Re: Study Blames Global Warming for Stronger Hurricanes
- From: Earl <neptune@xxxxxx>
- Date: 22 Sep 2005 16:32:09 GMT
maureen <maureen@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in
news:9k55j1turbt1sj8kt88430u8ekje5rmvkd@xxxxxxx:
> On 22 Sep 2005 03:00:42 GMT, Earl <neptune@xxxxxx> wrote:
>
>>maureen <maureen@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in
>>news:uqq3j1p55tgr2dddhh4tt76t9vb3e675pl@xxxxxxx:
>>
>>>
>>> New, detailed study blames warming world for stronger
>>> hurricanes.
>>>
>>> " We can say with confidence that the trends in sea
>>> surface temperatures and hurricane intensity are connected
>>> to climate change,? says Webster?s co-author Judy Curry,
>>> also of the Georgia Institute of Technology. The team
>>> looked at the incidence of intense tropical storms and the
>>> study results are the strongest affirmation yet that
>>> Katrina-level hurricanes are becoming more frequent in a
>>> warmer world"
>>>
>>> http://www.newscientist.com/channel/earth/hurricane/dn8002
>>>
>>
>>It is amazing what a group that is determined to push the
>>global warming concept (New Scientist) will do to
>>selectively alter a report.
>
>
> I thought this would get you out of hiding, Earl. ;-)
>
> The best places to go for information on scientific studies
> are to the studies themselves, or to scientific magazines
> where experts summarize the studies. The New Scientist is
> not interested in altering scientific reports. It's Bush
> and his gang who do that constantly -- and the vested
> interests of the mega fossil fuel lobby groups who give them
> mucho lolly, and also hire scientists to put out
> anti-scientific information against global warming.
>
>
>>
>>The same study, as reported by the Economist
>>http://www.economist.com/science/displayStory.cfm?story_id=44
>>00847 47
>>
>>notes these very interesting report problems.
>>(they also bother to have the graphs which show a rise, but
>>with a LOT of noise.
>>
>>And the long tern incrase in Atlantic storms just shows that
>>the cycle exists that we have known about for decades. We
>>are now in a high number period.
>
>
> It's interesting that you would choose a general news
> magazine for your interpretation of the new data on
> hurricanes over a magazine that deals soley with science,
> Earl. I know which source I would prefer .
>
> The co-Author of the study , Judy Curry, said herself that
> the study results are the strongest affirmation yet that
> Katrina-level hurricanes are becoming more frequent in a
> warmer world.
>
> Now that is going to the real source and not a source of
> general news.
>
>
> maureen
>
>
>
>
>
>
The Science section of Economist is far from a general news
magazine.
The content and reporting are far better than you will find in
NS or Discover. SciAm once had a good reputation but lost it 20
years ago with a political biased publishing staff than now
pushes the latest fad. NS and Discover have lowered themselves
to the level of Popular Science or Popular Mechanics.
Since I tend to read Science (AAAS) whenever possible I can see
the difference between intelligent summations and political
spin.
But you did not bother to explain how the 2nd largest increase
in intensity occured in an area with no measured temperature
increase. Your argument for the GW link fails on that
observation alone.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Study Blames Global Warming for Stronger Hurricanes
- From: E. (Bet) Anthony
- Re: Study Blames Global Warming for Stronger Hurricanes
- From: Peter Vos
- Re: Study Blames Global Warming for Stronger Hurricanes
- References:
- Prev by Date: Re: Blanco Says Feds Pledged Buses
- Next by Date: Re: Roberts Spilled the Beans on How Repubs Plan to End Abortion, and They're Not Going to Bother With Overturning Roe - "You can have an abortion, but you can't get an abortion."
- Previous by thread: Re: Study Blames Global Warming for Stronger Hurricanes
- Next by thread: Re: Study Blames Global Warming for Stronger Hurricanes
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
