my information is coming straight from the national weather service

Wilmington, NC

http://weather.noaa.gov/weather/current/KILM.html

still showing 33mph 7pm EDT yesterday

correct but when it hit nc early friday it was 85 gusting 90-95+

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/nor...lypse-that-never-was.html

Hi txyankee last time I checked Wilmington NC, Virginia Beach, the Chesapeake Bay area are where the Hurricane came onshore for the first time and none of those places are showing wind speeds of that order

This was a Gale/Strong Gale that was hyped up to prop up the dwindling MMGW story which in the face of reality is finally being seen for what it is

I have had a look through the METAR data I have stored for Wilmington which was gathered from this page http://weather.noaa.gov/weather/current/KILM.html

271101Z AUTO 31040G57KT 1 3/4SM BR BKN018 OVC026 24/23 A2896 RMK AO2 PK WND 31057/1101 P0001

This is the highest value I have in the database

After AUTO it says 31040G57KT

This is wind from the direction 310 degrees (north west ish) at 40 Knots (sustained for 10 mins during the measurement period) gusting to 57Knots

40 Knots is 46 mph which puts it on the border of Gale/Strong Gale (which backs up the fact that Weatherspark is using the same datasource)

Even if we take the gust as the measure of the storm (normally it's based on sustained wind speed) then it is still not in Hurricane territory at 65.59 mph

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beaufort_scale

No time for hair splitting over whether it was a Hurricane or a Tropical Storm when Irene was making US Landfall either... last tally, 21 related fatalities, between 7-10 billion USD in damage. See http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/44305129/ns/weather/ ... kind of arguing in the 8th decimal, but if the Scottish would shrug their shoulders with 2-3 of these passing in a year that's quite OK. Munich Re will advise on the dollar and cents.

Who claimed that a specific hurricane was of man's doing, I do not know... probably the context of the story was lost. No warming in the 21st century will also be one of those that came across without distortion, but repeated here without blinking, same that the Arctic sea ice saw 3 good years between 2007 and 2011... the data not agreeing with that either... the 2011 melt has not finished yet.



Bagnoli and Nisida are in a vicinity where I remember to have seen a picture in a thread of a person near Napels. Whoever is there battling it out, military conscription did not end here until 2004. In the UK it ended in 1960, the last to leave compulsory service in 1963... now that year had a cold winter. Seems the US army spends 20 billion annual to keep it's forces air-cooled out in Iraq and Afghanistan [all British news outlets], I'd say, no money spared to get things in place.

--//--

P.S. "Climate is what you expect, weather is what you get" is a very old quote... even back then it was understood. With that radiating tarmac in mind, would that cause for all the snowmac to anomalously disappear, earlier and earlier, even after those terrible winters?





In 10 days or so we'll have the August snow data and then we can sum up the meteorological summer. How will that be looking in the seasonal chart? So far, since 1966 it's been on decline, just like in the Spring season:



More winter snow of late in inconvenient latitudes, yet it melting off further and further, faster and faster. Where is that energy coming from... Galactic Cosmic Rays?

GCRs are doing it now we're told by dreamers jumping to CLOUDS experiment conclusions [as predicted]. Wonder what the 10Be trace was for the Maunder Minimum that lasted 70 years of no sunspots, that could be seen. The here and now sun in the 21st century did not flux, unless amplifying signal hundreds of times to see that 0.1% variation (red SORCE moving average extended back for perspective, and fitted to see how much ACRIM III recorded for the peak years in this millennium. In one word: Wow.



If a single hurricane is said to be attributable to AGW, that's not utter nonsense, that's pure idiocy. It's the total that is hinting of extreme weather anomalies... stormier Europe too, 4% more water vapor [how many more Joules does that need]? 20% more rain, a declining atmospheric water mol residency, which before was equated to about 10 days. The funpack Aint True department has a new paper under discussion... when there are fewer/no sunspots, the sun emits more visible light, long wave radiation and that is what CO2 likes, high above the vapor holding troposphere. Mind boggling, not, that a lower active sun causes more warming... Some mothers do 'ave 'em (a British comic series, with a Spencer character).