Environmental modification, ENMOD and our changing climate

[subhumn]

I have a theory that Hurricane Sandy was manufactured and I would like to share my theory and invite people to read the article provided that explains my theory. I have spent quite a lot of time on this article and my goal is to explain this theory so that anyone could understand it. The foundation of my theory is based on several major coincidences and is backed up by further coincidences.

Article #1: Why this website was created?.. "Hurricane Sandy"
http://weatherwarfare.worldatwar.info/2012/11/hurricanesandy/

I have also found that Cyclone Evan had a weird and peculiar track and believe that Cyclone Evan might be the work of weather modification also. I have written an article regarding Cyclone Evan also.

Article #2: Cyclone Evan has a weird and peculiar track
http://weatherwarfare.worldatwar.info/2012/12/cyclone-evan-has-a-weird-and-peculiar-track/

I also have another theory that might cop a lot of flak in the climate change community but I think it should be debated and considered. I believe that the climate is changing because of the use of weather modification. Modifying the weather would in some way effect the balance of our climate. How do we know if weather is being manipulated behind our backs? Is this going on a lot? How can we prove its happening? I believe that governments are using and testing weather modification technology and the general public has no idea. As we all know, countries wish to test the effectiveness and power of their weapons. Weather modification can be used as a weapon also. This theory questions whether carbon emissions are the defining arguments of climate change. The thought of weather modification saddens and angers me and I have also posted another article on my website labeled "Why am I so concerned?" which goes into more detail.

Article #3: Why am I so concerned?
http://weatherwarfare.worldatwar.info/2012/12/why-am-i-so-concerned/

The United States used weather modification in the Vietnam War to limit the movement of enemy vehicles. I wonder at what stage of advancement in this technology the world is at now. Its been over forty years since the Vietnam War and the calculator on my desk is faster than the computers that existed back then. Unfortunately, we are unable to see the progress of top secret research programs relating to weather modification. I've only started to open my eyes to this recently. I would like other people to be open to the idea also. I'm sure that if we can spend millions researching the effect of carbon emissions, we can spend even a fraction of that researching the effect of weather modification.

Please read the articles provided before replying to this post.

[dimreepr]

Coincidence does not = evidence, have a look at some conclusions based on evidence. Also this on how it affected hurricane sandy.

Edited January 10, 2013 by dimreepr

[ACG52]

As was pointed out to you on another forum, the energy of an average hurricane is over 200 times the total electrical output of the world.

 

Your 'theory' is based on ignorance of the way hurricanes behave and meteorology in general.

[elfmotat]

This is one of the strangest things I've ever read...

[D H]

Nonsense, both posts #1 and #2, but the opening post in particular.

 

The first post is spam in the sense that the OP has posted this nonsense far and wide across the internet.

 

It is also complete nonsense.

 

Sandy was a late autumn Atlantic storm. These oftentimes track up the coast but then turn eastward thanks to a semi-permanent low pressure system in the northeast Atlantic. These late autumn tropical storms occasionally switch from being a tropical storm into a nor'easter. A double whammy, but still nothing particularly unusual yet. What made Sandy so unusual was that that low pressure system wasn't there. It was a high pressure system instead. Instead of turning the storm northeast and out to sea, it turned the storm to the west and straight for the coast. It was a natural phenomenon. To make matters worse, a cold front (another natural phenomenon) had formed off the Great Lakes just in time to feed Sandy even more. So, a quadruple whammy: hurricane plus nor'easter plus high pressure to the northeast plus cold front for a last bit of extra energy. All natural.

 

 

As far as Sandy being caused by global warming, don't go there. The anti-global warming nuts use weird weather phenomena in the summer as supposed proof against global warming. Weird weather is just that, weird weather. It happens all the time. One incident of weird weather is neither proof of or proof against global warming.

[iNow]

As far as Sandy being caused by global warming, don't go there. The anti-global warming nuts use weird weather phenomena in the summer as supposed proof against global warming. Weird weather is just that, weird weather. It happens all the time. One incident of weird weather is neither proof of or proof against global warming.

 

Agreed, but it should be noted that global warming HAS resulted in sea level rise which has itself provided a greater impact from the storm via more intense shoreline oceanic surge behavior.

[ACG52]

Global warming means that there is more energy in the system. More energy means there will be more extreme weather events.

