Latest Storm/Damage Data: Alarmists’ Predictions Have Near-Zero Accuracy…Dead Wrong

By P Gosselin on 9. August 2017

At Twitter hurricane expert Philip Klotzbach recently tweeted a couple of charts which are certainly worthy of mentioning again.

The first one helps to tell us why some people may think Atlantic hurricanes have become more frequent. Today the detection and monitoring technology allows constant, 100% coverage, and so every single storm gets picked up.

Years ago a storm lasting less than two days probably did not get acknowledged and thus went unnamed before disappearing completely. Today, as the chart shows, many short-lived disturbances get a name and thus forever have a place in the 2named storm” statistic.

Gore’s hurricane hype is all fraud

Next there are all the claims of rapidly increasing damage from hurricanes, like Al Gore often hypes up. Of course as population and property grow along coastal area, the net dollar amount in damages indeed grows. But when the damage gets normalized, the trend looks very different, as shown by the following chart:

Above we see no increase total economic damage. Things are not getting worse as con-man Mr. Gore likes to claim.

Next Climate Depot here brings us another chart from Prof. Roger Peilke Jr of the University of Colorado in Boulder. It shows global weather-related disaster losses as a proportion of GDP:

Well, look at that! The chart above clearly tells us losses as a percent of GDP have halved over the past 27 years! Not something you’d expect after listening to the end-of-world rantings of Al Gore and the climate alarmist media.

According to Professor Pielke Jr.

The world is presently in an era of unusually low weather disasters. This holds for the weather phenomena that have historically caused the most damage: tropical cyclones, floods, tornadoes and drought. Given how weather events have become politicized in debates over climate change, some find this hard to believe…The US has seen a decrease of about 20% in both hurricane frequency and intensity at landfall since 1900…Data on floods, drought and tornadoes are similar in that they show little to no indication of becoming more severe or frequent…”

In fact the real damage so far inflicted by the (lack of) storms over the years has been to the climate alarmism and destruction industry itself.

10 responses to “Latest Storm/Damage Data: Alarmists’ Predictions Have Near-Zero Accuracy…Dead Wrong”

sunsettommy 9. August 2017 at 5:31 PM | Permalink

The very opposite of gloomy warmist prediction.

But watch the denials come running in here…….
Bitter&twisted 9. August 2017 at 5:53 PM | Permalink

Typical sceptic- using facts to argue a case.
What does he think he is doing?
Doesn’t he realise the world has moved on from such silly things as “facts”?
1. SebastianH 10. August 2017 at 4:04 PM | Permalink
  
  Direct quote from IPCC AR5 chapter 2 executive summary:
  
  Extreme Events
  
  It is very likely that the numbers of cold days and nights have
  decreased and the numbers of warm days and nights have
  increased globally since about 1950. There is only medium confidence
  that the length and frequency of warm spells, including heat
  waves, has increased since the middle of the 20th century mostly owing
  to lack of data or of studies in Africa and South America. However, it is
  likely that heatwave frequency has increased during this period in large
  parts of Europe, Asia and Australia. {2.6.1}
  
  It is likely that since about 1950 the number of heavy precipitation
  events over land has increased in more regions than it has
  decreased. Confidence is highest for North America and Europe where
  there have been likely increases in either the frequency or intensity of
  heavy precipitation with some seasonal and/or regional variation. It is
  very likely that there have been trends towards heavier precipitation
  events in central North America. {2.6.2.1}
  
  Confidence is low for a global-scale observed trend in drought
  or dryness (lack of rainfall) since the middle of the 20th century,
  owing to lack of direct observations, methodological uncertainties
  and geographical inconsistencies in the trends. Based on
  updated studies, AR4 conclusions regarding global increasing trends
  in drought since the 1970s were probably overstated. However, this
  masks important regional changes: the frequency and intensity of
  drought have likely increased in the Mediterranean and West Africa
  and likely decreased in central North America and north-west Australia
  since 1950. {2.6.2.2}
  
  Confidence remains low for long-term (centennial) changes in
  tropical cyclone activity, after accounting for past changes in
  observing capabilities. However, it is virtually certain that the frequency
  and intensity of the strongest tropical cyclones in the North
  Atlantic has increased since the 1970s. {2.6.3}
  
  Confidence in large-scale trends in storminess or storminess
  proxies over the last century is low owing to inconsistencies
  between studies or lack of long-term data in some parts of the
  world (particularly in the SH). {2.6.4}
  
  Because of insufficient studies and data quality issues confidence
  is also low for trends in small-scale severe weather
  events such as hail or thunderstorms. {2.6.2.4}
  
  That’s what your favorite climate alarmists are saying … nothing more and nothing less.
  1. yonason 10. August 2017 at 10:47 PM | Permalink
    
    LOL
    
    Thank you, chatbot, for providing yet more proof that climate alarmists who try to use high/low ratios are nothing but charlatan alarmists who should know better.
    https://realclimatescience.com/2017/08/very-high-confidence-of-extreme-fraud-by-government-climate-scientists/
  2. yonason 10. August 2017 at 11:00 PM | Permalink
    
    Oh, goodie. Tony Heller has a video on that now.
    https://realclimatescience.com/2017/08/new-video-very-high-probability-of-fraud-by-climate-scientists/
    
    It’s so simple, even a chatbot has no excuse for not understanding it.
  3. AndyG55 10. August 2017 at 11:57 PM | Permalink
    
    A POLITICAL AGENDA BASED summary.
    
    meaningless.
    
    You do that any summary from the IPCC has been through the AGW political agenda grinder until basically zero science still remains, don’t you seb.
    
    Are that naïve, gullible and ignorant that you don’t know that ? REALLY !!!
yonason 10. August 2017 at 12:39 AM | Permalink

Another aspect of the fraud is the naming of storms as “tropical” when they are not, in order to bulk their numbers, as noted by Pierre here.
https://notrickszone.com/2017/04/19/meteorologist-bastardi-blasts-noaa-for-naming-eyesores-in-the-middle-of-nowhere/#sthash.AAD89dww.dpbs
tom0mason 10. August 2017 at 12:55 AM | Permalink

Just wait for all the wailing and gnashing of teeth that will ensue from the AGW advocates when the US get two or three large hurricanes. The noise will be deafening.

O.T.

I notice https://tallbloke.wordpress.com/2017/08/09/nasa-admits-it-hasnt-been-accurately-measuring-earths-radiation-balance/#more-33423 has a piece about “NASA admits it hasn’t been accurately measuring Earth’s radiation balance.”
That should also cause a bit of noise.
Juergen Uhlemann 10. August 2017 at 9:37 AM | Permalink

The man behind Al Gore was Stanford Professor Stephen Schneider (RIP).
Schneider said in 2008:
“Don’t be poor in a hot country, don’t live in a hurricane alley, watch out about being on a cost or in the arctic, it’s bad idea to be up in high mountains with your glaciers melting and losing your water supply and if you are in Mediterranean climate you’re gonna have a fire season in the summer and it’s really gonna be a problem.”
You can see Schneider talking in 1978 about cooling and in 2008 about warming. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DsdWTBNyvX0
Latest Storm/Damage Data: Alarmists' Predictions Have Near-Zero Accuracy…Dead Wrong | Principia Scientific International 10. August 2017 at 1:28 PM | Permalink

[…] Read more at No Tricks Zone […]