Study: Katrina-like Hurricanes Every Two Years Way In The Future. Maybe. Possibly

More prognostication deep into the future by Warmists, with lots of hedge betting

(USA Today) Could the USA deal with a Hurricane Katrina every two years?

Such a scenario is possible by the end of the century due to climate change, according to a study published Monday in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

Funny how they can’t tell us what will happen now.

The frequency of extreme storm surges — the deadly and devastating walls of water that roar ashore during hurricanes — is projected to increase by as much as 10 times in coming decades because of warming temperatures, the study finds. Global warming has already doubled the chance of storms like Katrina, according to the study, which was led by climate scientist Aslak Grinsted of the University of Copenhagen in Denmark.

Except, the US has not been hit with a major hurricane (cat 3 and up) since Wilma in 2005. As of today, that is 2,703 days, which goes well beyond breaking the record for no Cat 3’s. Heck, there are barely any minor hurricane strikes. Since 2008 there has been one real hurricane. Irene was not a hurricane at landfall. Isaac was just barely a hurricane at landfall (and could be debated). Sandy was not a hurricane when she made landfall.

However, another expert finds fault with the study: “I find this paper to be very misleading,” says Georgia Tech climatologist Judith Curry, who says they used “a very incomplete data set:” It only considers tide gauge measurements at six locations (Atlantic City, Charleston S.C., Mayport, Fla.; Pensacola, Fla.; Key West, and Galveston, Texas.)

So, yet another dubious study designed to cause hysteria of something that may possibly kinda sorta happen in the future? Color me shocked.

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at 1800flowers.com. Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

10 Responses to “Study: Katrina-like Hurricanes Every Two Years Way In The Future. Maybe. Possibly”

  1. Gumball_Brains says:

    extreme storm surges — the deadly and devastating walls of water that roar ashore during hurricanes — is projected to increase by as much as 10 times in coming decade

    So, does that mean there will be 10x more storm surges from the same number of storms? Or, 10x the number of storms with the same number of surges? Or, does it mean, that the walls of water will be 10x the size of current deadly walls of water?

    So, based on the declining impacts from hurricanes over the last few decades, I can fully understand that the next few decades will see that slope change at a right angle and increase drastically.

    Am glad to know that now we have 100% perfect weather predictions for 7 days in advance. Heck, I’d give up my 100 year predictions for a reliable 3-day weather forecast.

  2. So, does that mean there will be 10x more storm surges from the same number of storms? Or, 10x the number of storms with the same number of surges? Or, does it mean, that the walls of water will be 10x the size of current deadly walls of water?

    Warmist answer: you sure ask a lot of questions. Why do you ask so many questions? I bet you believe in God and that the earth is only 6,000 years old, hate Darwin, and are anti-science. Your betters know what is going to happen 90 years from now, so you should give up your fossil fueled lifestyle and follow Gore.

  3. bob sykes says:

    All atmospheric and oceanic flows are driven by the temperature difference between the tropics and the poles. Global warming reduces this differential and the intensity of the flows. Therefore, global warming must reduce the likelihood of storms like Katrina. And, in fact, during the recent climatic optimum (since the late 1970s), the number of hurricanes has gone down, albeit slightly.

    It’s simple thermodynamics.

  4. john says:

    As the jet stream is pushed down south by the increase in arctic air temps the frequency and intesity of its interaction with tropical air will INCREASE. That is when the thermodynamics should get….. interesting. Like with the storm that hit NYC Sandy had low wind speeds (Teach said barely a hurricaine) but that storm was very destructive with its storm surge. Its the storm surge taht hurts, even if landfall does not occur

  5. gumball_brains says:

    Teach:
    Sigh.. in all humbleness and self-hatred – “ohkayyyyy”

    Bob:
    Wait.. was that science? Oh Heck No! Science is not allowed in Climate Science(TM). You could get banned from universities and journals for that. Don’t you dare bring that icky sciencey crap way of thinking around here. We’ll have none of it. You are not going to fool us with your hocus-pocus science magic. We’re too smart for that.

    Do you think these Officially Recognized Consensus Climate Scientists(TM) got to where they are in the political world by doing “science”. Man, I can hardly even write that word it makes me feel so icky. You should be ashamed of yourself by trying to soil such a an honored and First-Level Science program by…. doing… that!

    I mean, the Official World Religion of Climate Science(TM) has been around since before the dinosaurs left the planet on their galactic tour of the universe at the behest of the Pleides. It was the inbred, incompetent, illogical, and superstitious cavemen that came up with the fallacy of science.

    Don’t let this happen again.

  6. gumball_brains says:

    First off john, science is tough even for 2nd graders.. so don’t even try it without trained personnel on hand to guide you through your mistakes. Or, at least read a book of some kind.

    When temperatures in the poles increase, the jet stream moves UP towards the pole.. not down toward the equator.

    Like with the storm that hit NYC Sandy had low wind speeds (Teach said barely a hurricaine) but that storm was very destructive with its storm surge. Its the storm surge taht hurts

    No again john. It’s not the storm surge per se, its the coast line. If no one was living on the coast line, there would be no destruction and no one would care about any storm surge. And, vegetation and sand bars would help dissipate the strength of that surge.

    But, when you allow homes and development to occur on the beaches themselves, and you remove all vegetation and blackwater areas, you prevent alot of those natural defenses.

    The storm itself was fairly weak, but had a large widespread area of impact. It impacted an area that was not prepared for any kind of storm surge. You also have an area that has grown up and older without the “clearing out” that hurricanes typically inflict on areas.

    Oh, and by the way.. THAT’S CALLED NATURE!!

  7. Weird. None of what John wrote proves anthropological causation. Just unscientific ramblings

  8. gumball_brains says:

  9. john says:

    The area that Sandy damaged the most has been built up for at least 6 decades, or more. The Jersey Shore has been built since at least the 50s.

  10. Longer in some cases, John. I grew up there in a town called Brielle. And people have been worried about this type of storm for 80+ years. But there is nothing anthropogenic about it. Just nature.

Bad Behavior has blocked 7362 access attempts in the last 7 days.