Hurricane Rita.

[southsideirish71]

Rita is starting to experience shearing - it's not going to be a cat 5 for long.

 

 

It is going through eyewall replacement right now. It will weaken a bit, then possibly strenghten again.

[FlaSoxxJim]

Jim - I'm having trouble following the conversation.  To what site or previous discussion or whatever do your references to Singer and Spencer pertain?  The search function here is disabled right now.  Thanks.

My rant above was in response to Kong dismissing the 'friggin bloggers' at RealClimate and elsewhere. All due respect to Kong as a poster I enjoy here, but the pervasive attitude that those of us concerned with anthropogenic climate change are being alarmists or Chicken Littles is by now tedious.

 

The Singer note is my cutting to the chase on where the climate change naysayers are going with this. They exploit the cautionary nature of science itself, the concession that "there is no way to prove that [insert hurricane here] either was, or was not, affected by global warming," much as Big Tobacco relied on the fact that no single incidence of cancer or emphesyma (sp?) could be absolutely linked to smoking. The fact that Singer was a primary mouthpiece for Big Tobacco and is currently pimping himself as a tool of the no warming camp is, to me, quite telling.

 

The Spencer note is me giving voice to my exasperation over the fact that THE sole credible source of data suggesting a lack of upper atmosphere warming has been turned on his ear and this is not a major news story. The same issue of Science from two weeks ago had another paper that similarly exposed flaws in the weather ballon-based measurement evidence for a lack of atmospheric warming (the correction factors the original scientists used were wrong and hence real atmospheric temperature increases were systematically underestimated).

 

Human-induced global climate impacts are systemic and syndromic, and that is a fact that will continue to be fully exploited by those who think confronting the issues is not in our best economic interests. Any single climatological anomally can be held up by the naysayers who will tell you you can't be sure climate change played a role. What they refuse to do is to examine the entire body of evidence and compare what is happening now to any other slice of time in the historic or geological past. It's Tobacco Wars all over again, but with much higher stakes.

 

It should have registered in the public consciousness that the landscape changed dramatically when both Exxon and GE publically launched campaigns to develop technologies to deal with climate change in May. BP and Shell execs had by then already conceded that the real question was not IF? but HOW MUCH and HOW BAD? But Exxon (which has exposed as being secretly instrumental in getting Bush to not sign on to Kyoto) never backed away from their stance that climate change was a myth.

 

For 15 years Exxon has been at the helm of the campaign trashing sound science in favor of their well funded junk science bio-prostitutes who have persuaded the public and the press that the cerdict is still out on global warming. Add people like Don Pearlman and former chief of staff for the White House Council on Environmental Quality Philip Cooney who made changes to descriptions of climate research results (lessening their perceived impacts) that had already been approved by government scientists and their supervisors, and you can see what a well orchestrated, well-heeled dis-information campaign the no warming contingent has put together.

[DonkeyKongerko]

I was merely addressing the conclusions drawn in the article which really require a few logical leaps for me to make the same attributions they make. The correlation of rising sea temperatures and storm strength is strongly evidenced, but the degree of correlation is largely left up to the interpretation of a reader. By the end of the article, nothing is proven and it is concluded that the evidence only "strongly suggests" that "hurricanes tend to become more destructive." The problem is that people, and I don't mean to single out Balta, will throw out a blog link like this with such conclusions and add their own summary based on assumptions that the article proved something beyond a reasonable doubt.

 

I'm glad to see progress is being made on the matter, but what action am I supposed to take when the scientific community remains so divided on a particular issue?

[FlaSoxxJim]

I'm glad to see progress is being made on the matter, but what action am I supposed to take when the scientific community remains so divided on a particular issue?

 

The truth is that the scientific community is not nearly so divided on the issue as the naysayers have led the public to believe. Not by a long shot.

 

Your post points out one of the very problems the scientists are facing. Scientists aren't in the business of "proving" anything. So the naysayers exploit that by demanding to see "the proof." That's not how science works. Science is a reiterative process that accumulates a body of evidence that either supports or refutes hypotheses that have been proposed, thereby refining those hypotheses that hold up under scrutiny and abandoning those that don't.

 

The hypothesis that anthropogenic greenhouse emmissions are contributing to a global temperature elevation that is more rapid than the sorts of fluctuations seen in the historic or geological past is bolstered by a preponderance of peer-reviewed scientific data.

 

Yet, sadly, since this doesn't "prove anything" per se, non-scientist policymakers, politicians and industrial CEOs and lobbyists continue to get air time and perpetuate a misconception that the majority of credible climate scientists are deeply divided as to whether climate change is in fact occurring.

[DonkeyKongerko]

Well I was more under the impression that scientists were divided as to whether or not climate change is the primary factor in increasing hurricane frequency and/or strength.

[southsider2k5]

An interesting read from February in the Houston Chronicle on what to expect if a Cat 4/5 hurricane hit Houston/Galveston

 

http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/m...politan/3046592

[Texsox]

Jim I remember a long ago comment by my HS Bio Teacher that every organism pollutes their environment to the point that it is inhabitable. Is that accurate?

