Cory

I'm not saying his science is wrong, but he ripped into Hansen pretty hard (probably a little harder than was scientifically deserved given the great uncertainty in this field) and the way he went about it was beyond normal criticism you see between scientists. For example, when Trenberth criticized Hoerlings studies, he wasn't quite so belligerent about it. i think Hoerling and his co-authors are making good faith efforts to interpret evidence objectively and they are doing good science.

 

I'm just saying that if anybody could find evidence that central U.S. drought would not increase, it would be Hoerling, but even he concludes that there will be a modest increase. Other studies find a larger increase. We shouldn't be so quick to assume either party is right. And we definitely should not ignore the overall probability that drought in the central U.S. will increase with AGW. Rising temperature will cause an increase in drought without a pretty solid increase in rainfall to go with it, which does not appear likely. 

Fair enough. 

The increased temperature trend likely outweighs any small increase in precipitation. At least this is the conclusion of most climate models, climate experts, and the IPCC which gives low to medium confidence of increased drought risk in the central U.S. I see little reason to disagree with this conclusion. Even Hoerling whose "schtick" seems to be trying to one-up and attack Hansen and others forecasting dire consequences acknowledges CO2 forcing probably drives a "modest" increase in drought risk.

? 

I've never gotten any indication from Hoerling's papers that he has an agenda. If he does, he seems to be good at rounding up sympathetic coauthors from a variety of respected institutions to go along with his campaign. Romm ripped him apart as a useful idiot or denier for criticizing Hansen's drought statements in the media, but if he's an idiot and has many of his papers debunked after they're published, it's a scary thought that he's gotten so many through peer review.

From what I can tell, he's only been attacked for the Hansen drought incident. I don't think that meets the definition of "schtick". 

Yes, this part...and also, it should not matter regardless. The topic should be weighted by scientific evidence, not politics or a derivative of politics.

Unfortunately, it seems that attributing any random weather event to AGW without evidence is acceptable to a degree. If you were to assert that some heatwave had nothing to do with AGW, with no evidence (a dumb thing to do as well), you'd probably lose your head. There's a double standard in some circles when it comes to requiring proof of something, which is likely related to the politics surrounding the issue. 

Jeff Masters will do so... If he hasn't already, its coming soon.

 

He's already blabbing about 1 in 1000 year flood.

 

Next he will allude that the dice are loaded and this is less than 1 in 1000 year.

Jeff Masters hasn't exactly been doing science any favors. 

This is a new video of the joplin tornado. It shows it going from wall cloud to wedge tornado in just 60 seconds.

Cool video but I think that's the most annoying commentary I've ever heard. Keep me safe, Lord....oh yeah and my wife too if you don't mind, since she's over there near the tornado.

Why is Moore so clearly stronger, in your opinion?

And why Jarrell? I've actually heard some skepticism Re: that one-- doubts about the quality of the construction, etc.

I think part of the reason for the extreme damage in the Jarrell tornado was because it was moving so slowly (10-15 mph I believe). It was propagating southwestward along a boundary rather than hauling ass with the westerlies. The WCM at WFO Austin/San Antonio told me a few years ago that several cars were never found. The only place they think they could have gone was Lake Travis ~40 miles away, which seems unlikely.

Agreed.

I agree with your assessment that some of the best meteorologists I have met were non-American. Great mets come from everywhere , I guess. Perhaps a discussion for a different thread, but great minds come from all backgrounds.

Yep...notice how you don't hear about things like Smith-Jones equations in college.