Asgara writes:
Buz, thank you for providing the link.
Your NOAA list is by no means definitive, and it doesn't claim to be. It claims to be A list of major storms...not the list of ALL major storms. You can look at my links to NOAA's most intense, most deadly, and most costly storms and you have many storms missing from your list that are on various ones of mine.
It's major landfall ones, which are the ones relative to the op of this thead, i.e.
natural disasters They need to make landfall to do the disastrous damage in most cases. That so many are making landfall seems to indicate that things are changing quite rapidly meterologically.
Asgara writes:
Your site is discussing US hurricanes and at least three on their list did NOT make US landfall, Iris falling WELL short.
The three are on the NOAA list, aren't they?
Asgara writes:
Once again hun, not saying you are definately wrong, but you have YET to show us anything.
I repeat: I've still shown that the frequency of all natural disasters of all kinds together has been on the rise in recent decades, according to a number of websites. Also, even if you discount your three hurricanes from the NOAA list, you still have a significant increase in natural disasters from them.
Asgara writes:
Meteorologists DO expect the storms to increase in number...
Max Mayfield, director of the National Hurricane Center in Miami, told a Senate subcommittee on Tuesday that we're in a period of heightened hurricane activity that could last another decade or two.
"The increased activity since 1995 is due to natural fluctuations (and) cycles of hurricane activity driven by the Atlantic Ocean itself along with the atmosphere above it and not enhanced substantially by global warming," he testified.
Yes, and I've already stated that to be the case, so for you to say I've shown nothing is just not right.
The immeasurable present is forever consuming the eternal future and extending the infinite past. buzsaw
™ Version 4.2
