Voit lisätä twiitteihisi sijainnin, esimerkiksi kaupungin tai tarkemman paikan, verkosta ja kolmannen osapuolen sovellusten kautta. Halutessasi voit poistaa twiittisi sijaintihistorian myöhemmin. Lue lisää
Thanks, @FrancoisF24, for an interesting debate. Surprisingly, some seemed to resist inconvenient facts, so let me just outline what seemed to be the most controversial ones @rajendrashende, @MohamedNasheed, @hblandeshttps://twitter.com/F24Debate/status/1040269890572230656 …
No, hurricanes have not become more frequent – if you look at US landfall (the best and most robust measure), there has not been an increase since 1900 https://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/10.1175/BAMS-D-17-0184.1 …pic.twitter.com/icvQ72KA0B
How about the rest of the world? https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/sep/05/asian-typhoons-becoming-more-intense-study-finds …
@BjornLomborg @jordenbpeterson think the claim is that hurricanes have become more robust rather than more frequent or worse.
but what of severity? hurricanes are large, discrete things. only so many can realistically happen in a season. but severity is a continuous spectrum.
How about reading the article: "However, since 1900 neither observed CONUS landfalling hurricane frequency nor intensity shows significant trends, including the devastating 2017 season."
Aren't you attacking a strawman? Who has claimed that there would be more hurricanes? The only thing that I have read is that the frequency of major, catastrophic, hurricanes will increase. Got any stats on that?
It's the Ted Turner Effect 24 / 7 Cable News
Which is what climate change models predict.
Why is landfall the best and most robust method? Why not look at named stormes in the Atlantic?
Yes, it also says nothing about severity
Twitter saattaa olla ruuhkautunut tai ongelma on muuten hetkellinen. Yritä uudelleen tai käy Twitterin tilasivulla saadaksesi lisätietoja.
