Skip to content

The Southern Hemisphere Sees Its ‘Quietest’ Hurricane Season On Record

April 4, 2017

By Paul Homewood

 

image

http://dailycaller.com/2017/04/03/the-southern-hemisphere-sees-its-quietest-hurricane-season-on-record/ 

 

From the Daily Caller:

 

As we head into April, the Southern Hemisphere is in the midst of the “quietest” hurricane season on record.

Meteorologist Ryan Maue of Weatherbell Analytics noted tropical cyclone activity in the Southern Hemisphere for the 2016-2017 season is the “quietest on record, by far” based on records going back nearly five decades.

image

So far, the Southern Hemisphere has seen 13 named storms, including four hurricane-strength storms. Only two of those storms became major hurricanes, Category 3 or higher, according to data compiled by Colorado State University.

Most recently, Tropical Cyclone Debbie struck Australia’s northeastern coast in late March, forcing 25,000 people to be evacuated from low-lying areas. Debbie brought 161-mile-per-hour winds and cut power to thousands of residents. At least four deaths have been blamed on the storm.

The Southern Hemisphere’s quiet hurricane season comes after the most active season in the North Atlantic since 2010. The 2016 Atlantic season saw 16 named storms, including seven hurricanes.

Just three of those hurricanes were Category 3 or higher, and none made landfall this years. A major hurricane has not made landfall in the U.S. for more than a decade.

http://dailycaller.com/2017/04/03/the-southern-hemisphere-sees-its-quietest-hurricane-season-on-record/

Advertisements
17 Comments
  1. Ian Magness permalink
    April 4, 2017 9:53 am

    Oh dear.
    Best not tell that to the BBC – it would spoil a lot of the narrative on its new programme “Galapagos”. The poor, deluded, formerly impressive and respectable reporter and biologist Liz Bonnin cannot stop herself from repeatedly bringing up “and how is the beleaguered wildlife coping with the devastating affect of climate change?”. Amusingly, the standard answer from local experts seems to be “err, fine actually”, but that doesn’t stop Bonnin continually seeking evidence that could provide proof for the BBC AGW party line.
    Sorry for going off-piste but I needed a rant about the latest BBC climate catastrophe-fest disguised as a serious wildlife programme.

    • tom0mason permalink
      April 4, 2017 10:34 am

      Going off-piste after listening/viewing the latest BBC climate propaganda is very understandable. Just stop watching them and complain to your local MP about the BBC tax not being worth the money.

      • Old Englander permalink
        April 5, 2017 12:59 pm

        Never mind value for money, what’s worse is that the BBC is patently in violation of its own Charter, requiring balance on controversial matters. Whoops, sorry, I forgot it’s all “settled science”.

    • Rowland H permalink
      April 4, 2017 10:58 am

      It seems that anybody who wants to make a program about the great outdoors and get funding for it only needs to ensure that climate change is to be included (and,of course that the existence of something is threatened by it) to get the go-ahead!

    • Adrian permalink
      April 4, 2017 12:35 pm

      Well the propaganda wing of the leftist/green nutters are funded by YOUR money so surely the answer is obvious, stop giving it to them! You’ll not stop their rantings but at least you’ve done ‘your bit’ and you really do a lot better when you’re not paying for it. Voila, instant karma.

      No miss to miss the telly, subscription to both amazon and netflix amounts to roughly the same cost and ‘green’ crap is not forced down your throat. Of course if you want to be legally reminded of what you no longer fund they both have some Broadcasting Biased Crap output on them.

    • CheshireRed permalink
      April 4, 2017 1:27 pm

      She said the Galapagos islands ‘have the most stable climate…..which makes them more exposed to climate change’!! I found myself wondering what exactly is different there due to human climate influence because she didn’t identify so much as one specific weather / climate / animal / ocean thing that has changed. Not one. Yet again there was plenty of assertive projecting but actual evidence of climate change impact was an endangered species. Par for the BBC course.

    • johnrmcd permalink
      April 4, 2017 2:35 pm

      When I was younger I used to go off-pissed every weekend.

      • Terry Wilson permalink
        April 4, 2017 6:50 pm

        As a 70 year old, I still do.
        Toughen up!

  2. April 4, 2017 10:15 am

    Reblogged this on WeatherAction News and commented:
    Shhh if we don’t say anything it will go away

  3. CheshireRed permalink
    April 4, 2017 10:32 am

    This is pretty much the exact opposite of what experts predicted. Oh dear, flat out wrong again, then. It’s all getting a bit embarrassing.

  4. tom0mason permalink
    April 4, 2017 10:43 am

    Without a large temperature/pressure differential and some large mass of warm water to feed it hurricanes [Mr. Higgins] hardly ever happen.

  5. Athelstan permalink
    April 4, 2017 12:57 pm

    Agreed Paul, incidence is clearly down.

    But at the moment I wouldn’t go shouting it down Australia way, as we all will know on here – in the wake of cyclone ‘Debbie’ – there have been some deaths and that is very sad, we sincerely commiserate with our Aus cousins and wish the survivors all the help and hope that they can get.

  6. Broadlands permalink
    April 4, 2017 1:08 pm

    Does this mean that we haven’t added enough carbon dioxide to the atmosphere down there? I read that the South Pole finally made it to 400 ppm…because of El-Nino?

  7. John F. Hultquist permalink
    April 4, 2017 1:57 pm

    CheshireRed April 4, 2017 10:32 am
    This is pretty much the exact opposite of what experts …

    In the 1970s, people were expecting worse weather because of global cooling.
    Global warming of the current period is supposed to be happening near the polar regions faster than near the equatorial area. This should decrease the differences and make for better weather.
    The “experts” seem to have introduced a “polar vortex” and a “wavy atmosphere” to arrive at scary (we are doomed) weather. [Both actions were known before SUVs.]
    They just make up the scary part.

  8. ColA permalink
    April 5, 2017 8:53 am

    Thanks Athelstan, yes Cyclone Debbie was a late comer but did not miss 2 states in Australia, she blew into the North of Queensland as a Cat 4 and did a large amount of damage a week ago – there are still some 20,000 without power up there.
    Most cyclones when they hit land the turn into rain depressions (loose all their OOMPH!) but Not Debbie, as a rain depression, she stayed close enough to the ocean and continued to draw energy and moisture, she then tracked down the coast dumping the most rain that the East coast has seen in over 60 years (1974 to be accurate when another cyclone did almost the same thing!) I live in the Tweed Valley 1200 km from where Debbie made landfall, it started to rain HEAVILY on Wednesday afternoon and continued heavily until Friday morning, we received over 700 mm over the whole valley catchment area of 1055 sq. km.
    When you look online at the floods here you see water everywhere, what you don’t realize is the bits of green showing here and there is the top of full grown sugar cane, which is about 3 meters tall! We have dried out now and the huge clean up has started.
    But Debbie wasn’t finished, she tracked across the Tasman Sea and dumped rain on New Zealand as well!
    And the aftereffects in Rockhampton are still coming a week after the rain flood waters are expected to peak tomorrow at 9 m!

    Mother nature in all her awesome power and glory is a wonder see!

  9. ColA permalink
    April 5, 2017 8:56 am

    PS in some areas they Compare Debbie floods and damage to another similar cyclone in 1954 which was huge, bigger than the 74 cyclone.

  10. April 7, 2017 1:06 am

    Reblogged this on Climate Collections.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: