[Steve]

For those blaming "Climate Change" or "Global Warming" for the severity of Hurricane Ian here is a listing of the 10 most intense Florida hurricanes since record keeping of that nature began (not including Ian, of course).

Six were in the years1919-1960, long before 'Climate Change" or "Global Warming" were today's hot topic. They just happened because conditions were right.

The top three as far as loss of life is concerned were in 1919, 1926 and 1928.

Most Intense Hurricanes In Florida’s History
(From worldatlas.com)
Rank System Season Estimated Casualties
1 "Labor Day" 1935 400
2 Michael 2018 74
3 Andrew 1992 65
4 "Florida Keys" 1919 600-900
5 "Okeechobee" 1928 2,500
6 "Great Miami" 1926 372–539
7 Donna 1960 438
8 Irma 2017 134
9 "Florida" 1948 13
10 Charley 2004 35

The warming of the earth has happened at least once before that we know of. I think they called it the "Ice Age" where the earth cooled to the point it covered most of the planet with a sheet of ice killing off the dinosaurs, etc. But then it warmed up again and the glaciers that covered the earth receded...and it wasn't because of "greenhouse gases". We are still in that warming cycle and there's not an electric car in the world that can change that.

[bagboy]

And Galveston hurricane in 1900. Estimated 8000 people died.

[njbchbum]

Were there fewer/less intense weather events when we had more air pollution?

Are we still supposed to be worrying about the hole in the ozone layer?

[Keefelane66]

Originally Posted by Steve

For those blaming "Climate Change" or "Global Warming" for the severity of Hurricane Ian here is a listing of the 10 most intense Florida hurricanes since record keeping of that nature began (not including Ian, of course).

Six were in the years1919-1960, long before 'Climate Change" or "Global Warming" were today's hot topic. They just happened because conditions were right.

The top three as far as loss of life is concerned were in 1919, 1926 and 1928.

Most Intense Hurricanes In Florida’s History
(From worldatlas.com)
Rank System Season Estimated Casualties
1 "Labor Day" 1935 400
2 Michael 2018 74
3 Andrew 1992 65
4 "Florida Keys" 1919 600-900
5 "Okeechobee" 1928 2,500
6 "Great Miami" 1926 372–539
7 Donna 1960 438
8 Irma 2017 134
9 "Florida" 1948 13
10 Charley 2004 35

The warming of the earth has happened at least once before that we know of. I think they called it the "Ice Age" where the earth cooled to the point it covered most of the planet with a sheet of ice killing off the dinosaurs, etc. But then it warmed up again and the glaciers that covered the earth receded...and it wasn't because of "greenhouse gases". We are still in that warming cycle and there's not an electric car in the world that can change that.

Don't just concentrate on Hurricanes but also droughts, and what people use to call hundred year weather events now estimated 500 year rain events.
Prior to April 1960 when the first weather satellite was launched we were blind to hurricane forecasting resulting in loss of life and property.

[Stu from NYC]

When in doubt lets blame it on man made global warming

[PugMom]

Originally Posted by njbchbum

Were there fewer/less intense weather events when we had more air pollution?

Are we still supposed to be worrying about the hole in the ozone layer?

LOL! that came & went, huh?? i was in 8th grade when Prince Charles claimed the ozone condition would destroy the earth within 10 years. after that it became global warming, & now climate change, each time becoming more dire than the last warning. same story re-packaged for each generation. i wonder what they'll call it 10 years from now?

[fdpaq0580]

Originally Posted by PugMom

LOL! that came & went, huh?? i was in 8th grade when Prince Charles claimed the ozone condition would destroy the earth within 10 years. after that it became global warming, & now climate change, each time becoming more dire than the last warning. same story re-packaged for each generation. i wonder what they'll call it 10 years from now?

Global heatwave? Whatever they call it, "global" will be the first word.

[justjim]

The temperature of our oceans have increased by several degrees according to those that check such things. Warmer temps gives “fuel” to the storms as they approach the coast of the U.S. In addition, the oceans are rising on our coast. Having said that, the majority of scientists tend to call this “climate change”. Some disagree calling it “climate change.” A matter of semantics I suppose? The debate and politics begin when discussion starts over the “cause” of this phenomenon. This phenomenon has become political and since this site has a policy of no political references I will refrain from any comments what may or may not be a cause. Its above my “pay grade”anyway and probably above most who post on TOTV.

[Taltarzac725]

https://www.nationalacademies.org/ba...CAAEgKrQ_D_BwE

What bothers me is the logic of climate change deniers. They say that it is a pattern of centuries or something like that. But what happens to the people living decade to decade or year to year? We humans may all be dead by 2122 at the rate we are changing the earth now.

[fdpaq0580]

Originally Posted by Taltarzac725

https://www.nationalacademies.org/ba...CAAEgKrQ_D_BwE

What bothers me is the logic of climate change deniers. They say that it is a pattern of centuries or something like that. But what happens to the people living decade to decade or year to year? We human may all be dead by 2122 at the rate we are changing the earth now.