[dimreepr]

Nonsense, both posts #1 and #2, but the opening post in particular.

 

The first post is spam in the sense that the OP has posted this nonsense far and wide across the internet.

 

It is also complete nonsense.

 

Sandy was a late autumn Atlantic storm. These oftentimes track up the coast but then turn eastward thanks to a semi-permanent low pressure system in the northeast Atlantic. These late autumn tropical storms occasionally switch from being a tropical storm into a nor'easter. A double whammy, but still nothing particularly unusual yet. What made Sandy so unusual was that that low pressure system wasn't there. It was a high pressure system instead. Instead of turning the storm northeast and out to sea, it turned the storm to the west and straight for the coast. It was a natural phenomenon. To make matters worse, a cold front (another natural phenomenon) had formed off the Great Lakes just in time to feed Sandy even more. So, a quadruple whammy: hurricane plus nor'easter plus high pressure to the northeast plus cold front for a last bit of extra energy. All natural.

 

 

As far as Sandy being caused by global warming, don't go there. The anti-global warming nuts use weird weather phenomena in the summer as supposed proof against global warming. Weird weather is just that, weird weather. It happens all the time. One incident of weird weather is neither proof of or proof against global warming.

 

The BBC2 ‘Horizon’ program doesn’t deny global warming in favour of global weirding, it describes how global warming means these weird weather events become more likely because of global warming.

[iNow]

DH is correct, however, that one event does not proof of warming make. When looking at this issue, we must look toward trends across multiple storms, not at single storms (regardless of how super).

[dimreepr]

DH is correct, however, that one event does not proof of warming make. When looking at this issue, we must look toward trends across multiple storms, not at single storms (regardless of how super).

 

Indeed, I foolishly neglected two words, my second sentence should have read “Also this on how it may have affected hurricane sandy."

Edited January 10, 2013 by dimreepr

[subhumn]

Coincidence does not = evidence, have a look at some conclusions based on evidence. Also this on how it affected hurricane sandy.

 

The theory relating to Hurricane Sandy is based on unusual occurrences and weather anomalies which are all sourced on the website provided. Due to the sheer number of these, the occurrences together become very coincidental and theory is formed, you can call it a conspiracy theory if you wish. Maybe I am wrong about Sandy and Evan and I am prepared to bear that, and yes it is not enough evidence to prove this completely, but the coincidental and unusual nature of both storms should at least prompt further scientific research.

 

#1 – Hurricane Sandy was the largest Atlantic hurricane ever recorded. (as measured by diameter with winds spanning 1,100 miles (1,800 km)).

#2 – If you look at the topography, when the storm reaches North America it continues to stay the around the same distance away from the coastline. (It is very rare that coastline effects the path of a storm. It seems that coastline had a lot to play in the track of this storm. Note the size of the North American coastline and this sheer distance of coastline that effected Super-storm Sandy).

#3 – The storm curves with with the coastline of North Carolina, South Carolina and Florida. (Once again, it is very rare that coastline effects the path of a storm, let alone curves with the coastline of a continent).

#4 – The storm speeds up just as it heads for New Jersey. (From the start, the storm moved at a steady rate and then just before the major catastrophe of the storm, it speeds up, just before it circles New York City).

#5 – The storm moves in a circle around New York City (New York City is the business capital of the United States and the world. New York City would be the most likely place for an attack. United States is where the Twin Towers were destroyed on September 11, 2001).

More unusual occurrences and coincidences.

#6 – Hurricane Sandy is the largest Atlantic hurricane ever recorded and it hits late in the hurricane season. (You would think that the largest hurricane ever recorded would hit in peak period).

#7 – This hurricane is very far north in comparison to other Atlantic hurricanes. (Most Atlantic hurricanes hit Florida and very rarely go any further. If hurricanes do go any further, they usually head from west to east because the prevailing winds blow that direction. What happened with Hurricane Sandy was the complete opposite).

#8 – Sandy had the biggest storm surge ever seen. (The storm surge of Sandy has created some of the worst flooding from a hurricane in a very long time).

#9 – Hurricane Sandy is very fast for a hurricane. (So, Hurricane Sandy is the largest in diameter, its very fast for a hurricane, its not at the right time, its very far north for a hurricane and had the worst flooding from a hurricane in a very long time. Too many coincidences for me to accept that this storm is a natural creation).

