Hurricane Helene brought widespread destruction to the southeast United States as a Category 4 storm, killing over one hundred people and cutting power to tens of millions. This is without doubt, and being in the path of any such system is scary at best. But a question looms: if the storm did not make landfall would it matter? What metric do we determine whether our weather is severe? Is it scientific measurement, emotion, or economic? 

Many people having been pointing out only another hurricane named Helene back in 1958, also a CAT-4 which also began its destructive journey on September 26 with maximum sustained winds of 150mph with 930mbar. In comparison, the most recent Helene had sustained winds of 140mph and 938mbar. Technically the 2024 was less windy. 

The difference is, 1958-Helene did not make landfall. Another Helene formed in 2006, only a CAT-3, and also never making landfall. Reports all over the news are using words like “apocalyptic” and “biblical” to describe the recent destruction, but although these words are appealing, they are recent applications that rely on direct or indirect emotional appeal to the destruction seen in person or on the news. 

What is the motivation behind using such words, especially when the 1958 storm was just as apocalyptic technically, except it didn’t strike land. So are we classifying storms based on winds speed, pressure, and size, or based on how much of our property or lives they destroy? If the latter be the case then a relatively small storm could devastate a community and yet have no relationship whatsoever with any perceived human-made-climatic-change.

Just a few months prior to Helene-2024, the BBC reported in May that a "super charged" hurricane season was "brewing" and then NOAA reported that Hurricane season is "highly active" in August. Yet, by September, just a few days before Helene-2024, the New York Times said that Hurricane season wasn't as bad as it was predicted to be. Then about two weeks later we learn about tropical storm Helene and how it "could be" the strongest this season - compared to what? - and "could be" one of the fastest developing - compared to what? - on record. But what record? As an article in Nature has further pointed out: "We find that recorded century-scale increases in Atlantic hurricane and major hurricane frequency, and associated decrease in USA hurricanes strike fraction, are consistent with changes in observing practices and not likely a true climate trend." Predictions can be made all day long, but the observable evidence for storm frequency, intensity, etc., is not present. 

Others are saying that storms like Helene-2024 are caused by geoengineering, and they just may well be, considering how the hurricane season went from widespread dud to apocalypse in a matter of hours and days. But then again, in 2022, hurricane Ian made landfall in Florida as a CAT-4 with maximum sustained winds of 150 mph and a central pressure of 940mbar - this is the one that sucked the water from the bay of Tampa. By all accounts Ian was far more severe than Helene. And hurricane Andrew was a CAT-5 in 1992 but only had 922mbar, though a whopping 165mph maximum sustained winds.

The point is storms have always been ‘bad’, but only usually when we are in their path. But what is the metric by which we determine ‘bad’ if it is also based on size and strength, things that are by every data point not changing or getting worse. These storms therefore can also not all be caused by the climate change alternative, i.e., geoengineering.

-

FREE ARCHIVE & RSS: https://www.spreaker.com/show/the-secret-teachings 

Twitter: https://twitter.com/TST___Radio 

Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/thesecretteachings 

WEBSITE (BOOKS, RESUBSCRIBE for early show access): http://thesecretteachings.info 

Paypal: rdgable@yahoo.com 

CashApp: $rdgable 

EMAIL: rdgable@yahoo.com / TSTRadio@protonmail.com