tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2759913671101666257.post1336696354186084738..comments2023-05-24T06:02:06.480-05:00Comments on Chuck's Chatter: I don't know and neither does anyone else!Chuck Doswellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03099345055614900157noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2759913671101666257.post-51458233513833930042012-04-16T15:22:11.868-05:002012-04-16T15:22:11.868-05:00Linking a couple highly active tornado seasons to ...Linking a couple highly active tornado seasons to climate change is indeed a disturbing suggestion by a few climate scientists, although I may add that no climate scientist I know would do that. Almost all climate scientists should be aware that tornado formation is much more closely linked to the highly detailed dynamics of individual storms than to global average surface temperatures.<br /><br />The most dangerous thing is that the next time we experience a relatively inactive tornado season (which is sure to happen at some point in the future) the general public will see it as an indication that global warming isn't real. I feel that the public lost interest (or lost "belief") in global climate change after the 2005 hurricane season ended, which many people tried to use as evidence of global warming.Mario Lopeznoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2759913671101666257.post-63152685164422812442012-04-15T19:33:10.244-05:002012-04-15T19:33:10.244-05:00My email interaction with Kevin indeed proved to b...My email interaction with Kevin indeed proved to be unsatisfying. I'm not sure why some climate scientists choose to use the media the way they do, but I presume their intention is to inform the public of the situation - as they see it. This isn't inherently a bad thing, but my experiences with the media suggest that it's almost always a waste of time. Even in the odd case where what you say isn't distorted, misquoted, or taken out of context - it will be drowned in a tsunami of nonsense from the media. Your one shining instance of meaningful reportage will be buried in an avalanche of crap. This is why I no longer do media interviews.Chuck Doswellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03099345055614900157noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2759913671101666257.post-25423028304471353692012-04-15T15:50:37.504-05:002012-04-15T15:50:37.504-05:00Thanks for posting that, Chuck. May I guess your ...Thanks for posting that, Chuck. May I guess your discussion with Kevin Trenberth wasn't very productive, at least in this sense? <br /><br />I've examined historic tornado data not as much as you, but a lot nonetheless, over the past 25 years. I agree fully with your statements here.<br /><br />I've reviewed multiple papers claiming, in effect, that "global warming" is boosting their chosen measure of tornadoes (i.e., all-CONUS, all in the Southeast, TC tornadoes in Florida, CONS strong/violent). <br /><br />Every one of them was profusely riddled with speculative, hand-waving rubbish. Each one reeked with the classic causation/correlation fallacy. One manufactured an F3-F5 tornado trend out of thin air that doesn't exist (essentially, those have flatlined for decades, to the extent we can tell). None were authored by scientists we know to be familiar with the problems of the tornado data, nor did they reference key papers you and others have authored that discussed such. <br /><br />One particularly egregious formal submission did little more than the following:<br /><br />1. See Mann's "hockey stick";<br />2. See the increase in Atlantic TCs over the past several years, including category 4-5 storms (paper was circa 2007, right after the big 2004-5 AMO-associated spikes in TC occurrence...naturally!);<br />3. See all these major hurricanes over and near Florida in the last few years; <br />4. See the increase in TC tornadoes over FL;<br />5. Global warming is causing TC tornadoes to increase in number and intensity over FL.<br /><br />Fortunately, this paper was rejected unanimously. Disturbingly, it was lead-authored by a major university professor of atmospheric-science(co-authored by a student), who most certainly should have known better than to submit that garbage. <br /><br />As you know, some folks in climate science are going straight to the media with absolutely unsubstantiated claims on AGW and tornadoes. Clearly there's a voracious desire in some quarters to hitch tornadoes to the AGW wagon. Do you have any ideas why?<br /><br />I also don't see why is is so stinking difficult for not only the media, but *fellow scientists*, to accept the notion that there isn't enough evidence to say. What's the problem with admitting the simple truth--that we just don't know?Roger Edwardshttp://www.skypix.wsnoreply@blogger.com