#10 – Forecasters labeled Hurricane Sandy “Frankenstorm“… If you remember “Frankenstein” was created, he was not born, he was manufactured.

#11 – Hurricane Sandy sped up just before New Jersey, just before the major catastrophe of the storm. It is very coincidental that Hurricane Sandy was dubbed Frankenstorm the same day the National Weather Service predicted the storm would make landfall in New Jersey.

 

I will get to the main point I am getting at and I am trying to make in this thread and I will also verge into the scientific and historical aspect of weather modification.

 

NASA states that

 

“Even small changes in the abundance or location of clouds could change the climate more than the anticipated changes caused by greenhouse gases, human-produced aerosols, or other factors associated with global change.“

 

http://weatherwarfare.worldatwar.info/docs/understandingclouds.pdf

 

The United States military used weather modification in the Vietnam War to limit the movement of the enemy. Please refer to the Wikipedia link below.

 

Operation Popeye : Wikipedia

 

This cloud seeing operation ran for five years, resulting in targeted areas seeing an extension of the monsoon period an average of 30 to 45 days. The continuous rainfall slowed down the truck traffic and it was considered relatively successful. This military operation was conducted forty years ago and the calculator on my desk is faster than the computers that existed back then. What can they do with weather modification now? How far have governments advanced in this field? The document by NASA that I have added above talks about the fact that even small changes in the abundance or location of clouds can effect climate. Operation Popeye extended monsoon periods for 45 days. That’s more than just an increase in the abundance of clouds to me, that’s a monsoon.

 

Monsoon - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

In 1976, one year after the Vietnam War, a treaty was signed in Geneva “Convention on the Prohibition of Military or any Hostile Use of Environmental Modification Techniques“. The treaty, as the title infers, prohibits the hostile use of environmental modification techniques. As a result, I find it very difficult to find evidence of the use of weather modification after that date. Note that the the convention prohibits the “use” of environmental modification techniques, not the “research” into these techniques. The problem we have is that it is easy to cheat this prohibition. Weather modification has no source. You know someone is responsible when something gets bombed, but how do we know someone is responsible if a city gets flooded? Weather modification was used in Vietnam and it can be used now. The problem is now, we don’t know who has this technology and we don’t know who is using it.

Edited January 11, 2013 by subhumn

[D H]

This is one huge load of horse excrement. Strike that, it is many, many loads.

 

Conspiracy theories are so wonderful. They explain everything, and once we find the conspirators we can put them behind bars and be safe once again. If, on the other hand, things like Sandy are natural phenomena, well, we're never safe. Even worse, if the CO₂ produced by 7 billion car driving, electricity consuming humans aggravates those natural phenomena, we're never, ever safe.

 

Guess what: We're never safe. Sandy was a natural phenomenon, quite possibly aggravated by global warming.

 

 

With regard to hurricanes not following the coast -- Nonsense. Here's a graph of hurricanes that came near Cape Hatteras, NC:

 

 

Following the coast is exactly what many late season north Atlantic hurricanes do. It's rare to get a late season hurricane in the Gulf of Mexico because the steering currents tend to keep them out from the Gulf, driving them up the coast instead. Sandy was a pile of coincidences, but all natural coincidences.

 

With regard to Sandy "being very fast for a hurricane" and "speeding up right before it hit New Jersey" -- Nonsense. That's what hurricanes do when they go subtropical: They speed up. It happens all the time. There are very sound meteorological reasons for this speed-up.

 

With regard to Sandy moving "in a circle around New York City" -- Say what? I would have said "nonsense" again, but "nonsense" isn't the right word here. That's just not what Sandy did. It turned subtropical just about the same time it turned west. It kept going west for a bit, punching right through the stationary cold front that had been part of the steering currents that kept it just off the coast. After punching through, subtropical storm Sandy dropped a boatload of snow on West Virginia and Ohio, and then turned northeast. It did not move in a circle around New York City.

 

With regard to Sandy turning west when hurricanes "usually head from west to east", first off, that isn't true. The worst kind of hurricanes, Cape Verde hurricanes, move from east to west. They form off of the coast of Africa, move west across the Atlantic, hit the Caribbeans or Florida, and from there either enter the Gulf or turn up the coast.

 

You are talking about the behavior of tropical storms after they become post-tropical in the north Atlantic. Yes, they usually do turn to the northeast once the become sub-tropical. That's because of the prevailing steering currents in the north Atlantic. They weren't there for Sandy. A semi-permanent low pressure cell typically sets up over Iceland, and this low drives storms to the northeast once they reach the north Atlantic. That's not what happened with Sandy. Instead of the typical semi-permanent low over Iceland, there was a nice balmy very high pressure cell over Iceland. This steered Sandy to the west rather than the east once it went sub-tropical.

 

 

For this to be a manufactured storm, the group behind it would have had to have made the jet stream form a cold front over the continental US that dipped down into Florida just as Sandy crossed Cuba. Then they would have had to somehow have made that cold front become stationary. Then they would have had to have somehow have to have steered Sandy right along the Gulf Stream. Then they would have had to have manufactured this high pressure system over Iceland.

 

It's absolutely ridiculous.

 

 

[subhumn]

 

 

 

Notice in your graph of Hurricanes, most of the Hurricanes go east and out to sea, Sandy turned west when it reached New Jersey. That is unusual dont you think? Also note that no Hurricane began in the same place as Sandy, below Cuba. They all started a lot further east or a bit further west. It is improbable that Sandy was weather modification at work, but is it impossible? Why doesnt CNN / BBC / ALJAZEERA ever talk about the effect of weather modification on climate? If news does, it might be some small column in the personal section of your newspaper. How about explaining the effect of weather modification on climate? How about they speak about the Environmental Modification treaty which prohibits the "use" and not the "research"? At what level of technology are we at now with weather modification? We need to expose the effect of weather modification on climate and the capability of weather modfication programs to the world before its too late.

Edited January 12, 2013 by subhumn

[John Cuthber]

Notice in your graph of Hurricanes, most of the Hurricanes go east and out to sea, Sandy turned west when it reached New Jersey. That is unusual dont you think?

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas_sharpshooter_fallacy

 

" Why doesnt CNN / BBC / ALJAZEERA ever talk about the effect of weather modification on climate?"

Probably for the same reason that they don't talk about alien invasions: there are none to talk about.

[D H]

Notice in your graph of Hurricanes, most of the Hurricanes go east and out to sea, Sandy turned west when it reached New Jersey. That is unusual dont you think?

(1) You are moving the goalposts, and (2) I have already mentioned this twice now. I'll discuss it for the third time below.

Also note that no Hurricane began in the same place as Sandy, below Cuba. They all started a lot further east or a bit further west.

Where Sandy formed isn't on that map. It was a lot further east than Cuba.

It is improbable that Sandy was weather modification at work, but is it impossible?

Discounting anthropogenic global warming as (unintentional) weather modification caused by billions of us, yes, your weather modification thesis is impossible. It is complete and utter nonsense.

 

 

If you want something to blame for Sandy turning west rather than to the northeast, blame this:

 

 

That blocking high over Greenland is what steered Sandy to the west. That blocking high typically does not exist at that time of year. Instead, there's a semi-permanent low over Iceland. Why did that happen? Perhaps you can blame this:

 

 

That's the Arctic sea ice extent on September 16, 2012, the lowest level ever recorded. That same high pressure cell over Greenland was also responsible for drawing a lot of the ice in the Arctic south into the Atlantic. Which is cause and which is effect isn't known at this time. It might be that the very low sea ice extent was responsible for the creation of that blocking high. If that's the case, you might well be able to blame the following for making Sandy into the devastating storm that it was:

 

 

Instead of just a handful of intentional conspirators, it might well have been billions of unknowing ones.

[subhumn]

Ive created another post regarding ENMOD. This is a excerpt of the post.

The ENMOD Convention is specifically intended to prevent use of the environment as a means of warfare by prohibiting the deliberate manipulation of natural processes in order to protect the environment because these modifications could produce phenomena such as hurricanes, tidal waves or changes in climate. Unfortunately environmental modification can be used outside of conflict without any knowledge its occurrence.

Convention on the Prohibition of Military or any other Hostile Use of Environmental Modification Techniques – United Nations Treaty (Signed in Geneva May 18, 1977)
http://weatherwarfare.worldatwar.info/docs/treaty.pdf

The treaty created a list of phenomena that could result from the use of environmental modification techniques (this list is sourced from the United Nations Treaty above):

“earthquakes and tsunamis; an upset in the ecological balance of a region; changes in weather patterns (clouds, precipitation, cyclones and tornadic storms); changes in climate patterns; changes in ozone currents; changes in the state of the ozone layer and changes in the state of the ionosphere.”

On February 7th 2013, three months after Hurricane Sandy devastated the New York State area, “Colossal Blizzard Nemo” ripped through the same area of the United States. This resulted in heavy snowfall and hurricane force winds. If Sandy was manufactured, could this phenomena be the result of Hurricane Sandy?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blizzard_of_2013

As stated in an earlier post, it is unfortunate that the ENMOD treaty prohibits only the “use” and not the “research” into environmental modification techniques. Since ENMOD it is evident that environmental modification has been researched and at very least tested. To what degree has our climate been effected since ENMOD? Has the effect of weather and environmental modification been so severe that the world has decided to impatiently geoengineer and create a Carbon Conspiracy? Are tyrants now taking advantage of these past effects with the use of their own environmental modification techniques? (E.g. Sandy, Evan & Oswald?)

The treaty also aims to prohibit the use of any prohibited techniques within a States territory (sourced from the United Nations Treaty):

“In particular, each State should enact criminal legislation to outlaw and repress the use of prohibited techniques within its territory and anywhere else under its jurisdiction or control.”

The territorial prohibitions are not being adhered to. In the United States there are a number of civilian run weather modification programs and associations which continue to operate, for example “Weather Modification, Inc.” and the “Weather Modification Association”. While in China the “Beijing Weather Modification Office” runs as a unit of the Beijing Meteorological Bureau. The Beijing Weather Modification Office form a part of China’s nationwide weather control effort, believed to be the world’s largest and it employs 37,000 people nationwide. If the ENMOD treaty created a list of phenomena that could result from the use of environmental modification techniques, why are these programs, associations and nationwide weather control efforts continuing to operate? ENMOD was enacted because of Operation Popeye, which was a United States military cloud seeding operation. These civilian run programs do exactly the same thing, seed clouds. What is the difference between civilian based cloud seeding and military based cloud seeding? They both have an impact on climate and the use of both civilian and military based cloud seeding could result in the phenomena listed above.

The treaty also states:

“Any State with reason to believe that any other State is violating the Convention may lodge a complaint with the Security Council of the United Nations, on the basis of which the Security Council may conduct an inquiry.”

Is anyone going to lodge a complaint? If a State was to lodge a complaint, would the Security Council make an inquiry? (Note the wording of the treaty “the Security Council “may” conduct an inquiry”). The United Nations need to be reminded that they are the United Nations. Any breach of a treaty as important as ENMOD should be subject to penalty and punishment by any means necessary.

[D H]

On February 7th 2013, three months after Hurricane Sandy devastated the New York State area, “Colossal Blizzard Nemo” ripped through the same area of the United States. This resulted in heavy snowfall and hurricane force winds. If Sandy was manufactured, could this phenomena be the result of Hurricane Sandy?

 

No.

 

 

Has the effect of weather and environmental modification been so severe that the world has decided to impatiently geoengineer and create a Carbon Conspiracy?

 

No.

 

 

Are tyrants now taking advantage of these past effects with the use of their own environmental modification techniques? (E.g. Sandy, Evan & Oswald?)

 

No.

 

 

The territorial prohibitions are not being adhered to. In the United States there are a number of civilian run weather modification programs and associations which continue to operate, for example “Weather Modification, Inc.” and the “Weather Modification Association”. While in China the “Beijing Weather Modification Office” runs as a unit of the Beijing Meteorological Bureau.

 

The treaty bans military use of environmental modification techniques. It does not prohibit non-military uses such as seeding clouds in an attempt to stop a drought.

 

 

The treaty also states:

 

“Any State with reason to believe that any other State is violating the Convention may lodge a complaint with the Security Council of the United Nations, on the basis of which the Security Council may conduct an inquiry.”

 

Is anyone going to lodge a complaint?

 

There's no complaint to be lodged.

 

Take off your tinfoil hat.

[Przemyslaw.Gruchala]

 

The United States used weather modification in the Vietnam War to limit the movement of enemy vehicles. I wonder at what stage of advancement in this technology the world is at now.

