Ned Flanders wrote:
nutria wrote:2. (Lord help me, but) taking your thesis at its face, the hurricane you listed is significantly smaller than Sandy.
Public school reading comp champ, that nutty-ria.... What part of this don't you understand?:
"The Great Colonial Hurricane of 1635 was a severe hurricane which in August of that year brushed Virginia and then passed over southeastern New England. Though accounts of the storm are very limited, it was most likely the most intense hurricane to hit New England since European colonization."
As I pointed out in my original post, there was little if any infrastructe to wreck, so nobody cared if some beaver and deer were displaced.
I'm not sure if you are more cowardly, or stupid. Right here, dipshit:
nutria wrote:1. Yes, dumbass, hurricanes will happen regardless of human existence.
2. (Lord help me, but) taking your thesis at its face, the hurricane you listed is significantly smaller than Sandy.
3. More importantly, that hurricane hit in August, dead in the middle of hurricane season, and not during the last days of October.
I'll walk you through it, nice and slow. Hurricanes will happen, regardless of human existence, interaction, etc. Given the relatively long time scale of current weather patterns existing, particularly with respect to the length of human existence, it is almost a certainty that the strongest hurricane in the earth's history happened well before those of us besides Ned descended from the trees. But that is not the question, you fucking idiot.
The question is whether human behavior have affected average
intensity and frequency of these storms. And the answer to that question is an unequivocal yes, you believing-in-demonic-possession imbecile.
Cue Ned's "people are refuting my obvious bullshit, therefore I must be right" post in 3..2..