[W:#101]Climate Change Rapidly Intensified Hurricane Ian Before Landfall

[longview]

It was offline....they said so on Twitter.

Here...let me help you along..

Do you understand that wind gust are not sustained wind speed?
This is what was going on at the official NOAA weather station at Ft Myers, just across the channel from Cape Coral.
notice that the wind speed never exceeded 75 knots?

 

[ClaraD]

Do you understand that wind gust are not sustained wind speed?
This is what was going on at the official NOAA weather station at Ft Myers, just across the channel from Cape Coral.
notice that the wind speed never exceeded 75 knots?
View attachment 67415824

yes, I do...do you understand you are purposefully not providing links and you are doing so for a reason.

 

[ClaraD]

Want to explain why you are using a source you knew was offline?

 

[longview]

yes, I do...do you understand you are purposefully not providing links and you are doing so for a reason.

No I am on my phone, a link would take a bit longer as that was a screenshot the day of the storm.
Ft Myers station

 

[ClaraD]

No I am on my phone, a link would take a bit longer as that was a screenshot the day of the storm.
Ft Myers station

bullcrap, I can do a link from either my Android or my husband's iPhone. In fact, it is just as easy on a phone as it is on a laptop. I was on my android when I posted to you the link.

 

[longview]

Want to explain why you are using a source you knew was offline?

We only have the data we have!
Ft Myers never went offline!

 

[longview]

bullcrap, I can do a link from either my Android or my husband's iPhone. In fact, it is just as easy on a phone as it is on a laptop. I was on my android when I posted to you the link.

Hey, I am an old guy with fat fingers, and find the phone somewhat limiting.

 

[ClaraD]

Hey, I am an old guy with fat fingers, and find the phone somewhat limiting.

and you are quite wrong

Upon release, the uncrewed aircraft deployed its 8-foot wingspan and acquired a center fix on the eye of the hurricane at 4,500 feet. It then dropped to 3,000 feet within the eye to collect temperature, pressure, and moisture values. The crew then directed it into the eyewall where it completed a series of circumnavigations at different altitudes. At less than 2300 feet above the sea surface the UAS recorded winds over 187 kts (216 mph), and at one point even descended to as low as 200 feet.

Redirecting...

www.aoml.noaa.gov

 

[longview]

and you are quite wrong

Upon release, the uncrewed aircraft deployed its 8-foot wingspan and acquired a center fix on the eye of the hurricane at 4,500 feet. It then dropped to 3,000 feet within the eye to collect temperature, pressure, and moisture values. The crew then directed it into the eyewall where it completed a series of circumnavigations at different altitudes. At less than 2300 feet above the sea surface the UAS recorded winds over 187 kts (216 mph), and at one point even descended to as low as 200 feet.

Redirecting...

www.aoml.noaa.gov

And I have no reason to doubt they recorded that but at what location?

 

[Peacenik]

Yet the official weather station at Ft Myers never got above 80 mph, that does not work if the wind speed at Ft Myers beach, some 10 mile away was 150 mph. The storm surge reached 8.5 feet, so could have reached far inland.

I noticed you didn't respond to my discussion on the structure of a hurricane, how the strongest winds are not uniform all around the eye, how they are contained in the rain feeder bands at the NE leading edge of the storm, and that Ft Myers got the southern quadrant of the eye. Maybe you have avoided talking about strongest winds and eye quadrants because this shoots down your simplistic stance that a land station miles from the coast did not record the forecast strongest winds so the NHC, a government agency doing a very good job, is somehow either messing up or reporting erroneous information for some other reason. Such negativity! Do you not appreciate our great government?

You know, some very talented and qualified people work at the NHC. They are dedicated to producing the best forecasts they possibly can. We are better off for having them do the work they do.

 

[Peacenik]

Except that no where was a sustained wind above 85 mph recorded during land fall!

That is not conclusive.

And hey, it's not a perfect world with robust recording stations equally spaced along the coast. One station recorded 126mph gust and then stopped recording, probably destroyed by the storm. And hey, the structure of a hurricane is imperfect. The strongest winds are not found uniformly in all quadrants of the eyewall. The eyewall is not perfectly circular. It changes shapes and undulates, it wobbles. It is an out-of-control swirl of rain feeder bands blowing in towards the center and then rising up to the top. It is entirely possible for a land station at one single point to not see the strongest winds. And nobody else is saying the forecast was blown. An internet search reveals no supporting sites claiming the storm was over-hyped. Not even Fox news.

 

[longview]

I noticed you didn't respond to my discussion on the structure of a hurricane, how the strongest winds are not uniform all around the eye, how they are contained in the rain feeder bands at the NE leading edge of the storm, and that Ft Myers got the southern quadrant of the eye. Maybe you have avoided talking about strongest winds and eye quadrants because this shoots down your simplistic stance that a land station miles from the coast did not record the forecast strongest winds so the NHC, a government agency doing a very good job, is somehow either messing up or reporting erroneous information for some other reason. Such negativity! Do you not appreciate our great government?

You know, some very talented and qualified people work at the NHC. They are dedicated to producing the best forecasts they possibly can. We are better off for having them do the work they do.

Sustained wind is different than what might exist in the surrounding thunderstorms, it is usually right at the eyeball.
It is important that the NHC report accurately about the details of a storm, so people understand the scale and which storms they should flee from vs which they should ride out.
The effects of Ian are more like a cat1 or a cat2,
Not a cat4.

 

[longview]

That is not conclusive.

And hey, it's not a perfect world with robust recording stations equally spaced along the coast. One station recorded 126mph gust and then stopped recording, probably destroyed by the storm. And hey, the structure of a hurricane is imperfect. The strongest winds are not found uniformly in all quadrants of the eyewall. The eyewall is not perfectly circular. It changes shapes and undulates, it wobbles. It is an out-of-control swirl of rain feeder bands blowing in towards the center and then rising up to the top. It is entirely possible for a land station at one single point to not see the strongest winds. And nobody else is saying the forecast was blown. An internet search reveals no supporting sites claiming the storm was over-hyped. Not even Fox news.

I cannot stress enough that gusts are not the same as sustained wind speeds.
Hurricanes ofter spawn tornadoes, do they count the whole hurricane as the speed inside the tornado? No, they count the maximum sustained winds!

 

[Peacenik]

Now you are just flat lying. Stop listening to the conspiracy theory nonsense of Tucker Carleson. He lies to his audience and brags about lying to the gullible fools that watch him.

I am not a fan, and never ordinarily listen, but I actually checked out his site briefly listened to Tucker Carlson (ugh!) talk about Ian just to see if he was claiming the forecast was over hyped. He wasn't. Instead, he made the completely absurd claim that Amy Klobuchar said she could have stopped the storm if she had been given enough funding to enact her climate change measures. (Not true - she never said any such thing, and Tucker had no quote of her saying it because she didn't say it.)

I noticed that unlike when going to PBS Newshour, the Tucker Carlson site does not provide a written transcript of the show. That makes it impossible to search for certain key phrases. I guess his fans don't care, but it makes it more difficult to fact-check him or verify what he has said or hasn't said.

Even Tucker Carlson is claiming the forecast was over hyped.

 

[Peacenik]

View attachment 67415820
This was the official data for the area of the main strike. “ maximum measured wind speed 85 mph,
They did estimate a 145 mph wind speed, but did not measure it.

If you think that means the forecast 'was blown,' or that the forecast winds should have been able to have been measured at the Cape Coral Fire Department,, which is not on the coast, then why can you not even find any right wing media making such an outrageous claim?

 

[Peacenik]

No I am on my phone, a link would take a bit longer as that was a screenshot the day of the storm.
Ft Myers station

That comes up as yesterday and today, not the day of the storm landfall.

 

[longview]

If you think that means the forecast 'was blown,' or that the forecast winds should have been able to have been measured at the Cape Coral Fire Department,, which is not on the coast, then why can you not even find any right wing media making such an outrageous claim?

This is not about the forecast but about how strong the storm was at landfall!
At landfall Ian looks like a cat 1 or cat 2 hurricane.

 

[Peacenik]

and you are quite wrong

Upon release, the uncrewed aircraft deployed its 8-foot wingspan and acquired a center fix on the eye of the hurricane at 4,500 feet. It then dropped to 3,000 feet within the eye to collect temperature, pressure, and moisture values. The crew then directed it into the eyewall where it completed a series of circumnavigations at different altitudes. At less than 2300 feet above the sea surface the UAS recorded winds over 187 kts (216 mph), and at one point even descended to as low as 200 feet.

Redirecting...

www.aoml.noaa.gov

Oh wow. Awesome post. You sealed the deal with that one. This has been such a bizarre discussion. What a ridiculous position to take, that the 'forecast was blown,' or 'overhyped.' Even Tucker Carlson isn't making such an outrageous claim. I really thought that when I researched the structure of a hurricane and learned that the maximum winds are not uniform in a perfect circle around that eyewall, but undulating and wobbling and only found in the strongest feeder bands near the eyewall, but not in all quadrants, that would do it, but no! That complete argument was ignored, as if it was never said. Not one response to it.

So I imagine that even posting the results of a a drone flight showing way more wind than the forecast will somehow be disregarded as well.

There is a thing where some people just can't be wrong. If they take a position they can never admit if it was a mistake.

I am starting to get the idea we are seeing some of that here. But it has been an interesting and educational conversation...

 

[longview]

That comes up as yesterday and today, not the day of the storm landfall.

It is a real time station report, the screen capture was for when the storm came ashore, and included the wind shift when the eye passed.

 

[Peacenik]

And I have no reason to doubt they recorded that but at what location?

That can be derived from the time of the recordings. The flight was conducted on September 28:

On September 28, 2022, the Hurricane Hunters transected Category 4 Hurricane Ian during a period of rapid intensification.

Where was Ian on the 28th?

 

[Peacenik]

Sustained wind is different than what might exist in the surrounding thunderstorms, it is usually right at the eyeball.
It is important that the NHC report accurately about the details of a storm, so people understand the scale and which storms they should flee from vs which they should ride out.
The effects of Ian are more like a cat1 or a cat2,
Not a cat4.

They measured way more than forecast with a drone. The forecast was accurate.

Do you have anything to support a contention that the NHC purposely reported erroneous information? Is it some kind of deep state conspiracy to try to fool people who 'know better' than what the main stream media is reporting?

 

[Peacenik]

I cannot stress enough that gusts are not the same as sustained wind speeds.
Hurricanes ofter spawn tornadoes, do they count the whole hurricane as the speed inside the tornado? No, they count the maximum sustained winds!

So if a land station does not measure the forecast wind speed then you think it means they 'blew the forecast?'

Even if the land station was destroyed by the storm before it could complete a full data set?

 

[Peacenik]

This is not about the forecast but about how strong the storm was at landfall!
At landfall Ian looks like a cat 1 or cat 2 hurricane.

And you're not comparing that to the forecast nor demanding they match?

Or else 'the forecast was blown?'

 

[bubbabgone]

I was curious to see if hurricane IAN's strength is really unprecedented since, as expected, AGW has been cited as the cause.
Turns out IAN's strength is not unprecedented.
Such hurricanes affecting FL alone have been recorded over the last 2 centuries.

https://www.weather.gov/media/mlb/whirl/FloridaHazardousWeatherByDay.pdf

You have to look for them but they're in there.
Data for the 19th century is not very complete.
And we already know that greater hurricane frequency isn't a result of AGW cuz it hasn't occurred.

 

[Peacenik]

I was curious to see if hurricane IAN's strength is really unprecedented since, as expected, AGW has been cited as the cause.
Turns out IAN's strength is not unprecedented.
Such hurricanes affecting FL alone have been recorded over the last 2 centuries.

https://www.weather.gov/media/mlb/whirl/FloridaHazardousWeatherByDay.pdf

You have to look for them but they're in there.
Data for the 19th century is not very complete.
And we already know that greater hurricane frequency isn't a result of AGW cuz it hasn't occurred.

I am contending that the recently noticed rapid intensification is an indication that climate change is already affecting our weather patterns.

Katrina wasn't that bad until just before it hit. It encountered warm water and rapidly intensified.

That's what Ian did, too. The forecasting improved since Katrina. Now the NHC is looking for conditions which cause rapid intensification. The NHC forecast Ian to undergo rapid intensification and that is precisely what occurred.

When looking at previous records we should be looking for how frequently these rapidly intensified storms have occurred. That's happening more often now that the effects of climate change are becoming apparent.