NOAA Now Backtracking On Water Temp/Hurricane/Climate Breakdown Links

[hatrack]

EDIT

Technically, many scientists who believe global warming is increasing the intensity of storms would not argue with NOAA's belief that the number of storms has more to do with other factors, possibly including a natural cycle. But NOAA's extensive review last fall of the causes of hurricane activity fails to consider the notion that greenhouse gases are making storms more dangerous. Scientists outside NOAA say this reflects pressure from officials in the Bush administration, which doesn't want a link between climate change and hurricane strength forcing it to take steps against global warming.

NOAA responded to this criticism Wednesday by adding an online editor's note to its fall article. The note says, ''It was not the intention of this article to discount the presence of a human-induced global warming element or to attempt to claim that such an element is not present. There is a robust, ongoing discussion on hurricanes and climate change within NOAA and the scientific community."

The head of NOAA, Conrad C. Lautenbacher Jr., also e-mailed NOAA employees to take issue with media reports that NOAA scientists had been ''muzzled" in discussing global warming and hurricanes with the press. ''I encourage our scientists to speak freely and openly," he wrote, with the proviso that they make clear when they are expressing personal views and when they are characterizing their work as part of NOAA's mission.

All this backtracking is welcome but belated. NOAA's message all last fall was that greenhouse gases had nothing to do with Katrina. Lautenbacher said in a telephone interview with the Globe this week that NOAA is looking not only into the link between climate change and hurricanes, but also into its possible effect on droughts. He said NOAA had been able to increase resources for research ''modestly." Congress should grant it more than modest resources to explore this crucial issue.

EDIT/END

http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/editorials/articles/2006/02/17/katrina_and_climate/

[Zenlitened]

1. Repukes give a whole new meaning to the term "political science."

:grr:

[ewagner]

2. The NOAA people

to whom I have been exposed are really good scientists...they are as married to the scientific method as they are to their spouses. If you think of their work like a big Master's Degree Thesis or Doctoral Dissertation, you can pretty much understand how thorough and cautious they are.

Even Max Mayfield, Director of the National Hurricane Center, who I admire and respect wasn't willing to make the global warming= stronger/more hurricanes leap because all the data shows that we are in the middle of an 11 year cycle of active hurricane seasons.

I know.

It's almost intuitive to link one with the other and my personal believ is that there is a DIRECT link. But at the moment, the statistical, scientific, bullet-proof smoking gun hasn't been found.

[hatrack]

3. I wouldn't go that far, either. It's the water temperature issue that . .

. . . to me, is about as obvious as this game gets.

[rodeodance]

4. thanks.

[Strelnikov_]

6. Hurricane Debate Shatters Civility Of Weather Science

After reading this article, I have to wonder if Gray does not have an agenda.

Worsened by Global Warming?
Spats Are So Tempestuous, Sides Are Barely Talking, Charge of 'Brain Fossilization'
By VALERIE BAUERLEIN
Staff Reporter of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL
February 2, 2006; Page A1

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/06033/648772.stm

William Gray, America's most prominent hurricane scientist and an ardent foe of the belief that global warming has worsened hurricanes, was supposed to join a panel discussing the storms. So was Greg Holland of the National Center on Atmospheric Research -- who disagrees with Dr. Gray. But the organizers withdrew the invitations after deciding the dispute had grown so nasty it was too risky to put the two in the same room.

. . .

His adversary Dr. Holland is among a group of prominent scientists who argue that the recent burst of powerful storms isn't part of a normal pattern. In a recent article, he and co-authors said that global warming caused by human activity, while not affecting the number of hurricanes, appears to be causing more of them to be very intense. Dr. Holland went to the meeting despite the cancellation of his joint appearance with Dr. Gray and presented his paper's conclusions during a session on a wide variety of weather issues.

. . .

Dr. Gray attacked the Science article on his Web site, agreeing that ocean temperatures were climbing but maintaining that the rise was largely attributable to long-term heating and cooling trends. The rise in water temperature has negligible connection to the hurricanes, he argued. He complained that "the near universal reference to this paper over the last few weeks by most major media outlets is helping to establish a false belief among the general public...that global warming may be a contributing factor" to devastation such as that from Katrina.

. . .

Scientists on both sides say they expect follow-up studies proving they are right to be published before the next hurricane season starts in June. Drs. Trenberth and Emanuel are submitting separate studies to major journals arguing that the influence of natural cycles has been greatly overestimated, a mutinous theory in established hurricane science. Dr. Landsea says he has submitted his own analysis to a major journal confirming the natural ebb and flow of storms argued by Dr. Gray. Both sides are waiting to see which papers will be accepted.

[hatrack]

7. "The rise in water temps has negligible connction to the hurricanes"?

Yes, because hurricanes can form over water of any temperature - Sea of Japan, Sea of Okhotsk, Gulf of Mexico, the Denmark Strait, the Shatt al Arab - it just doesn't matter! And water temperature doesn't change storm strength AT ALL.

:puke: :eyes:

[ewagner]

8. Wow! Thanks for posting that

Very interesting article....some other tropical weather gurus reside at Florida state university(the home of the Super medley hurricane tracking model). It would be interesting to see what their take on the situation is...

[InvisibleTouch]

5. I'm reading a very interesting book

"The Coming Global Superstorm," upon which, very obviously, the movie "The Day After Tomorrow" was based. The authors are not scientists, and they make some very far-flung speculation (which they admit to), and they state some things that I know to be inaccurate, as I have a background in paleontology and biology. But the basic premise, that changes in the ocean currents will destabilize the weather and cause monstrous storms, seems entirely plausible. The fact is, while we know global warming is happening, and we know there will be an effect, no one can say for certain what that effect will be. So the "superstorm" theory, leading potentially to a new ice age, is as likely as any other scenario at this point. (I know, it seems contradictory: global warming=new ice age; but if you follow the logic and the progression, it does make sense.) Anyway, I very much recommend the book; you may or may not wish to disregard the "ancient civilization" thread, and you may wish to read it with a grain of salt, but do read it:

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0743470656/sr=8-2/qid=1140279366/ref=pd_bbs_2/102-0120163-5964946?%5Fencoding=UTF8

While there are natural cycles in weather patterns, there's no doubt in my mind that the recent crop of hurricanes is directly related to human-caused global warming. That's one of several issues I have with this book - the authors seem to be doing their best to absolve humanity of much of the blame for our current situation, the mass extinction that's underway - when there's no question as to what the cause is. The authors are also far more hopeful about science and technology saving the world, than I'm able to give credit for - but remember, this book was written at the end of the Clinton administration, when the prevailing attitude toward the environment in Washington was entirely different. None the less, as I said, it's worth a read.