The graph above plots the NOAA tornado count vs. GISS annual anomaly since 2001. The three largest tornado counts occurred among the coldest years of the decade – 2004, 2008 and 2011.
-
Archives
-
Recent Posts
- Have You Heard of Comet Elenin?
- 50 Billion Humans by 2032?
- Are you beginning to see that you’ve been lied to?
- Earth Day 1901
- Earth Day 1928
- NOAA : Cheating For 840 Months In A Row
- Jeff Masters : An American Traditionalist
- Michael Mann – The Human Proxy
- Ice Free Arctic Trajectory
- A Disturbing Trend In Atmospheric CO2
- 1950 Shock News : A Whole New Atmosphere
- Opinion : It Is Difficult To Enjoy Life When You Are Severely Neurotic
- Measure This …. Heidi
- 600% Permanent Drought Returns To The Southwest
- Put The Secret Service In Charge Of The Budget
- Weather Statistics For Mental Midgets
- Global Warming Sunday Sermon
- Time For A New Ice Age Scare?
- Why Hansen’s 1981 Predictions Have Come To The Surface
- Mann “Faces Off” All By Himself
- Congratulations To NOAA And Jeff Masters
- Mann-Made Climate Change In The Himalayas
- Three Days Of Normal Ice
- Site Was Hacked Yesterday
- Earth Day In The Capital Of Greenland
May 2013 M T W T F S S « Jun 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 Recent Comments
- Dave Burton on Sea Level Data Corruption – Worse Than It Seems
- Chris Korvin on Canadian Polar Bears Doomed
- Scarface on Have You Heard of Comet Elenin?
- Barry Musser on Joe Bastardi Nailed It
- _Jim on Are you beginning to see that you’ve been lied to?
- _Jim on Are you beginning to see that you’ve been lied to?
- _Jim on Are you beginning to see that you’ve been lied to?
- Rob Ryan on About Me
- Andyj on Correlating CO2 And Temperature In The Geologic Record
- Scott Brooks on Correlating CO2 And Temperature In The Geologic Record
Partners
Is this just a unqualified observation or are you claiming any significance over just 11 years and 0.2 of a degree?
From Roy W. Spencer:
http://www.drroyspencer.com/2011/05/the-tornado-pacific-decadal-oscillation-connection/
Hi Laz
I have no doubt you have made exactly the same comment to those who claim extreme weather has increased in the last few years because of global warming.
Or as Andy W would say – cough, cough!!
I don’t know of any qualified researcher that has made such claims on just 11 years of data. Being a sceptic, yes I would make exactly the same comment if I was aware of such a claim.
It seems that you accept Mr Goddard’s interpretation of the data. Are you not interested in whether the trend holds up for longer time periods? Are you not sceptical as to why he seems to be uninterested, even avoiding, such an analysis?
@Lazarus: Did you read the post by Roy Spencer? It couldn’t be any clearer. Personally, I wouldn’t have accepted the 11 year trend on its own. However, Steve has done many posts here on tornadoes and this post simply confirms what we already knew.
Lazarus, you display Tamino derangement syndrome. The three most active tornado years were all below 0.50 temperature anomaly.
Tornadoes occur when cold dry air collides with very humid air. This happens more often during cold years.
You haven’t answer my query. Are you saying that 11 years is enough for significance in the scientific sense? There must be more data on tornadoes than just the last 11 years. What does twenty or thirty years show?
Yes, Tamino derangement syndrome. Blathering mindlessly about statistical significance. The NOAA data set only goes back to 2000.
So do you know if the trend holds up over longer time periods? If you do why are you not forthcoming? If you don’t know, are you not the least bit curious to see if 20 or 30 years adds support to your hypothesis?
@Lazarus: How about 61 years?:
http://www.real-science.com/severe-tornadoes-decline
Yes that is the sort of thing I mean. But why is there not link to the said paper? As a sceptic I would like to see it and confirm it has been published and peer reviewed in a credible journal.
Have you got a link to the research?
Again, the NOAA data set only goes back to the year 2000
According to NOAA it goes back to 1950.
@Lazarus: Here is more:
http://www.real-science.com/ipcc-hiding-decline-hurricanes-tornadoes
Not a great source. The IPCC have always said that the number of hurricanes could decrease (thought why only consider US Strikes?), and I wonder how the tornado graph would look after this years data.
@Lazarus: “The IPCC have always said that the number of hurricanes could decrease”
Really? Is that why Christopher Landsea resigned from the IPCC? Come on!
