Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

How record-breaking Hurricane Beryl is a sign of a warming world
bbc ^ | 07/05/2024 | Mark Poynting

Posted on 07/05/2024 11:36:39 AM PDT by ChicagoConservative27

Hurricane Beryl has wreaked havoc in parts of the Caribbean – and put the role of climate change under the spotlight. With maximum sustained wind speeds of more than 160mph (257km/h), it became the earliest category five Atlantic hurricane in records going back around 100 years. In fact, there has only been one previous recorded case of a category five Atlantic hurricane in July – Hurricane Emily, on 16 July 2005. The causes of individual storms are complex, making it difficult to fully attribute specific cases to climate change. But exceptionally high sea surface temperatures are seen as a key reason why Hurricane Beryl has been so powerful. Usually, such strong storms only develop later in the season, after the seas have heated up through the summer. Hurricanes generally need the sea surface to be at least 27C in order to have a chance of developing. As the map below shows, waters along Hurricane Beryl’s path have been much warmer than this.

(Excerpt) Read more at bbc.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Outdoors; Society; Weather
KEYWORDS: beryl; climatehysteria; hurricane; hysteria; markpoynting; recordbreaking; shriekinghysteria; warming
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-64 next last
To: Theo

In a way it is.

When we removed Sulphur from fuels it cut down on particulates in the atmosphere.

These particulates reflected heat away from the Earth.

Some of the ocean warming can be attributed to this change.


21 posted on 07/05/2024 12:05:18 PM PDT by KEVLAR ( )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: ChicagoConservative27

“the earliest category five Atlantic hurricane in records going back around 100 years.”

100 to 6,000,000,000 years... 1/60,000,000 of unrecorded history... statistically there have been possibly 60 million Category 5 hurricanes this early...

no biggie.


22 posted on 07/05/2024 12:05:35 PM PDT by teeman8r (Armageddon won't be pretty, but it's not like it's the end of the world or something )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ChicagoConservative27

Of course the climate is changing. That’s what the climate does. Once where a friend of mine in Virginia lives, there were glaciers a kilometer high.

What’s going on right now is some warming because the Sun is at a solar maximum. Happens every 23 years.

In about eleven years the Sun will be at a “Mauder minimum.” That leads to things like a year without a summer.

This is all well known. They key is the alignment of the Sun with the Earth and Jupiter. And a few other things.

Us little tiny things (humans) have absolutely no impact on these cycles.

But hey, the solution is more taxes, more government regulation, more money to these con artists, less freedom for us, etc. That will affect the behavior of the Sun!

And oh yeah, it’s all Trump’s fault! /need I?


23 posted on 07/05/2024 12:06:17 PM PDT by piytar (Remember Ashli Babbitt and Rosanne Boyland!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ChicagoConservative27
Mark is a climate reporter??? I think I have heard it all now Mark needs to show his work.

It’s on his bank statement.

24 posted on 07/05/2024 12:06:49 PM PDT by Allegra (🇺🇦Слава Гіджету!🇺🇦👧)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ChicagoConservative27

I swear BBC pays bonuses per word for any article pushing climate hysteria


25 posted on 07/05/2024 12:08:10 PM PDT by Dr. Zzyzx
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ChicagoConservative27

About time for me to post this again:

For those curious:

CO2 only absorbs infrared light aka heat in two very narrow bands of wavelengths (think “colors” of heat). In those narrow bands, CO2 is almost completely opaque.

Even at only 0.04% of our atmosphere, CO2 absorbs almost all infrared light in those bands within a few tens of meters. Hence, if you increased CO2 by even 10 times, the total amount of infrared light (again, heat) absorbed by the atmosphere would NOT CHANGE.

Think about it like this: You have 10,000 sheets of very thin semi-opaque paper. Each sheet abosbs 0.04% of light passing through it. That means those 10,000 sheets will aborb almost all of the light passing through them.

Note: the math is a little complicated. First sheet aborbs 0.04% of the light leaving 99.96% left. Next sheet abosorbs 0.04% of the remaining 99.96% leaving about 99.92%. Next sheet aborbs about 99.96% of that, leaving 99.88% left. After about 10,000 sheets, only about 1.83% of the light is left. Basically all of it has been absorbed (and likely converted into heat).

Consider those sheets to be about 1 meter thick (that is a gross overestimation — it’s probably more like 10 cm thick, but erring on the side of a conservative estimate). That means your 10,000 sheets are a combined 10km thick. The atmosphere is about 10,000km thick. Hence all infared light is abosbed in the first 1/1,000th of the atmosphere.

How much more light is absobed if you increase the opaqueness of those sheets? Answer: NONE.

Outside of those narrow bands, CO2 is almost completely transparent. So again, if you increased CO2 by even 10 times, the amount of infrared light (again, heat) would NOT CHANGE.

Now the climate “scientists” try to handwave and “computer model” their way around these basic physics facts. After all, computer models are always right (/sarc). But that’s how the REAL physics works.

Short version: manmade aka CO2 caused climate change is not just a hoax, it is not even a very good hoax for those who know the physics. Unfortunately, the level of basic physics education in this nation is basically nil with the exception of real engineers, physicists, and scientists.