There have always been and always be "deniers" no matter the subject. For whatever reason they can't accept evidence counter to their beliefs. Flat earther's are a good example. Anything relating to earth as a globe is conspiracy and lies in their minds.

[JMintzer]

Originally Posted by Taltarzac725

https://www.nationalacademies.org/ba...CAAEgKrQ_D_BwE

What bothers me is the logic of climate change deniers. They say that it is a pattern of centuries or something like that. But what happens to the people living decade to decade or year to year? We humans may all be dead by 2122 at the rate we are changing the earth now.

Which circles back to whether or not "we" are changing anything...

[Arctic Fox]

Originally Posted by njbchbum

Are we still supposed to be worrying about the hole in the ozone layer?

No, because we listened to the vast majority of scientists who believed in the seriousness of it and the World got together and severely limited the use of chlorofluorocarbons which were causing the hole so, since then, the hole has significantly reduced in size.

Call me old-fashioned but I prefer to take my climate advice from the 80+% of scientists who now believe that climate change is a result of mankind's actions than from some rabid TV news program. Act now and we can reverse it. Keep kicking the can down the road and your grandchildren will look back in 20 years and think what selfish idiots we were when all of the evidence was telling us exactly what we needed to do to start cleaning up our mess but we opted to ignore it just so we could continue to live our wasteful lifestyles.

[JMintzer]

Originally Posted by Arctic Fox

No, because we listened to the vast majority of scientists who believed in the seriousness of it and the World got together and severely limited the use of chlorofluorocarbons which were causing the hole so, since then, the hole has significantly reduced in size.

Call me old-fashioned but I prefer to take my climate advice from the 80+% of scientists who now believe that climate change is a result of mankind's actions than from some rabid TV news program. Act now and we can reverse it. Keep kicking the can down the road and your grandchildren will look back in 20 years and think what selfish idiots we were when all of the evidence was telling us exactly what we needed to do to start cleaning up our mess but we opted to ignore it just so we could continue to live our wasteful lifestyles.

You're old fashioned because you ignore the fact that your 80+% number (actually more commonly cited as 97%) is false...

[golfing eagles]

Originally Posted by Taltarzac725

https://www.nationalacademies.org/ba...CAAEgKrQ_D_BwE

What bothers me is the logic of climate change deniers. They say that it is a pattern of centuries or something like that. But what happens to the people living decade to decade or year to year? We humans may all be dead by 2122 at the rate we are changing the earth now.

Surprising coming from someone as educated as yourself.

Our climate IS changing, it has done so many, many times. For example, when dinosaurs roamed the Earth, it was about 10-12 degrees warmer world wide. Twenty thousand years ago, half the northern hemisphere was covered in 2 miles of ice and it was 7-8 degrees colder on average. This is just fact, it would be illogical to deny it.

However, NONE of that has anything to do with humans burning fossil fuels. I again challenge those who believe that is the cause to tell me what model of SUV Fred Flintstone drove. To date, none of the "humans caused climate change believers" have even attempted to answer that question.

The last 4 million years have seen a cycle of repeated periods of glaciation and interglacial thaws that last not decades, not centuries, but 80-100,000 years. For anyone to make any assumptions based on the last 50 years is a joke. After all, Uncle Al said the polar ice caps would be gone by 2010, instead they are actually growing slowly. In the 1970's, the great fear was another ice age was imminent.

Unless we nuke ourselves into oblivion or the big asteroid comes to get us, we will be just fine in 2122---because "the rate at which we are changing the planet" is just about nil in comparison to the forces that drive climate change (the sun, variations in Earth's orbit and the tilt of its axis)

[JMintzer]

Originally Posted by golfing eagles

Surprising coming from someone as educated as yourself.

Our climate IS changing, it has done so many, many times. For example, when dinosaurs roamed the Earth, it was about 10-12 degrees warmer world wide. Twenty thousand years ago, half the northern hemisphere was covered in 2 miles of ice and it was 7-8 degrees colder on average. This is just fact, it would be illogical to deny it.

However, NONE of that has anything to do with humans burning fossil fuels. I again challenge those who believe that is the cause to tell me what model of SUV Fred Flintstone drove. To date, none of the "humans caused climate change believers" have even attempted to answer that question.

The last 4 million years have seen a cycle of repeated periods of glaciation and interglacial thaws that last not decades, not centuries, but 80-100,000 years. For anyone to make any assumptions based on the last 50 years is a joke. After all, Uncle Al said the polar ice caps would be gone by 2010, instead they are actually growing slowly. In the 1970's, the great fear was another ice age was imminent.

Unless we nuke ourselves into oblivion or the big asteroid comes to get us, we will be just fine in 2122---because "the rate at which we are changing the planet" is just about nil in comparison to the forces that drive climate change (the sun, variations in Earth's orbit and the tilt of its axis)