So you have no interest in if the data bears out Tornado vs Temp over a longer sample? Is that because what you see already tells you what you want to hear?
I have no idea what the data would reveal but it seems as a sceptic I’d want to be as thorough and as sceptical as possible with any claims I’d make.
Tornadoes require a source of cold dry air to form.
It’s a good thing you don’t, or you might have to do something more than just mindlessly snipe with non sequitors[sic], right?
So what the IPCC says about hurricanes forms the basis for your argument regarding tornados being more frequent during cooling periods – the subject of this post?
I never brought up Hurricanes, it was in a link by LLAP as ‘evidence’.
But it seems fair to say that no ‘skeptic’ commenting here has any interest in sceptically examining information to see if Mr Goddard hypothesis holds up for more than just a few years.
I’ll have to remember this topic here Laz, and the next time a warmist or the media brungs up a story about some weather event being evidence of global warming or what ever flavour they want to call it, we will bring it to your attention to see how hard of a Sceptic you claim to be. Cheers!
@Lazarus: Since it seems you didn’t read the Roy Spencer link (above), have a look at this:
http://lwf.ncdc.noaa.gov/img/climate/research/tornado/tornadotrend.jpg
I have had a look at that. That is why I know NOAA records go back to 1950 not 2000 as Mr Goddard claims.
There could well be a decline if analysed correctly and it would be interesting to see especially if this years data is added. So how come so called ‘skeptics’ have been giving me a hard time for suggesting doing just that?
Cut the crap Lazarus. Tornado detection technology has changed over the years. The database used in the graph goes back to 2000.
Come on Steve, admit it – you are the one with the BS.
NOAA records did not start in 11 years ago as you have claimed. They started over 60 years ago. Technology is always changing. Doppler radar is used and it’s coverage is increasing. But what is so special about 2000?Where is the data base that only started then? I’m not saying there isn’t one, just show it because I can’t find it. Why is it so much better than 1999s or earlier that they must all be ignored?
Lazarus, please try using your brain a little. You obviously can’t compare the total number of small tornadoes vs. older periods when they missed most of them.
The first installation of a WSR-88D for operational use in everyday forecasts was in Sterling, Virginia on June 12, 1992. The last system was installed in North Webster, Indiana on August 30, 1997. The site locations were strategically chosen to provide the most overlapping coverage between radars in case one failed during a severe weather event. Where possible, they were co-located with NWS Weather Forecast Offices to permit quicker access to maintenance technicians.[2]
The NEXRAD radars incorporated a number of improvements over the radar systems previously in use. The new system provided Doppler velocity, improving tornado prediction ability
The radars also had a much increased range allowing detection of weather features at much greater distances from the radar site
Deployed from March to August 2008,[5] the Super Resolution upgrade is the capability of the radar to produce much higher resolution data.
Laz, you know you can’t compare 1950 tornado data to present day. That’s as vapid as comparing hurricane data back that far. But, the connection of tornadoes to La Nina is well established, at least here in the States.
..and even with the “Super Resolution Upgrade” in 2008
there’s less
Come on Laz, you can’t be that dense………….
For anyone on here who is actually interested in real science here is a NOAA paper about TORNADO TRENDS OVER THE PAST THIRTY YEARS;
http://www.spc.noaa.gov/publications/mccarthy/tor30yrs.pdf
I stand corrected…………..
Give it up Lazarus. NOAA doesn’t find any trend in tornadoes.
http://www.real-science.com/noaa-trend-tornadoes
Latitude:
ROFLMAO!
Lmao! Laz, way to ignore science and blather garbage. Did you not read what Lat just put out? As to your funny paper you linked……. 75% of the tornadoes shown were f zeroes? (Whatever that means.) and F1s from 1970-2002. From 1998-2002 the numbers are 89% with 64.5% being F zeroes. Now, anyone with a synapse can understand this. But, you probably didn’t read anything in the paper. Else-wise, you probably would have notice section 2. I’ll quote from it for a bit…..The increase in reported tornado frequency during the early 1990s corresponds to the operational
implementation of Doppler weather radars. Other nonmeteorological factors that must be considered when looking at the increase in reported tornado frequency
over the past 33 years are the advent of cellular telephones; the development of spotter networks by NWS offices, local emergency management officials, and local media; and population shifts. Changnon (1982) and Schaefer and Brooks (2000) both discuss these influences on tornado reporting. The growing “hobby” of tornado chasing has also contributed to the increasing number of reported tornadoes. The capability to easily photograph tornadoes with digital photography, camcorders, and even cell phone cameras not only provides documentation of many weak tornadoes, but also, on occasion, shows the presence of multiple tornadoes immediately adjacent to each other.