Furthermore, why does CO2 only make up 0.04% of our atmosphere? The answer is simple: CO2 is PLANT FOOD. More CO2 simply means more plants and thus more O2 (oxygen). The plants including trees, grass, and mostly plankton simply gobble it all up. “Carbon based life forms” anyone in the class?

Note: The above is copyrighted by operation of law (not up to me — it just happens). I HEREBY GRANT FULL ROYALY FREE WORLDWIDE RIGHTS TO ANYONE AND/OR EVERYONE TO COPY, SHARE, AND/OR OTHERWISE USE ANY, ALL, AND/OR PART OF MY COMMENT as long as my words are not turned against their clear intent to educate.


26 posted on 07/05/2024 12:09:56 PM PDT by piytar (Remember Ashli Babbitt and Rosanne Boyland!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ChicagoConservative27
The Modern Warm Period isn't anything new. And it's actually a good time to be alive. The warming periods have higher crop yields, more predictable rain patterns and less deaths by plague than the cooling periods.

Fun fact: Our country was founding during the worst time of the Little Ice Age. Imagine if today's left could travel back in time and try to tell our founding fathers that global warming is bad. LOL


27 posted on 07/05/2024 12:19:12 PM PDT by Tell It Right (1 Thessalonians 5:21 -- Put everything to the test, hold fast to that which is true.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ChicagoConservative27

They said the same thing after Katrina - then we didn’t have a Cat 3 or higher make mainland in the US for almost 10 years!


28 posted on 07/05/2024 12:28:24 PM PDT by Stosh
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: KEVLAR

Good luck quantifying this effect.

If you want to be a climate “expert” study witchcraft and learn how to make up stuff.


29 posted on 07/05/2024 12:30:34 PM PDT by cgbg ("Our democracy" = Their Kleptocracy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Theo
Some people have suggested that hurricane Beryl was man-made.

I am not so open-minded to consider that as a possibility.

We do not have the technology or the knowledge of how to do such things.

The experimental programs to acquire such technology and knowledge would likely result in catastrophic errors. We would be best off to try them on some other planet first.

30 posted on 07/05/2024 12:35:05 PM PDT by flamberge (The future belongs to those who show up for it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: ChicagoConservative27

We don’t know this at all “going back 100 years” - the first weather satellite was launched in 1960. Prior to that, the storm would had to have been encountered by a ship or land mass that had the right instruments present to measure the storm’s strength...and even that would not tell us what the strength of the storm was through its entire life cycle - only at the time it was encountered.


31 posted on 07/05/2024 12:36:27 PM PDT by Republican Wildcat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: devere

So what happened before the last 100 years? Were there any hurricanes?


32 posted on 07/05/2024 12:42:19 PM PDT by MrRelevant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: devere

A warming world absolutely means that the temp gap between the North and equator is smaller. This provides less energy for storms.

It is acooling world that has more severe weather.


33 posted on 07/05/2024 12:45:29 PM PDT by bobbo666 (Baizuo, )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: ChicagoConservative27

Oh, BS.


34 posted on 07/05/2024 12:48:52 PM PDT by Skooz (Gabba Gabba accept you we accept you one of us Gabba Gabba we accept you we accept you one of us )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: frank ballenger
And the thing with the 1900 Galveston storm is that it not only went through Galveston, but the entire middle of the country and including Canada, even killing some up there in Canada.

Can you imagine if that storm happened in today's world, with this climate change hoax being perpetrated?

35 posted on 07/05/2024 12:48:54 PM PDT by PallMal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: MrRelevant
So what happened before the last 100 years? Were there any hurricanes?

No. There were no hurricanes, tornadoes or blizzards before the invention of the internal combustion engine.

36 posted on 07/05/2024 12:51:15 PM PDT by Skooz (Gabba Gabba accept you we accept you one of us Gabba Gabba we accept you we accept you one of us )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: PallMal
Can you imagine if that storm happened in today's world, with this climate change hoax being perpetrated?

If the catastrophic 1927 Mississippi river flood were to happen today, the climate goons would go into full psycho mode, with governments declaring martial law and the UN assuming dictatorial powers.

37 posted on 07/05/2024 12:53:55 PM PDT by Skooz (Gabba Gabba accept you we accept you one of us Gabba Gabba we accept you we accept you one of us )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: ChicagoConservative27

the winds reported were not experienced on the ground in jamaica or the yucatan.

rains and flooding aside, the 145mph+ winds they were reporting was at ALTITUDE. thousands of feet up... never to be experienced by anyone on the ground.

but they’re able to get people panic’d and claim global warming is at fault.

it’s bs.


38 posted on 07/05/2024 12:54:40 PM PDT by sten (fighting tyranny never goes out of style)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cgbg

This has been a sixty year old long con.

Almost too long. Nobody believes them anymore, so why do they keep lying to us?

39 posted on 07/05/2024 12:56:00 PM PDT by FormerFRLurker ("Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities"-Voltaire)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: devere

It is only for the past sixty or so years accurate readings of storm activity have been available. Cat 5s could have happened multiple times over the past 500 years but are unrecorded. So the climate crazies can just make up stuff.


40 posted on 07/05/2024 12:56:10 PM PDT by JimRed (TERM LIMITS, NOW! Finish the damned WALL! TRUTH is the new HATE SPEECH! )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-64 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson