Alarmists depressed by the lack of devastating North Atlantic hurricanes in 2026 are getting some late-season cheer. Reuters “Sustainable Switch” chuckles on Oct. 13 that “Multiple hurricanes hit US and Mexico”. The New York Times is relieved that “Hurricane Isaias Strengthens as It Moves Toward Gulf Coast” and while it concedes that “Isaias is the first storm in the Atlantic this year to reach hurricane status” it adds “El Niño has kept the season relatively quiet.” (For more on Isaias and actual hurricane data see below in this newsletter.) Meanwhile Heatmap chortles about “How the Godzilla El Niño Will Drench California” and says: “The approaching winter storms, combined with El Niño, represent ‘a humbling reminder of the ongoing effects of climate change and the importance of emergency preparedness,’ Laath Martin, the public affairs lead for the city of Long Beach, wrote to me in an email.” So whatever happens it’s climate change and it’s bad. Phew.

Or more precisely whatever they wrongly imagine has happened. The problem here, at least for them, being that natural disasters generally are not getting worse. As Roger Pielke Jr., in sharing “My Presentation on Disasters to the Financial Stability Board”, reminds us:

“One of the most common errors I come across in interpretation of trends in economic losses from extreme weather events is the misuse of economic loss data to infer trends in weather and climate events. Such errors are endemic. For instance, the authors of the Fifth National Climate Assessment (NCA5) opened their report by claiming that NOAA’s ‘billion-dollar disasters’ tabulation showed an increase due to asset changes and changes in climate – without decomposing the role of each – explaining that in the 1980s the United States experienced one such disaster every four months, and today it experiences one every three weeks. The clear implication was that changes in climate were driving loss trends. That was simply false.”

Despite which even the Wall Street Journal, in its modestly-titled “The Future of Everything”, shrilled “Extreme Weather Is Everywhere Now – How to Prepare Your Home”. Et tu, Wsje?

Et id. It went on:

“Nor’easters, hurricanes, tornadoes, wildfires and whatever this year’s super El Niño may bring to your corner of the world – is your home disaster-proof? No matter where you live, chances are climate preparation is worth considering, says Amy Myers Jaffe, an energy and sustainability expert who has studied U.S. climate resilience under a grant from NASA.”

Climate preparation. Climate resilience. Whatever happened to weather? Well, they say it got worse:

“She [Jaffe] was part of a team whose research shows that extreme heat and rainfall have already intensified in many parts of the U.S., and some of the next severe weather events are going to come in places that haven’t had such an event to date.”

Which is quite something. And that something is “lucrative” given such grants, even though actual data do not support the existence of such trends no matter how much you want them to be. (For instance their advice includes “Bonus points for an address higher on a hill, where flood risk is mitigated” but not the observation that “Head for the hills” is an old expression because floods are old news.) As it’s also quite something that El Niño is at once the excuse for the promised constant worsening of Atlantic hurricanes not happening, and proof that climate change is ruining the weather even while improving it.

Now you may think we are attributing ghoulish glee to people who are only concerned and sympathetic. But their rhetoric rather gives them away. The Times, for instance, said “Hurricane Isaias was gathering strength as it barreled toward the Gulf Coast on Thursday” and spoke of “a scenario that would bring potentially damaging conditions along the coasts of Mississippi, Alabama and the Florida Panhandle.”

They it weighed in on “Here’s how Hurricane Isaias exploded in intensity in a few hours.” Exploded. Barreled. Devastating three states:

“Hurricane Isaias surged into Category 3… a remarkable increase in strength… The phenomenon of a storm growing so powerful so quickly is known to meteorologists as rapid intensification.”

Basically what they’ve been waiting for all season with dour expressions as things stayed calm and safe. (They were also apparently enjoying their nation’s supposed failure in the Iran War.) Though again as noted below, Isaias evidently did not make landfall as a mighty 3 or even a 2 despite tortured attempts to torque it.

Scientific American was a bit more responsible for once, admitting that “the Atlantic hurricane season has been historically quiet this year” before rushing out their alibi:

“That’s in no small part because of a strong, brewing El Niño, which typically dampens Atlantic hurricanes with unfavorable wind conditions. The region had seen no hurricanes form between June and September – an unparalleled dry spell.”