Laz, you know what the barber said?
He said, “NEXT!!!!!
“75% of the tornadoes shown were f zeroes? (Whatever that means.)”
Always pleased to dispel ignorance where ever I can;
F0 – Estimated wind speed = 40–72 mph. Average Damage Path Width (meters) = 10–50. Potential damage = Some damage to chimneys; branches broken off trees; shallow-rooted trees pushed over; sign boards damaged.
We are having 80 MPH winds in Colorado today. Am I going to land on a witch in Oz?
Thanks for the info Laz, I was being a bit sarcastic. lol, apparently in KS, we get F zeroes on about a daily basis. At least with the wind speeds and damage.
However, Laz, it would be nice if you acknowledge the clarification of issues I presented from the paper you linked. I know its fun to be a contrarian at times, but you’re losing credibility by pursuing this line.
Laz:
In the Southwest we called those “Dustdevils” and they were very common. However we also had straight line winds that did more damage.
Steven Goddard says:
” NOAA doesn’t find any trend in tornadoes.”
I don’t believe that I ever said it NOAA did. However that can’t be right. The graph goes back to 1954 and you said “the NOAA data set only goes back to the year 2000″. Does anyone else smell BS?
Anyway doesn’t that disprove your claim that tornadoes are more likely on cold years? Yes it does.
You can’t compare numbers from different measurement systems. How many times do I have to repeat myself?
Then how can you claim “NOAA doesn’t find any trend in tornadoes.”?
Probably because NOAA only finds a trends in the ability to detect and report events and not in actual events them selves.
Of course going back in history it can be seen that other periods were more active with extreme events than what we currently have!
@Lazarus: From your NOAA 30-year paper, “Finally, it will be seen that the number of strong and violent tornadoes has not varied much since 1970″.
P.S. Did you ever read this:
http://www.drroyspencer.com/2011/05/the-tornado-pacific-decadal-oscillation-connection/
Where have I ever claimed anything different from NOAA or published science? There is no credible evidence that tornadoes are more likely during cold years. The 11 year analysis by Mr Goddard shows no scientific significance. His excuse for only using the last 11 years is apparently due to some sort of step change at NOAA where different measurements systems started being used and justifies disregarding all previous data. But as a sceptic I have asked where this short data set is as I can’t find it or any reference to a new way of counting tornadoes. So far Mr Goddard has avoided providing a source to support his assertions of a different measurement system being introduced in 2000.
Do you know of any? Perhaps there is but unless Mr Goddard reveals his source I’m not obliged to accept it. If he does reveal it then I want to know how it invalidates all previous measurements.
It strange how people with a sceptical voice get treated on here when their scepticism is directed at clarifying the blog owners claims and sources.
@Lazarus: From wiki:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/1a/Globdisttornado.jpg
Notice how most of the areas where tornadoes occur are outside the tropics. Tornadoes require cold air colliding with warm air.
Laz
Have you actually read that paper you quote?
E.g. There was a significant increase in tornado occurrence during two periods in the last 33 years – in the early 1980s when National Weather Service (NWS) warning verification began, and in 1990 when the WSR-88D became operational.
Or – The increase in reported tornado frequency during the early 1990s corresponds to the operational implementation of Doppler weather radars. Other nonmeteorological factors that must be considered when looking at the increase in reported tornado frequency over the past 33 years are the advent of cellular
telephones; the development of spotter networks by NWS offices, local emergency management officials, and local media; and population shifts.
Or – Dr. Changnon has long advocated the use of “event days” because of its mitigation of the impact of reporting biases (Changnon and Schnickedanz, 1969). When tornado days are plotted against year (Fig. 2), the rapid inflation that is apparent in the numbers of reported tornadoes is no longer present. Instead, only small changes are seen over the period 1970 through 2002;
Or – breakdown is quite misleading; for the most recent five year period (1998 through 2002), F0 tornadoes accounted for 64% of reported tornadoes (Fig. 4b).
Since F0 roughly corresponds to winds of only 18- 32 m/s (40-72 mph), how many of the reports were based on damage rather than visual observation of actual tornadoes? Some of these reported storms could have actually been damaging straight-line winds caused by weak downbursts or rear flank downdrafts
Would you like retract your earlier comment?
Just to clarify the F0 statistics.
The long term average was 39% but increases to 64% 1998-2002.
Exclude these and there is no upward trend, indeed a quite clear downward trend.