[Ed note: for up-to-date info, see also: NOAA National Hurricane Center, Mike's Weather Page, windy.com, NWS - Hourly Weather Forecast Graph - Tampa, and NWS - Hourly Weather Forecast Graph - Miami.]
At 8:28AM September 5, Zero Hedge reported
Irma is now the [strongest] hurricane [ever] in the Atlantic basin, outside of the Caribbean Sea and Gulf of Mexico, in [US National Hurricane Center] records.
[...] meteorologist Eric Holthaus writes that Hurricane Irma is now expected to *exceed* the theoretical maximum intensity for a storm in its environment, or as he puts it "Redefining the rules".
[...] Irma's current path--headed straight for Florida--has prompted the state to prepare for the "catastrophic" system.
Unlike Harvey, which caused widespread damage, power outages and flooding and taking almost a fifth of U.S. oil refining capacity offline, Irma is a bigger threat to agriculture, with orange juice futures surging.
[...] Florida is the world's largest producer of orange juice after Brazil. About two-thirds of the state's citrus crop is located in the lower two-thirds of the peninsula.
[...] Airlines have canceled flights across the Caribbean and are adding planes to evacuate tourists, while cruise-line stocks have tumbled.
[...] Only three Category 5 hurricanes have hit the contiguous 48 U.S. states, [said Bob Henson, a meteorologist with Weather Underground:] The Labor Day Hurricane of 1935 that devastated the Florida Keys, Hurricane Camille in 1969, and Hurricane Andrew that cut across Florida in 1992. Andrew was originally classified as a Category 4 storm only to be upgraded years later after further analysis.
"It is obviously a rare breed", Henson said. "We are in rare territory."
At 12:37PM September 5, Heavy.com reported
The Florida governor has declared a state of emergency as Hurricane Irma reaches a Category 5 storm. The Florida Keys are currently in the hurricane's path, although the storm remains unpredictable.
[...] Irma has [...] maximum sustained winds [of] 185 mph. It was moving west at 14 mph and is about 270 miles east of Antigua. The Florida Keys are in the projected path of the hurricane, according to September 4 late evening forecasts.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by deimtee on Saturday September 09 2017, @06:55AM (6 children)
If you look at the tables below that one, and break it up into equal 25 year periods instead of mixing 25's and 50's you get:
Period Number Number per year
1851–1875 3 0.12
1876-1900 10 0.40
1901–1925 8 0.32
1926-1950 27 1.08
1951–1975 22 0.88
1976–2000 24 0.96
2001–present 24 1.40
They are using the low reportage from the early 1900's to mask the fact that there were more hurricanes in 1926-50 than in either 1951-75 or 1976-2000. So yes, illuminating isn't it.
If you cough while drinking cheap red wine it really cleans out your sinuses.
(Score: 5, Informative) by Mykl on Saturday September 09 2017, @09:06AM (2 children)
Interesting that the '2001-present' figure is the same figure as the last period, yet we are only 17 years into a 25 year period. If you want to provide a true comparison, pro-rate that last figure. It will end up around 35.
(Score: 4, Informative) by deimtee on Saturday September 09 2017, @11:00AM
My point was that fudging numbers is not science, and only hurts credibility. You could just as easily, and honestly, break it up into variable length periods that equal the time between hurricanes, and then say that the rate of hurricanes is exactly 1.00 and has not changed since records began.
Cherrypicking one result is exactly the sort of bullshit that makes it easy for climate denialists to dismiss climate alarmists. Those tables make it clear that we don't have enough data to say anything meaningful about hurricane frequency but still the data gets massaged to provide the desired result.
For the record, i think it is obvious that humanity is affecting the climate, but how much and which way is unknowable given the current partisan bullshit surrounding climate science.
If you cough while drinking cheap red wine it really cleans out your sinuses.
(Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 09 2017, @08:52PM
It is prorated. 24/17 = 1.4
(Score: 2) by Entropy on Sunday September 10 2017, @05:24AM (2 children)
1926-1950 27 1.08
1951–1975 22 0.88
1976–2000 24 0.96
2001–present 24 1.40
The last two lines have a total number of 24, yet the 1.40 number seems magically and irrationally larger. The other lines seem to have a predictable proportionality whereas the last line seems to not. Misprint or something?
(Score: 2) by deimtee on Sunday September 10 2017, @07:37AM (1 child)
24 over 17 years instead of 25 years. I only included it because the original table did.
If you cough while drinking cheap red wine it really cleans out your sinuses.
(Score: 2) by Entropy on Sunday September 10 2017, @09:08PM
Oops. You're right. Thanks for the correction!