Florida Hurricane Statistics: Active Vs. Non-Active Periods

[wxman57]

I created a web page discussing the relationship between the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation and landfalls in Florida. It can be accessed below. Note that it was constructed before the 2004 season:

http://myweb.cableone.net/nolasue/florida

[CHRISTY]

wow that is quiet interesting.....i to think florida especially the south east is gonna get its share very soon.let me ask u something wxman57 i heard early that TSR had lowerd there numbers on hurricanes this year due to cooler atlantic temperatures do u think these cooler temps may help us here in florida or will it all depend on the famous BERMUDA HIGH!

[CHRISTY]

hey wxman57 i found this map this is incredible they came from everywere...

[wxman57]

wow that is quiet interesting.....i to think florida especially the south east is gonna get its share very soon.let me ask u something wxman57 i heard early that TSR had lowerd there numbers on hurricanes this year due to cooler atlantic temperatures do u think these cooler temps may help us here in florida or will it all depend on the famous BERMUDA HIGH!

SSTs aren't THAT much lower. If you've seen my "florida" web site that I made prior to 2004 (http://myweb.cableone.net/nolasue/florida), then you can see that Florida may be under the gun for the next several decades. Florida through the Carolinas is at much higher risk for a major hurricane landfall than it was from 1970-1994. Slightly cooler SSTs in 2006 vs. 2005 don't change that.

[EDR1222]

I remember reading your information when you first posted it WXMan57,
back in 03.
We were discussing the east coast trough and high pressure ridge relationship and what factors determine their strength and position. That was right around the time I first joined Storm2k and began discussing the lack of Florida Landfalls, with the exception of Erin and Opal, since the heightened activity began in 1995. Your article contains some great analysis, and sure enough in 2004, Florida's luck ran out, in a very big way!

[gtalum]

We are entering an era that is even more active than 1921-1960 I'm afraid based on data from 2004-2005

You're taking the two most active years so far in an active period and comparing it to the averages of the entire previous active period. If you found the two most active years of that last active period I bet the numbers aren't that different from the 2004-2005 numbers.