Friday, November 30, 2007

The Fix is in - Adjusting the Records to Fit the Theory

What do Chantal, Erin, Gabrielle, Ingrid, and Melissa all have in common with Jerry? No this isn't a dating compatibility test. All these names belong to storms that some say didn't deserve names, that is, they weren't really tropical storms.

The above storms may have reached winds of 39mph, but the central pressure, which is another measure of the intensity of a storm, would have classified them as just depressions and not tropical storms.

There appears to be a rush to name storms these days, according to Neil Frank, a former director of the National Hurricane Center. Interviewed for this story in the Houston Chronicle, Frank said "This year, I would put at least four storms in a very questionable category, and maybe even six."


Chantal is the cluster of clouds off the U.S. east coast in the top right side of this satellite image


Why is this important? Because the number of tropical storms that are named is part of the historical record. In order to show that there is increased storm activity due to global warming, you must have more storms. In the past, none of the storms mentioned above would have been given a name. Chantal formed outside of the tropics and wouldn't even have been classified as a tropical storm.

There has already been an effort underway to prove that there weren't more storms that we didn't record due to the lack of technology, now there is the current effort to make sure we record more storms than ever. This will allow the global warming alarmists to quote the false statistics as proof that global warming is increasing the number of tropical storms and hurricanes.

But we can see where this is going. To argue that we didn't miss storms before the advent of satellite technology so that the historical numbers are not underestimated, and then to argue that the use of said technology is exactly what is allowing us to name more storms than ever before is the kind of logic-bending and science-skewing that goes on all the time in the name of global warming proof.

No comments: