False claims about hurricanes and global warming
It's just breathtaking what kind of utter nonsense gets published in scientific publications, as long as it conforms with the modern Lysenkoism. Take this paper that claims that there's supposedly a "signal" that would show that "man-made global warming" made Cat. 4 Hurricanes worse and Cat. 1 & 2 Hurricanes weaker. Yes, they really claim that there's a "respose to global climate change" and we are responsible for it ...
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00382-013-1713-0
So let's look at their claim that "the bulk of current anthropogenic warming has occurred in the past four decades".
Wait ... the paper postulates that there was man-made global warming. It just presumes that this is a given. As the paper was published in 2013, the preceding 4 decades means that he assumes that the warming started in 1973?
4 decades of warming
Let's see how much "warming" there was, in 1973:
Wait - that doesn't look like "warming" at all ... December 3, 1973 it was "The Big Freeze"!
In 1974, The Guardian says "Ice age coming fast", based on satellite data - that's serious science! They really knew what they were talking about, at The Guardian. Never any false predictions. We are in the middle of an ice age as we speek. Right?
1978: still freezing cold and "no end in sight for 30 year cooling trend" 🤔and that's from the "paper of record", the New York Times.
In 1989, the same New York Times reports that a team of government scientists from NOAA failed to find any warming trend since 1895:
So that means that the "warming" period only started in or after 1989?
We know that 1998 was the hottest year on record after the previous cold period. It was a great year - I have very fond memories of it.
In 1999, the temperature dropped and has been increasing very moderately, since then.
In fact, there was so little warming that more than 60 studies were published about the "missing heat". What they called "missing heat" is the heat that saw in their models that assumed that CO2 would cause warming, but which they did not show up in actual observations.
http://www.nature.com/news/climate-change-the-case-of-the-missing-heat-1.14525
There was a time when scientists started with an observation and then tried to base their hypothesis on that observation. Now they start from a conjecture and try to see if they can twist the data to support that conjecture.
Basically, this Nature article admits that there was almost no warming since 1998. They even started to accept that their entire assumption about CO2 warming might have been wrong.
Back to the hurricanes
Without diving further into this issue, let's return to the original study about hurricanes:
We now know that the starting point the study chose for the alleged "man-made global warming" fell on a period of intense cooling and that the actual warming period was pretty much over in 1998.
So how exactly is the study going to find a "signal" for "man-made global warming" if there's almost no measurable warming? 🤔
How can something that is not detectable have an effect?
Oh, wait, there's that pesky ATLANTIC MULTI-DECADAL OSCILLATION (AMO):
So basically the increase in intensity of hurricanes is not exactly a surprise - it's in line with the AMO.
That entire paper, which claims that "hurricanes increased 25-30% per degree of global warming" (warming on which base line? ) completely omitted to mention that there was an expected increase that had nothing to do with the global temperature.
It's even worse, as there was a hurricane drought and scientists admit that basically, they have no clue what's going on. This Washington Post article is very amusing to read when one does not have a religious believe in "man-made global warming", as it is obvious to the neutral observer that all these scientists are seriously hampered in their thinking because they have this Lysenkoist dictate that they may not doubt man-made global warming:
Even when they are forced to admit that they cannot detect any impact of the alleged man-made warming.
So in 2013, a supposedly scientific paper was published that claimed that it could detect a signal of man-made global warming in hurricanes - a signal that NOAA does not see in 2017.
This is one of the most amazing demonstrations of how ideology completely destroys the scientific process.
The claim that CO2 causes global warming remains nothing than more than a bizarre 19th century conjecture supported by absolutely nothing. There is no correlation between CO2 and global temperature:
The claim is fundamentally absurd, as CO2 does not store heat. Whatever scattered radiation CO2 re-emit instantly upon being hit with incoming radiation automatically lost some energy, i.e. it is of lower energy than the incoming radiation and hence it cannot heat the atmosphere, let alone the earth's surface - a fundamental principle of thermodynamics: a cooler object cannot heat a warmer object. It just bounces around a bit before leaving the atmosphere.
This is an illustration of the CO2 warming model: