Top researchers now agree that the world is likely to get stronger but fewer hurricanes in the future because of global warming, seeming to settle a scientific debate on the subject.

Top researchers now agree that the world is likely to get stronger but fewer hurricanes in the future because of global warming, seeming to settle a scientific debate on the subject.

But they say there's not enough evidence yet to tell whether that effect has already begun.

Since just before Hurricane Katrina hit Louisiana and Mississippi in 2005, dueling scientific papers have clashed about whether global warming is worsening hurricanes and will do so in the future. The new study seems to split the difference. A special World Meteorological Organization panel of 10 experts in both hurricanes and climate change - including leading scientists from both sides - came up with a consensus, which was published online Sunday in the journal Nature Geoscience.

“We've really come a long way in the last two years about our knowledge of the hurricane and climate issue,” said study co-author Chris Landsea, a top hurricane researcher for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

The technical term for these storms are tropical cyclones; in the Atlantic they are called hurricanes, elsewhere typhoons.

The study offers projections for tropical cyclones worldwide by the end of this century, and some experts said the bad news outweighs the good. Overall strength of storms as measured in wind speed would rise by 2 to 11 percent, but there would be between 6 and 34 percent fewer storms in number. Essentially, there would be fewer weak and moderate storms and more of the big damaging ones, which also are projected to be stronger due to warming.

An 11 percent increase in wind speed translates to roughly a 60 percent increase in damage, said study co-author Kerry Emanuel, a professor of meteorology at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

The storms also would carry more rain, another indicator of damage, said lead author Tom Knutson, a research meteorologist at NOAA.

Knutson said the new study, which looks at worldwide projections, doesn't make clear whether global warming will lead to more or less hurricane damage on balance. But he pointed to a study he co-authored last month that looked at just the Atlantic hurricane basin and predicted that global warming would trigger a 28 percent increase in damage near the US despite fewer storms.

That study suggests category 4 and 5 Atlantic hurricanes - those with winds more than 130 mph (209 kph) - would nearly double by the end of the century. On average, a category 4 or stronger hurricane hits the United States about once every seven years, mostly in Florida or Texas. Recent category 4 or 5 storms include 2004's Charley and 1992's Andrew, but not Katrina which made landfall as a strong category 3.

Outside experts praised the work.

The study does a good job of summarizing the current understanding of storms and warming, said Chunzai Wang, a researcher with NOAA who had no role in the study.

James Lee Witt, former director of the Federal Emergency Management Agency, said the study “should be a stern and stark warning that America needs to be better prepared and protected from the devastation that these kinds of hurricanes produce.” The issue of hurricanes and global warming splashed onto front pages in the summer of 2005 when MIT's Emanuel published a paper in Nature saying hurricane destruction has increased since the mid-1970s because of global warming, adding it would only get worse.

Several weeks later Hurricane Katrina struck, killing 1,500 people and the 2005 hurricane season was the busiest on record with 28 named storms and seven major hurricanes.

But then other scientists led by Landsea disputed the conclusions that storms were already increasing in number or intensity.

Now Landsea and Emanuel are co-authors on the same paper with Knutson.

In 2007, the authoritative Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change said it was “more likely than not” that man-made greenhouse gases had already altered storm activity, but the authors of the new paper said more recent evidence muddies the issue.

“The evidence is not strong enough that we could make some kind of statement” along those lines, Knutson said.

It doesn't mean the IPCC report was wrong; it was just based on science done by 2006 and recent research has changed a bit, said Knutson and the other researchers.

Lately, the IPCC series of reports on warming has been criticized for errors. Emanuel said the international climate panel gave “an accurate summary of science that existed at that point.” ^ - = On the Net Nature Geoscience: http://www.nature.com/ngeo

Olympics-Alpine skiing-Svindal braced for Swiss challenge By Alan Baldwin WHISTLER, Feb 21 : Norway's Aksel Lund Svindal had a third Olympic Alpine skiing medal in his sights on Sunday while Bode Miller's hopes of a first gold receded after the downhill leg of the men's super combined.

The tall Svindal, winner of the super-G and silver medallist in the downhill, faced a strong challenge from the powerful Swiss in the afternoon's slalom but was up for the fight after setting the early pace.

"I'm happy with that," he told reporters after powering down the gleaming Dave Murray piste, bathed alternately in bright sunshine and the shade of the surrounding pine forest, in a fastest time of one minute 53.15 seconds.

"It's going to be tough with the slalom guys but I've done my job now and let's see what they can do," he added, punching the air after he crossed the line before giving a thumbs-up to the cameras.

Little-known Italian speed specialist Dominik Paris was the surprise second fastest, 0.39 slower than Svindal, from an unpromising 29th start position.

While he is likely to struggle to live up to that performance in the slalom, Switzerland's Carlo Janka looked a much bigger threat in third place and just half a second off the pace.

Switzerland's new downhill champion Didier Defago was fourth with compatriot Silvan Zurbriggen, silver medallist in slalom at the 2003 world championships, lurking ominously in sixth place and 0.73 behind Svindal.

Miller, also chasing his third medal after collecting a silver in super-G and bronze in downhill, was seventh and 0.76 adrift of Svindal.

The American has not won a slalom since 2004, however, and was clearly disappointed as he caught his breath and glanced up at the timing screen in the finish area.

With fans holding up placards declaring "It's Miller Time,” echoing a well-known beer slogan, the American had been 0.26 faster than Svindal after the second intermediate but was 0.16 slower after the third.

"It was quite a good run, I was doing well but I made a mistake and took a lot more air (off a jump) than I had expected and lost a lot of time," he said. "Otherwise it was a pretty solid run.

"If I have a good slalom, I can definitely do it. It is not like I was going to be holding back anyway," he added. "I am going to be going full gas in the slalom." Croatian Ivica Kostelic looked like an outside medal contender, with his father Ante setting the slalom course. The brother of four-time Olympic champion Janica was ninth after the downhill, with 1.05 seconds to make up.

                                                                                                                               By Ap