 

 

Let me guess- CIA destroyed WTC and Pentagon too.. ?

Edited February 11, 2013 by Przemyslaw.Gruchala

[subhumn]

The ENMOD treaty is specifically intended to prevent use of the environment as a means of warfare by prohibiting the deliberate manipulation of natural processes in order to protect the environment because these modifications could produce phenomena such as hurricanes, tidal waves or changes in climate. Unfortunately environmental modification can be used outside of conflict without any knowledge its occurrence.

Convention on the Prohibition of Military or any other Hostile Use of Environmental Techniques – United Nations Treaty (Signed in Geneva May 18, 1977)
http://weatherwarfare.worldatwar.info/docs/treaty.pdf

The treaty created a list of phenomena that could result from the use of environmental modification techniques (this list is sourced from the United Nations Treaty above):

“earthquakes and tsunamis; an upset in the ecological balance of a region; changes in weather patterns (clouds, precipitation, cyclones and tornadic storms); changes in climate patterns; changes in ozone currents; changes in the state of the ozone layer and changes in the state of the ionosphere.”

I have found a document which was written by NASA. The document is labeled “The Importance of Understanding Clouds” (National Aeronautics and Space Administration).
http://weatherwarfare.worldatwar.info/docs/understandingclouds.pdf

The document explains that clouds regulate the planets average temperature and help to spread the suns energy evenly over the earths surface. The article also quotes:

“Even small changes in the abundance or location of clouds could change the climate more than the anticipated changes caused by greenhouse gases, human-produced aerosols, or other factors associated with global change.“

Environmental modification has a great deal more of an effect on climate than carbon. The scientific community has not acknowledged the existence of another defining argument for climate change, weather and environmental modification. The reason for this is that governments hide the existence and developments of their weather modification programs and the media is reluctant to publish anything relating to this topic. Have you ever seen a front page story in your national newspaper on weather modification and its effect on climate? Have you ever seen a prime time segment on any world news network on weather modification and its effect on climate?

It is unfortunate that the ENMOD treaty prohibits only the “use” and not the “research” into environmental modification techniques. Since ENMOD it is evident that environmental modification has been researched and at very least tested. To what degree has our climate been effected since ENMOD?

The treaty also aims to prohibit the use of any prohibited techniques within a States territory (sourced from the United Nations Treaty):

“In particular, each State should enact criminal legislation to outlaw and repress the use of prohibited techniques within its territory and anywhere else under its jurisdiction or control.”

The territorial prohibitions are not being adhered to. In the United States there are a number of civilian run weather modification programs and associations which continue to operate, for example “Weather Modification, Inc.” and the “Weather Modification Association”. While in China the “Beijing Weather Modification Office” runs as a unit of the Beijing Meteorological Bureau. The Beijing Weather Modification Office form a part of China’s nationwide weather control effort, believed to be the world’s largest and it employs 37,000 people nationwide. If the ENMOD treaty created a list of phenomena that could result from the use of environmental modification techniques, why are these programs, associations and nationwide weather control efforts continuing to operate?

The treaty also states:

“Any State with reason to believe that any other State is violating the Convention may lodge a complaint with the Security Council of the United Nations, on the basis of which the Security Council may conduct an inquiry.”

Is anyone going to lodge a complaint? If a State was to lodge a complaint, would the Security Council make an inquiry? (Note the wording of the treaty “the Security Council “may” conduct an inquiry”).

This treaty was enacted in 1976. Since then, what progress has ENMOD made?

Is the United Nations and ENMOD doing the job they are required to do? I think not.

[imatfaal]

!

Moderator Note

Two similar threads merged. Please keep to one thread per topic.

[Tim the plumber]

Global warming means that there is more energy in the system. More energy means there will be more extreme weather events.

I don't get this idea.

 

The extreem weather events talked about are storms (mostly) right?

 

These are wind driven and indeed wind. This is the movement of air about the planet driven by temperature differences. The global warming theory says that there will be more warming in the colder bits of the world and thus there will be a lower gradient to drive the winds about. The higher temperature may well mean that there will be more water in the weater systems so more rain but that's all.

[dimreepr]

 

 

The most extreme weather events, Tropical cyclones/hurricanes are heat driven not wind driven.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Huricane

 

http://spaceplace.nasa.gov/hurricanes/