Search

e appreciate the effort taken by Anthes et al. (2006) to respond to our paper “Hurricanes and global warming.” Such open exchanges can help to clarify not only different perspectives on science, but also different perspectives on the structure and function of scientific assessments of peer-reviewed literature. We are very pleased that there appears to be a strong consensus among Pielke et al. (2005) and Anthes et al. (2006) on what sorts of policy actions make the most sense with respect to hurricane [hereafter, tropical cyclone (TC)] impacts in the context of ever-growing societal vulnerability. It would therefore be a misinterpretation of Anthes et al. (2006) or Pielke et al. (2005) to suggest that they support significantly different approaches to dealing with the impacts of tropical cyclones. Anthes et al. (2006) present three criticisms of our paper. One criticism is that Pielke et al. (2005) “leaves the impression that there is no significant connection between recent climate change caused by human activities and hurricane characteristics and impacts.” If by “significant” they mean either (a) presence in the peer-reviewed literature or (b) discernible in the observed economic impacts, then this is indeed an accurate reading. Anthes et al. (2006) provide no data, analyses, or references that directly connect observed hurricane characteristics and impacts to anthropogenic climate change. Anthes et al. (2006) include several important inconsistencies. First, Anthes et al. (2006) cite Emanuel (2005a) and Webster et al. (2005) to support claims of attribution of trends in hurricane intensity to global warming, when neither of those papers focused on attribution. Emanuel (2005a) expressed some uncertainty as to the factors responsible for the trends presented in that paper, stating “Whatever the cause, the near doubling of power dissipation over the period of record should be a matter of some concern” (emphasis added). Webster et al. (2005) even go so far as to observe that “attribution of the 30-year trends to global warming would require a longer global data record and, especially, a deeper understanding of the role of hurricanes in the general circulation of the atmosphere and ocean, even in the present climate state.”1 Future research may indeed demonstrate attribution, but until that time we should not make the mistake of confusing interesting hypotheses with conclusive research results. Second, Anthes et al. (2006) neglect two recent papers contradicting the notion that there are changes to hurricane characteristics and impacts outside of that expected due to natural climate variability. In a comment on Emanuel (2005a), Landsea (2005) demonstrated that in employing a correct analysis and not utilizing an out-of-date bias-removal scheme, the last 10 years of activity in the Atlantic basin were virtually indistinguishable from that which occurred W

This paper reviews recent research on tropical cyclones and climate change from the perspective of event risk—the physical behavior of storms; vulnerability—the characteristics of a system that create the potential for impacts, but are independent of event risk; and also outcome risk—the integration of considerations of vulnerability with event risk to characterize an event that causes losses. The paper concludes that with no trend identified in various metrics of hurricane damage over the twentieth century, it is exceedingly unlikely that scientists will identify large changes in historical storm behavior that have significant societal implications, though scientists may identify discernible changes in storm behavior. Looking to the future, until scientists conclude a) that there will be changes to storms that are significantly larger than observed in the past, b) that such changes are correlated to measures of societal impact, and c) that the effects of such changes are significant in the context of ine...

Meteorologists and other atmospheric science experts are playing important roles in helping society respond to climate change. However, members of this professional community are not unanimous in their views of climate change, and there has been tension among members of the American Meteorological Society (AMS) who hold different views on the topic. In response, AMS created the Committee to Improve Climate Change Communication to explore and, to the extent possible, resolve these tensions. To support this committee, in January 2012 we surveyed all AMS members with known e-mail addresses, achieving a 26.3% response rate (n = 1,854). In this paper we tested four hypotheses—1) perceived conflict about global warming will be negatively associated, and 2) climate expertise, 3) liberal political ideology, and 4) perceived scientific consensus will be positively associated—with 1) higher personal certainty that global warming is happening, 2) viewing the global warming observed over the past 150 years as mostly ...

The 2005 Atlantic hurricane season was the most active and costly season on record. Recent publications linking an increase in hurricane intensity to increasing tropical sea surface temperatures have fueled the debate on whether or not global warming is causing an increase in hurricane intensity. Because of the substantial implications of the hurricane–global warming issue for society and the immediate policy relevance associated with decision making related to Hurricane Katrina, attacks and rebuttals related to this research are being made in the media and on the World Wide Web without the rigor or accountability expected of scientific discourse. In this paper, we aim to promote a balanced and thoughtful examination of this subject by clarifying the debate surrounding the subject as to whether or not global warming is causing an increase in global hurricane intensity, illustrating a methodology of hypothesis testing to address multiple criticisms of a complex hypothesis that involves a causal chain, and ...

The U.S. Department of Energy and the People's Republic of China's Academy of Sciences signed an agreement on 19 August 1987 to carry out a joint research program on the study of global warming due to enhanced greenhouse effect. The joint study is a first step toward providing opportunities for scientists in both countries to share climate information leading to a better understanding of the earth's climate system and to reliable regional climate prediction. The joint program has four tasks— analysis of general circulation models (GCMs), preparation and analysis of proxy and instrumental data, the study of the relationship between large-and regional-scale climates, and measuring and analyzing methane emissions from the paddy fields in China. Significant progress is being made, and this paper summarizes the research progress since 1985, including two years of scientist-to-scientist collaboration. Overall, there are over 120 publications documenting project research. Highlights of the accomplishmen...