[Balta1701]

An interesting read from February in the Houston Chronicle on what to expect if a Cat 4/5 hurricane hit Houston/Galveston

 

http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/m...politan/3046592

Eerily similar to the way the Times-Picayune was running pieces 3 years ago saying that those levees were going to break.

[SnB]

i haven't read or seen much about this one, but mya ccy proffesor mentioned that she heard gas prices might be around $5/gal, by the end of the weekend, true?

[Balta1701]

I was merely addressing the conclusions drawn in the article which really require a few logical leaps for me to make the same attributions they make. The correlation of rising sea temperatures and storm strength is strongly evidenced, but the degree of correlation is largely left up to the interpretation of a reader. By the end of the article, nothing is proven and it is concluded that the evidence only "strongly suggests" that "hurricanes tend to become more destructive." The problem is that people, and I don't mean to single out Balta, will throw out a blog link like this with such conclusions and add their own summary based on assumptions that the article proved something beyond a reasonable doubt.

 

I'm glad to see progress is being made on the matter, but what action am I supposed to take when the scientific community remains so divided on a particular issue?

Actually, I put that specific link up because it doesn't attempt to insist that any of these hurricanes are directly related to global warming.

 

However, the discussion was on the question of whether or not 2 hurricanes this size in any particular year is something unprecedented. My point in response is that while it may be unprecedented now, given the forcing of climate change that we've already created...in our lifetimes, this sort of event, with multiple gigantic hurricanes in a single season, may become shockingly commonplace.

[Balta1701]

i haven't read or seen much about this one, but mya ccy proffesor mentioned that she heard gas prices might be around $5/gal, by the end of the weekend, true?

Here's CNN saying it could hit that.

 

The fact is...no one really knows what sort of damage it'll do until it passes. If it comes ashore with the full Category 5 force and bears down on all of those refineries in Houston (which probably weren't built to withstand the strength of a Category 5) and also dismantles even more of the offshore oil platforms, then $5 a gallon might not be out of the question.

 

My instints tell me that a few areas might push $4 in the worst case scenario, but I personally doubt $5 until I actually see it.

[southsider2k5]

i haven't read or seen much about this one, but mya ccy proffesor mentioned that she heard gas prices might be around $5/gal, by the end of the weekend, true?

 

It wouldn't surprise me at all. If this ends up making landfall around the TX/LA border, you would be putting a direct hit on the biggest US pumping capacity that wasn't already devestated by Katrina. If you put a direct his on Galveston that would be battering the single biggest unleaded gasoline refineries in the US.

[Balta1701]

Jim I remember a long ago comment by my HS Bio Teacher that every organism pollutes their environment to the point that it is inhabitable. Is that accurate?

"Every mammal instinctively develops an equilibrium with its surroundings but you humans do not. You move to an area and you multiply and you multiply until every natural resource is consumed. There is another creature on this planet that operates the same way. A virus. Human beings are a disease, a cancer of this planet. And we, are the cure."

 

-Agent Smith.

[FlaSoxxJim]

Well I was more under the impression that scientists were divided as to whether or not climate change is the primary factor in increasing hurricane frequency and/or strength.

Again, that is naysayers taking a single piece of the puzzle and taking an intentionally incorrect statistical approach and saying you cannot state conclusively that this or that storm would have not occurred has man's footprint not been part of the landscape. Good for you that yoiu are including storm frequency as well as magnitude in the discussion, because a lot of naysayers realized the incresed storm frequency of the last dcade was hurting their own arguments and they instead started talking only about magnitude.

 

The take home message is that warm circumequatorial water is the engine for tropical storms. Any increase in seasonal high water temperatures or the duration of these seasonal highs will, on average, produce more and bigger tropical systems. If those increases are part of a natural large-scale cyclic event, the hurricane seasons will intensify. If the increases are due to human activity, the hurricane seasons will intensify.

[FlaSoxxJim]

"Every mammal instinctively develops an equilibrium with its surroundings but you humans do not.  You move to an area and you multiply and you multiply until every natural resource is consumed.  There is another creature on this planet that operates the same way.  A virus.  Human beings are a disease, a cancer of this planet.  And we, are the cure."

 

-Agent Smith.

Much as I would like to let the Matrix be my guidebook to life, I think Tex's prof is as correct as Smith Prime.

 

Yes, all animals generate toxic waste products (COv2, ammonia, ect.) That would pollute the environment to the point of inhabitibility if the system were closed. But they are not closed, they have either/or the capacity for wate export or waste processing and so a balance is acheived.

 

Agent Smith got it right in that humans don't know when to stop. Rather than existing within environmentally defined carrying capacity boundaries, we test the elasticity of the system by cramming more people into a system than it was designed to handle. And the problem in doing that of course is that elasticity is not infinite. They boundaries of the system must either eventually snap back or break.

[DonkeyKongerko]

The take home message is that warm circumequatorial water is the engine for tropical storms.  Any increase in seasonal high water temperatures or the duration of these seasonal highs will, on average, produce more and bigger tropical systems.  If those increases are part of a natural large-scale cyclic event, the hurricane seasons will intensify.  If the increases are due to human activity, the hurricane seasons will intensify.

 

I agree, and now I'll go home.

[southsider2k5]

Good news from Masters Blog

 

We continue to live history as this incredible Hurricane Season of 2005 unfolds more stunning surprises. Rita has peaked in intensity as the third strongest hurricane of all time, with a pressure of 897 mb and 175 mph winds. She is on the decline now, as the 11am hurricane hunter mission found a pressure of 913 mb, and increase of 5 mb in just 3 hours. The hurricane hunters also found concentric eyewalls of 17 and 55 nautical miles in diameter. All these signs indicate that Rita will continue to weaken today as her inner eyewall collapses and an eyewall replacement cycle begins. Rita is about to leave the vicinity of a warm eddy of Gulf water called the Loop Current that has been aiding her intensification. In addition, 10 knots of shear has developed on her south side, thanks to the fact that the upper-level high pressure system that was providing such excellent outflow for Rita has now shifted to the southeast of the storm. All these signs point to a substantial weakening trend for Rita that will continue through Friday and probably reduce her to a Category 4 hurricane. The GFDL forecast model and NHC predict that this weakening trend will continue until landfall Saturday, when Rita will be a Category 3 hurricane. Lower heat content water and continued shear are expected to cause this weakening.

[Balta1701]

Good news from Masters Blog

NOAA is running a similar story.

 

Let's just hope this doesn't discourage people from evacuating.

 

RITA APPEARS TO HAVE REACHED ITS PEAK INTENSITY DURING THE PAST

12 HOURS. HURRICANES TYPICALLY DO NOT MAINTAIN SUCH HIGH INTENSITY

FOR A LONG TIME. INITIAL INTENSITY ESTIMATE IS 145 KNOTS. ALTHOUGH

SOME FLUCTUATIONS IN INTENSITY ARE LIKELY DURING THE NEXT DAY OR

TWO...DUE TO EYEWALL REPLACEMENT CYCLES...AN OVERALL GRADUAL

WEAKENING TREND SHOULD TAKE PLACE. THIS WEAKENING TREND IS BASED ON

LOWER OCEANIC HEAT CONTENT ALONG THE FORECAST TRACK AND INCREASING

SHEAR. NEVERTHERELESS...RITA IS EXPECTED TO MAKE LANDFALL AS A

DANGEROUS HURRICANE OF AT LEAST A CATEGORY THREE INTENSITY. 

[FlaSoxxJim]

Very good news indeed.

 

Big ass storms are great – as long as they stay out at sea or weaken substantially before making landfall.

[southsider2k5]

NOAA is running a similar story.

 

Let's just hope this doesn't discourage people from evacuating.

 

Yeah no kidding. If New Orleans wasn't proof enough to fear mother nature, Darwinism just takes over at that point...

[Balta1701]

Yeah no kidding.  If New Orleans wasn't proof enough to fear mother nature, Darwinism just takes over at that point...

From the Houston Chronicle's Hurricane blog...

 

Hortense Davis is waiting at the Houston Greyhound station for a bus that may not be coming.

 

The 73-year-old woman called the Red Cross today to find out what she should do about the storm. She said she was told to go to the bus station and tell them she had no money and needs to get out of the city.

 

"But when I got here, they said they couldn't help me," she said. "So now I'm just sitting here."

 

Davis is trying to evacuate to Lufkin because she is scared hurricane Rita is going to causing major flooding in Houston.

 

"I'm stuck here," she said. "I don't have anywhere else to go."

 

Hundreds of people packed the downtown Greyhound station tonight hoping to get a ticket to safety.

 

Carolyn Rivera, 62, said she bought a bus ticket to Dallas today, but when she arrived at the station she discovered all the buses were filled. So she called her daughter and the two women plan to drive to Arkansas tonight.

 

"There are so many people and so few buses," she said.

[LosMediasBlancas]

People have been stuck on the freeways for 13 hours, on what is normally a four hour trip! Anyone who didn't head out by today, might be stuck sititng in their car as Rita blows it away.

Katrina taught us that you absolutely have to evacuate. Let's hope Rita doesn't teach us that you need more time than what we've alloted. This might get interesting.

[Steff]

Don't bother Balta..

 

The blame game is orgasmic for some of the feeble minded around here.

[Balta1701]

People have been stuck on the freeways for 13 hours, on what is normally a four hour trip!    Anyone who didn't head out by today, might be stuck sititng in their car as Rita blows it away.

Katrina taught us that you absolutely have to evacuate.  Let's hope Rita doesn't teach us that you need more time than what we've alloted. This might get interesting.

I think the real worry with that situation is this...what happens when people on the freeway start running out of gas? If it happens to like 10 cars in the entire line...that basically blocks the whole thing.

[LosMediasBlancas]

I think the real worry with that situation is this...what happens when people on the freeway start running out of gas?  If it happens to like 10 cars in the entire line...that basically blocks the whole thing.

 

 

Oh, it's already hapenning.

http://www.cnn.com/2005/WEATHER/09/22/rita/index.html