3 ms·

He specifically mentioned hitting the US. Ike hit Texas as a Cat 2 storm, Sandy hit the east coast as a Cat 2 storm. Their peaks (4, 3) were out in ocean/sea wa

He specifically mentioned hitting the US. Ike hit Texas as a Cat 2 storm, Sandy hit the east coast as a Cat 2 storm. Their peaks (4, 3) were out in ocean/sea waters near the island nations. Of course, you don't have listen to me or the weather people who repeatedly say that storms have not increased in frequency or intensity (beyond their normal cycles) [0]. [0] - https://twitter.com/RyanMaue/status/908030951975989261 https://twitter.com/RyanMaue/status/908030951975989261

todayiamme 9y ago
Have I made the claim that it increases the frequency of occurrence? I feel that link is a red herring and obfuscates reality. What I, and all of the papers above, have been referring to is the frequency of intensity of storms. NOT the frequency of storms. Other than the graphs I've already pasted, the phenomena shows up over and over again in the power dissipation index; http://images.nature.com/m685/nature-assets/ngeo/journal/v3/n3/images/ngeo779-f1.jpg http://images.nature.com/m685/nature-assets/ngeo/journal/v3/... Here's yet another paper on the topic and its graphs; http://rsta.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/roypta/365/1860/2695/F1.large.jpg?width=800&height=600&carousel=1 http://rsta.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/roypta/365/18... http://rsta.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/365/1860/2695 http://rsta.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/365/1860/2695 > Of course, you don't have listen to me or the weather people who repeatedly say that storms have not increased in frequency or intensity (beyond their normal cycles) [0]. First of all, the graph you linked to only mentions the frequency of occurrence. It does not include intensity. Second, I trust well sourced papers featuring replicable research by scientists published in notable peer-reviewed journals over random people on Twitter.

todayiamme 9y ago

Have I made the claim that it increases the frequency of occurrence? I feel that link is a red herring and obfuscates reality. What I, and all of the papers above, have been referring to is the frequency of intensity of storms. NOT the frequency of storms. Other than the graphs I've already pasted, the phenomena shows up over and over again in the power dissipation index; http://images.nature.com/m685/nature-assets/ngeo/journal/v3/n3/images/ngeo779-f1.jpg http://images.nature.com/m685/nature-assets/ngeo/journal/v3/... Here's yet another paper on the topic and its graphs; http://rsta.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/roypta/365/1860/2695/F1.large.jpg?width=800&height=600&carousel=1 http://rsta.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/roypta/365/18... http://rsta.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/365/1860/2695 http://rsta.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/365/1860/2695 > Of course, you don't have listen to me or the weather people who repeatedly say that storms have not increased in frequency or intensity (beyond their normal cycles) [0]. First of all, the graph you linked to only mentions the frequency of occurrence. It does not include intensity. Second, I trust well sourced papers featuring replicable research by scientists published in notable peer-reviewed journals over random people on Twitter.