Global Warming Made Dorian Stronger, Say Discredited Scientists


I deliberately did not at first comment on the predictable claim from Warmists to the effect that global warming had made the  recent hurricane worse.  I was sure a skeptic closer to the data would do the honours.  And, sure enough, Paul Homewood has demolished the claim.  I reproduce his post below -- JR


The Grauniaid article is not worth repeating, as it is full of the same lies we see every year, every time there is a bit of bad weather. Guardian readers naturally fall for it every time, without even thinking to question it.

But if there was any truth to Mann and Dessler’s little theories, would not we see clear proof in the actual data?

No of Major Atlantic Hurricanes – 1851 to 2018

https://www.aoml.noaa.gov/hrd/tcfaq/E11.html

According to the experts at NOAA’s Hurricane Research Division, however,  there were many more major Atlantic hurricanes in the 1940s and 50s, than in the last two decades.

Data from the pre 1940s is of course not comparable, as there were no satellites or hurricane hunter aircraft around to spot every storm in the middle of the Atlantic Ocean.

As for the dip in numbers in the 1970s and 80s, this is a well understood effect of the AMO, which went into cold phase in those years:



If the Mann/Dessler theories are correct, then sea temperatures must have been just as high back then as now.

And if they weren’t then so much for the potty theory!

We can, of course, totally discount the “wetter” storms argument. There is simply no data to prove it, mere supposition. Given the fact that their “stronger storms” argument is trashed by the actual data, I think we can safely ignore anything else they have to say.

We are well aware of Michael Mann’s unreliability as a “scientist”. Not only did he try to produce the now utterly discredited hockey stick, but he has recently lost his court case against Tim Ball, because of his refusal to divulge the data behind it.

What about Andy Dessler? He is professor of atmospheric sciences at Texas A&M University, so you would assume he might know what he is talking about. As with most climate scientists though, you would be wrong.

This was what he had to say in 2011:

As you sit by the pool and sweat this summer, one book you should be reading is The Impact of Global Warming on Texas (University of Texas Press, June 2011, second edition). This book, written by a group of Texas academics, is a sober analysis of our state’s vulnerability to climate change — and the things we can do about it.

It is a particularly appropriate read as we suffer through the hellish summer of 2011. While it is unknown exactly how much human activities are contributing to this summer’s unpleasant weather, one lesson from the book is clear: Get used to it. The weather of the 21st century will be very much like the hot and dry weather of 2011. Giving extra credibility to this forecast is the fact that the weather extremes that we are presently experiencing were predicted in the first edition in 1995.

https://www.chron.com/opinion/outlook/article/Texas-is-vulnerable-to-warming-climate-2079164.php

And the reality?


https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/cag/statewide/time-series/41/pcp/3/8/1895-2019?

Dessler’s dry summer was a one-off, and since then Texas summers have in fact been much wetter than the 20thC average.

It is also evident that there have been other periods on record, where summer droughts have been much prolonged than that single year of 2011.

Of course, in fifty years we might be looking back and agreeing how right Andy Dessler was.
But in what other discipline of science would the so called “experts” be allowed to get away with statements that flew in the face of the actual data?


SOURCE