And it didn’t hail Isaias turning into Godzilla, writing instead that it was a “Category1”, the weakest:

“Officials officially upgraded Isaias’s status from a tropical storm to a hurricane – a storm with wind speeds at or above 74 mph (119 kph) – at 3:30 A.M. UTC on October 8.”

Moreover, with attention to the “how do you know” issue that’s far too rare in this kind of coverage, they also said:

“According to meteorologists, that’s the latest first hurricane since satellite tracking began. (Prior to that, a hurricane that didn’t make landfall could go unnoticed, making it hard to say if this is the latest-forming storm for the region ever.)”

Unfortunately they bungled it, because there’s no way that an unnoticed storm could steal its record even if someone had noticed it.

Meanwhile NBC emailed “BREAKING: Isaias becomes Category 3 hurricane as it approaches the Gulf Coast” only to have to report that in fact:

“Hurricane Isaias made landfall near Destin on the Florida Panhandle around 8:30 p.m. local time as a Category 2 storm with 105-mph sustained winds. The storm weakened in the hours ahead of landfall tonight and further weakened to a post-tropical cyclone as it moved inland. Isaias is the first hurricane of an unusually quiet Atlantic season.”

Especially as to repeat it didn’t actually hit land even as a 2. Still, on the plus side:

“As Isaias moves inland, across the country in Southern California, monster waves are mauling that area’s coast. The storm was sending 5-foot swells of tidal surge against the already-battered beach fronts.”

Yay! Death and doom!

Or not, since even Heatmap, whose morning newsletter starts with “Daily Conditions” that always describe bad weather to give the impression that it really is everywhere now and did not use to be, was reduced on Oct. 14 to:

“Hurricane Simon is lingering off Mexico’s coast as a new tropical depression that could form into a powerful storm begins gathering strength • Iceland has issued an orange-level warning – the notch just below the most severe – across the whole country ahead of an intense storm that could bring vicious winds and snow • The mountain areas surrounding Los Angeles are on red alert for wildfires throughout the rest of the week.”

The latter being the usual Santa Ana winds that have brought dangerous fire seasons for at least 500 years, before which observations are lacking. Though a New York Times writer assures us with regard to these long-understood winds and fire hazards that “as weather patterns change as a result of climate change, historical information can become less reliable as a predictor of the future.” Once again mistaking effect for cause. Plus a tropical depression being pretty depressing if you were hoping for Category 5s one after another. And winds and snow sounding more like winter than global heating.

As for El Niño, well, a bad one is bad. But not climate. In fact the worst of which we have any really credible record was in … 1877. And millions starved especially in India and China. Despite which Heatmap hollers climate:

“El Niño is a cyclical phenomenon, occurring when temperatures in a particular stretch of the Pacific Ocean rise half-a-degree Celsius above the average of the preceding 30 years. But there are signs these natural variations are happening less predictably because of climate change, and we know for sure that a warmer atmosphere makes the baseline for its impacts worse: king tides, Kelvin waves, and storm surge piggyback on top of rising sea levels to result in more severe coastal flooding and erosion. A warmer atmosphere also holds more water, which means more rain – perhaps 200% above normal – which, in turn, results in flooding and mudslides further inland, as well.”

So even if it’s not climate change it is, just as climate change is causing more hurricanes even if it’s not. (Oh, and that item resurrected “atmospheric rivers” just as we were starting to miss them.)

Given how bad weather can be, and usually has been, you’d think they’d be happy that all the Atlantic has had by mid-October is one that dropped to Category 2 before coming ashore and wilting. Even if it raises the question why they kept saying climate change was making hurricanes worse. And before that, during a hiatus from 2006 to 2017 in major ones making US landfall, that climate change was making them less severe due to “wind shear.” And before that when there were quite a few that climate change was making them worse.

Instead they drop the topic or change the subject when the facts are inconvenient, while giving themselves an out just in case 2027 sees a lively Atlantic hurricane season. As they would, and in which case they’ll do a really happy dance.