Hardly. BUT, when I was writing for Houstonist, I did interview him for a story and I thought he had some pretty insightful answers. http://houstonist.com/2006/09/15/interview_with.php There isn't really anything to "believe" with global warming. The planet is getting warmer. That's just a fact. The question is whether or not you think WE have anything to do with it. I'm no scientist and I honestly don't follow that debate very closely, so I won't bother to weigh in. With regard to hurricanes, the heat of the planet is having an effect on storm strength, but Al Gore was categorically wrong to use Katrina as an example of global warming. 2005 was a completely unique, "perfect storm" of circumstances that led to the busiest and most destructive hurricane season ever recorded. As we saw last year, things can change QUICKLY. Using Katrina to tug at the heart strings of Americans and propagandize the global warming debate even further was wrong. The HUGE amount of scientific data relating to man's impact on the environment should be more than enough to mount a credible argument. What's worse is that, despite the tragic results in New Orleans, the reason that city suffered was only partially because of Katrina. They were just sideswiped by a category 3 hurricane. Their problem was an ineffective government that ignored the warnings their levies would break in a significant storm event and left poor people there to die because they weren't prepared. That had little to do with global climate change or really even with hurricanes. A big low pressure system that dropped 15 inches of rain on New Orleans probably would've had the same impact. The only difference is that the entire city wouldn't have evacuated leaving thousands behind to suffer.
I fear turning this into a D&D thread..but let me say this: It doesn't bolster the case of the forecasters regarding climate change years from now when they're hugely incorrect on forecasting out over six months, much less six days. There are so many variables and factors that go into play.
I think we can all agree that forecasting hurricanes is anything but an exact science. What's important though for everyone living along the Gulf Coast and areas prone to hurricanes is to be prepared. People might be mocking the forecast now but there's no telling when some monster storm forms and comes barrelling out of the gulf at Houston. You're better off being prepared to evacuate or at least having enough supplies on hand, water, food, batteries and etc.. just in case.
Yeah, great advice! No question about it. Far better to be prepared (which really doesn't take too much).
You got a winner here! I'm strangely fascinated with the hurricanes but wouldn't want to be through one again(Hurricane Charley in 2004)!!! Ever since tracking of hurricanes started, which state has a high number of hurricanes strikes? I would say Florida (which seems an obvious answer).
When I want info on hurricanes, I generally go to Masters. He's the best resource out there. I wish I had access to the reports done by some of the commercial forecasting groups who work for the oil industry. Most believe them to be the most accurate and why not since they have all that oil money backing them.
My friend works for BP and he would always send me an email whenever there's a bad weather forecast. Some of them missed.
Florida most definitely by almost 2 to 1 compared to the next most hit state. This is a chronological list of all hurricanes hitting the US coastline dating back to the late 1800's: http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/hrd/hurdat/ushurrlist.htm From North Carolina to Texas, here are the totals by state: Florida: 125 Louisiana: 68 Texas: 60 North Carolina: 49 Alabama: 42 South Carolina: 30 Georgia: 25 Mississippi: 16
So why do some people get so defensive when people claim that humans play a good part in global warming? I still don't get it. Do they not want change? Do they not want guilt? Do they not want responsibility? Do they feel like they are being blamed?
i love folks who suggest blowing up a hurricane via a nuclear bomb. it's really hard to keep from laughing.
Desiderata Go placidly amid the noise and haste, and remember what peace there may be in silence. As far as possible without surrender be on good terms with all persons. Speak your truth quietly and clearly; and listen to others, even the dull and the ignorant; they too have their story.
Keep in mind, however, that "barely" is a relative term when it comes to temperature changes. A rise of only a few degrees in median temperature planet-wide has incredibly wide-ranging impact on the planet and its inhabitants. The issue I generally have with the debate is the same issue I have with most political debates. On one side, you tend to have the alarmists who think that the world is going to end as iceburgs broken off from the Arctic slam into Manhattan and killer hurricanes with 300mph winds cover all of Central America. On the other side, you have the dismissers who think that nothing will happen and they can do whatever the hell they want all the time with no significant lasting impact whatsoever - drive a Hummer, kill off an endangered species and pollute entire water systems; as long as we don't have to change what we do, who cares? Both sides rely on propaganda and hyperbole to punctuate a debate that should be entirely scientific. As usual, the truth is probably in the middle. We can't continue to destroy the resources of this planet, pollute everything in site and watch as species after species is irradicated. It's foolish, short-sighted and arrogant. We also shouldn't demand that we all move into self-sustaining green fibrous huts and drive motor scooters on the way to the recycle bin while sipping on wheat grass. Both extreme sides look like idiots and real science is generally ignored because it isn't sensational enough in either direction.
amen to all that! it's difficult for someone like me...who isn't an expert...to deciper what's real and what's memorex. most people are making their "decision" on these issues based on whether they identify as a Republican or a Democrat.
Are the above numbers direct landfalling hurricanes? If so, it is surprising to me that Georgia has 25 landfalling hurricanes considering that Georgia has a very small Atlantic coast, which is possitioned in an area that doesn't get any landfalls. But from the link that you provided, it seemes like these are the number of times that the above stated have been affected by a hurricane, not the number of times they have had landfalling hurricanes.
So, this guy is obviously invested in the oil industry, and is giving us the reasons (14 of them?), why we'll get bent over on gas prices even more. Brilliant!
