hurricane this month!
Ivan made landfall as a cat3 but was cat5 for about a day last week. According to Bystander's link, that puts it in the top 2 of 10 for the average year. That's not altogether special.
I'm glad I took "Public Opinion and Propaganda" in college. It helps a lot with reading news stories...
Separate names with a comma.