NOAA ATTRIBUTES RECENT INCREASE IN HURRICANE ACTIVITY
TO NATURALLY OCCURRING MULTI-DECADAL CLIMATE VARIABILITY

Nov. 29, 2005 - The nation is nowwrapping up the 11th year of a new era of
heightened Atlantic hurricane activity. This era has been unfolding in the
Atlantic since 1995, and is expected to continue for the next decade or
perhaps longer. NOAA attributes this increased activity to natural occurring
cycles in tropical climate patterns near the equator. These cycles, called
"the tropical multi-decadal signal," typically last several decades (20 to
30 years or even longer). As a result, the North Atlantic experiences
alternating decades long (20 to 30 year periods or even longer) of above
normal or below normal hurricane seasons. NOAA research shows that the
tropical multi-decadal signal is causing the increased Atlantic hurricane
activity since 1995, and is not related to greenhouse warming.



"Roger Coppock" wrote in message
oups.com...
Atlantic TS Epsilon Is About a 1 in 80,000 Year Event!!!!!

Tropical storm Epsilon, number 29, is now active in the Atlantic:

http://www.wxforecasts.com/ameriwx/a...age&hwvmetric=

http://www.wxforecasts.com/ameriwx/a...ems&hwvmetric=

If one controls for the increasing capability to observe
tropical storms over the last 126 Atlantic hurricane seasons,
this year's 29 Atlantic storms are about a 1 in 80,000 event!

If one ignores the 4 storms per year per century growth in
counted storms, this year's 29 storms is a 1 in 1,700,000
event. I won't use this, because it is misleading. I'll
leave the lying and exaggeration to the Carbon industry
lobbyists. They are the experts at that.

Storms
[1] 11 7 6 4 4 8 12 19 9 9 4 11 9 12 7
[16] 6 7 6 11 9 7 12 5 10 5 5 11 5 10 11
[31] 5 6 7 6 1 5 14 3 5 3 4 6 4 7 8
[46] 2 11 7 6 3 2 9 11 21 11 6 16 9 8 5
[61] 8 6 10 10 11 11 6 9 9 13 13 10 7 14 11
[76] 12 8 8 10 11 7 11 5 9 12 6 11 8 8 15
[91] 10 13 7 8 11 9 10 6 12 9 11 12 6 4 13
[106] 11 6 7 12 11 14 8 7 8 7 19 13 8 14 12
[121] 15 15 12 16 15 29

The data are from the NOAA web page given at this URL:
http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/hrd/hurdat/...arandStorm.htm
Currently, these data are preliminary and dated Friday,
July 15, 2005 9:00PM.

sort(Storms)
[1] 1 2 2 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 5 5 5
[16] 5 5 5 5 5 5 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6
[31] 6 6 6 6 6 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7
[46] 7 7 7 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8
[61] 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 10 10 10 10
[76] 10 10 10 10 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11
[91] 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12
[106] 12 12 13 13 13 13 13 14 14 14 14 15 15 15 15
[121] 16 16 19 19 21 29

Storms[126]
[1] 29
mean(Storms)
[1] 9.142857
sd(Storms)
[1] 4.086493

fitted.model

Call:
lm(formula = Storms ~ Year, data = aframe)

Coefficients:
(Intercept) Year
-70.80045 0.04115


residuals(fitted.model)[126]
126
17.28496

residuals(fitted.model)[126]/sd(Storms)
126
4.229779

pnorm(residuals(fitted.model)[126]/sd(Storms))
126
0.9999883

# Yes, except for this year's extreme and a few others,
# the residuals of the "Storms" data are normally
# distributed. A normal quartile-quartile plot shows a
# straight line, confirming this.

1/(1-pnorm(residuals(fitted.model)[126]/sd(Storms)))
126
85498.98
# Which rounds to 1 in 80,000.

# NOTE:
# to remove any bias due to increasing capability to observe
# hurricanes, I have used the current value of the trendline
# and not the mean as a baseline. Thus, the call to the
# residual here. Had I used the mean as a base line the
# result would have been 1 in 1,700,000. I'll leave the
# lying and exaggeration to the fossil fools.

pnorm((Storms[126]-mean(Storms))/sd(Storms))
[1] 0.9999994
1/(1-pnorm((Storms[126]-mean(Storms))/sd(Storms)))
[1] 1697027