Commentators have reviewed the hurricane statistics to point out that their frequency has not increased compared to such storms recorded a hundred years ago, although the severity has increased measurably, but only about 5%. Is that an accurate picture? Hurricane Ian is the largest to have ever hit Florida, and has been termed a once in 500 years occurrence. Is there a planned ramp-up of hurricane severity now that they have climate change as a cover story?

That is an accurate picture as far as it goes. As you know, being a scientist, using statistics can highlight but also mask important phenomena. Taking an average will smooth out the data and will not necessarily show to best advantage a heightened individual event, such as the recent large hurricane and the question as to what is making that modest increase take place. You are getting to the heart of the matter here, that they are using the cover story that hurricanes are natural and likely potentiated by global warming, to be particularly vicious on selected occasions, particularly with respect to coastal areas with a high population density where the ensuing damage will be a huge financial drain to cope with and to repair. So Hurricane Ian was a deliberate targeting intended to be extremely costly financially as well as induce more casualties than the average such storm. They are planning to strike, selectively in this fashion, other areas in the future.