Is it weird you stopped in 1994? Why did you stop there? If you wanted to prove that the climate isn't warming, you should use the next 25 years good. Why didn't you do that?

Also, where did you get your information?

When I go to the HURDAT data base to look at the historical list of hurricanes, I find a different set of numbers than yours.

Like 45-69 is 72 Major Hurricanes.
70-94 is 38
95-2019 is 86.

I also think it's interesting that you stopped at 1994. Because from 1990 to 94 there were 5 major hurricanes. But from 95 to 99 there were 20 major hurricanes. there were as many major hurricanes in 1995 as the previous 5 years put together. 1996 there were more than all the major hurricanes from 1990 to 1994.

It's as if you're lying to support your political agenda.

Interesting that 1995 - 2020 is when the green energy movement started. It’s as if “green energy” made things worse.

that is some tremendously magical thinking.

Kind of like magically thinking that global warming is caused by manmade carbon emissions, even though it’s a natural phenomenon that’s been going on long before the first automobile started its engine.

Does the climate change on it's own? Of course. The axial tilt of the Earth has a huge impact on our weather- that is literally what determines winter. The output of the sun has a impact on our weather. But those have cycles and are tracked.

Now, we've been pulling ice cores out of the arctic and antarctice since the 50s. We know from these ice cores what the atmopshere was like going back 1000s of years ago. And we know that starting in the 1800s the amount of carbon in the atmosphere started going up at a crazy pace.

We know from chemical analasys that this new carbon comes from burning fossil fuels. It's not a guess. It's not a "well, we think..." it's the exact carbon you get when you burn fossil fuels.

Carbon is a greenhouse gas and it absorbs heat and retains it. Observation and tracking shows us that the carbon is absorbing the heat and driving the temperature gains.

But how do we know that it's bad?

Great question! Science has this answer too. The end-Triassic mass extinction (ETME) was a mass extinction event that occurred around 201 million years ago. It was when 76% of the life on planet earth died.

What caused that extinction? The breakup of the supercontinent Pangea by a string of volcanoes known as CAMP (Central Atlantic Magmatic Province). The volcanoes erupted and belched all sorts of carbon into the atmosphere.

How do we know that? Sample cores from rocks!

We know that for close to 600,000 years that volcanoes pumped carbon and sulfer into the atmosphere, splitting Pangea into what would be the continents today. We also know that within 1,000 years of the final major eruptions in present-day Morocco, the ETME started.

So, we know that excess carbon in the air traps heat. We know that if there's enough carbon in the air, it will change the temperatures on the planet and drive an extinction event.

We know that the carbon in the air now is a result of buring fossil fuels. We know that the levels are approaching the levels of the ETME.

To deny this is to deny the reality that we live in.

We know that volcanos continue to erupt today and that they spew far more carbon than anything manmade.

We know that the climate changed long before man walked the earth.

We know that the climate will change no matter what man does and we don’t have the ability to reverse or control it.

Yes. I am glad that you understand that volcanic activity does drive climate change. That's good.

Now, have you seen a massive chain of eruptions happening? Have you seen them happening for multiple centuries? Ones powerful enough to split a continent or put out enough lava to cover Canada?

No, we don't see that.

And when we chemically analyze the carbon in the air today, we discover that it's different from the type of carbon produced by volcanoes. So, we know that the carbon in the air today comes from a different source. Because it's not the same as the carbon that comes from a volcano.

They're not guessing where the carbon is coming from today. They test the waste coming from burning fossil fuels, test the stuff in the air & ground from the last 200 years and it's a match.

The carbon in the air is exactly the kind of carbon you get when you burn fossil fuels. It is not the kind of carbon put out by volcanoes.

We know that the climate change in the past was driven by carbon in the atmosphere. We know from chemical analysis that this ancient carbon was produced by volcanoes. We know from observation that there are not massive chains of volcanoes erupting for the last several 1000 years spewing more carbon into the atmosphere.

We know that there is an excessive amount of carbon in the air today. We know that it is approaching levels that have driven mass extinction events in the past. We know from chemical analysis that it is the kind of carbon produced from burning fossil fuels.

We know that the climate is changing. We know that it is being driven by excessive carbon in the atmosphere. We know it's because we're burning fossil fuels.

To deny this is to deny reality.

It’s not just volcanic eruptions. Have you considered wildfires, Methane Emissions from Wetlands, nitros oxide from farmlands, etc. ?

If the carbon in the atmosphere is only from fossil fuels, where is all the greenhouse gasses from these other sources going?

We know that anyone who tries to publish data that doesn’t support the manmade global warming theory gets black listed. We are being lied to by investors who want the government to continue to subsidize “green energy” but only if it’s in the form of solar panels and windmills. They don’t want more of the proven, reliable sources like hydroelectric and nuclear because that’s not profitable to them

Those are great questions- how do we know it's not forest fires? Because they do release carbon when they burn. And the answer is pretty simple- scale.

For forest fires to be the source, they would have to be massive and continious. For the last 200 years. We would have noticed.

And when it comes to green energy vs the oil industry. The most profitable green energy company I could find is Iberdrola SA (IBDRY) with a gross Revenue (TTM): $50.68 billion
Net Income (TTM): $6.62 billion. By comparison, Exxon Mobile net income was $36 billion.

And as to being lied to. Back in 1970 the scientists employed by Exxon Mobile accurate predicted the change in global climate. They provided a report to the execs at the board. Who then promptly buried it and actively started a campaign to discredit anyone else who tried to claim it was real.

You can read it here: https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.abk0063

So, who do you believe? The oil industry that knew they were driving global climate change and actively worked to discredit anyone who made the claim? Or do you believe the people have have facts & data to back it up?

Still haven’t explained where all the natural carbon emissions, that have existed centuries before man started burning petroleum, go since they are not found in today’s emissions.

I could understand if manmade emissions add to natural emissions to cause global warming. But you say it is the kind of carbon produced from burning fossil fuels. I find it hard to believe that natural emissions are not occurring at the scale needed to cause climate change, only manmade emissions are.

And before that, it was called "greenhouse effect" and before that it was called "the next ice age", etc.

Hurricane Helene Chaos: Weatherman Loses It Live On Air.

https://x.com/i/status/1839458282349769102