Share this comment
1) Agree on the hurricane landfall data, from what I know. See our host's figure from https://www.forbes.com/sites/rogerpielke/2020/01/09/tropical-cyclone-landfalls-around-the-world-over-the-past-50-years/?sh=63a2a2e53b00 But that's not what they were arguing--weirdly, they don't even mention landfalls. I was critiquing the argument they…
1) Agree on the hurricane landfall data, from what I know. See our host's figure from https://www.forbes.com/sites/rogerpielke/2020/01/09/tropical-cyclone-landfalls-around-the-world-over-the-past-50-years/?sh=63a2a2e53b00 But that's not what they were arguing--weirdly, they don't even mention landfalls. I was critiquing the argument they made, not a better, stronger argument made by other people.
2) Disagree about the shipping traffic. There was a ton of shipping traffic in hurricane alley, because that's where three of the colonial world's most important commodities were centered: sugar, tobacco, and slaves. Here's a map of Euro-Am shipping 1750-1800 to show what I mean: https://web.archive.org/web/20130304044344/http://spatialanalysis.co.uk/2012/03/mapped-british-shipping-1750-1800/ (data sources on the site)
You use terms such as "absolute crapload" and "tons of" to describe the number of ships prior to 1900. In my part of the world such terms are not regarded as accurate, or even informative.
I do not have actual statistics at hand, and cannot myself give numbers to the merchant fleet in historical terms. What I know is that the European Maritime Safety Authority quotes the current merchant fleet of ship above 500 GRT to be around 90.000 vessels. Given that in the 19th century an Atlantic crossing would take around 6 weeks, while today is about 6 days, the number of vessels at sea in any given place at any given time is in my view probably much higher than the period before 1900.
Yes, it is true that ships in general are bigger today. But they transport much more goods since we are many times more people in the world today with much higher consumption.
On another note, it is in my view beyond dispute that hurricanes were less well spotted in early days since captain would avoid sailing through adverse weather. Modern ships are much more capable of handling adverse weather than the sailing ships used before 1900.
To conclude, unless you can show actual figures on the number of ships and voyages prior to 1900 and after 1900 as a direct comparison you are left with a personal assertion which carries little weight. I am aware that my own assertion here carries little weight since I explicitly stated that I do not have figures on this. That at least leaves you and me on par.
I am sorry that my Internet comment does not meet your scholarly standards.
As I indicated, I am not an expert on this subject, but the little evidence I do know would suggest that a) there were more vessels in the Atlantic then than now; and b) that there were, in any case, enough ships on the ocean to make one wonder whether they really missed a lot of hurricanes (the original point).
An example to suggest why this might be the case:
The British merchant navy was (and maybe still is?) the biggest single national fleet. The UK government published a register of all UK commercial vessels in international trade from 1849-1977. Some of these lists have been digitized by Google Books and other entities. The 1858 version lists about 40,000 ships (https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=nOkNAAAAQAAJ&dq=MERCANTILE+NAVY+LIST&pg=PA1&hl=en#v=onepage&q&f=false). The 1948 edition shows fewer than 15,000 vessels--the number fell by almost two-thirds (https://collections.mun.ca/digital/collection/mha_mercant/id/38658/rec/198).
There is indeed greater tonnage crossing the seas now than before, as I said. But the kind of evidence I cited suggests it is carried in fewer, bigger ships. In any case--again--the point is that there was an absolute crapload of ships on the sea in the 19th century, and it seems odd to posit from the get-go, as these folks did, that they somehow missed tons of hurricanes.
International trade is not directly translatør to ocean going vessels. We know that today there are around 35.000 deep sea vessels that cross the oceans. Trading vessels above 500 GRT number around 90.000. In all there are probably more than 150.000 vessels trading somewhere.
Most ships used to trade along the coast and within regions. The trade between continents has most definitely increased during the 20th century. As I stated previously, it is not just a matter of the nummer of vessels but also the speed at which they travel. The amount of goods transported today is manyfold the trade before 1900, and even though ships are bigger they also do more trips.
In previous years, ships used to stay for weeks in ports and they spent more time crossing the sea. Today they cross the oceans faster and stay only days in port, thus the total number of vessels at sea at any given time and location is probably much higher than before 1900.
You are of course free to keep to your own anecdotes.
I am always dubious about supposedly (precisely? accurately?) ascertained data and comparisons over centuries when definition, instrumentation, data collection, transmission and record keeping changed from primitive to most sophisticated. Meteorologists call it homogenization https://community.wmo.int/climate-data-homogenization with plenty of more or less 'objective' criteria applied, hence pretty 'soft' i.e. practically non-repeatable, non-reproducible results.