In addition to my other comment, with further consideration of also the implications of the energy polarity multiplier framework of nature, it follows that we should never try to anticipate positive outcomes, when the underlying problem is due to the forces of mathematically negative energy. Every surprise will unpleasant, with negative outcomes. This is just the nature of the issue, we absolutely can't know the consequences in advance, just that they are heavily weighted in the negative direction, and the unexpected consequences will continue to increase as a kind of hyperobject, as seen without knowing the energy polarity multiplier framework. In essence what it says is that creation leads to creation, but destruction leads to destruction. Our current mode is destruction, we monetise only destruction. So we should not expect any "Good" news, that the frequency of storms might reduce, or indeed any good news at all, until such time as we manage to reverse our mode to creation.
(Ive explained technically what needs to happen to do that)
Therefore we should assume the worst. Not only will the frequency of storms increase, they will get worse in magnitude, revealing new destructive forces with every storm, as their intensity increases.
As for this one that just passed over the US, dominating the satellite view of the planet in that time, did you notice the prevalence of lightning, both around the periphery of the storm, and in the eye?
I did. It looked much more obvious than we have seen in previous storms.
To me as an Engineer, I could not help wonder if there might be motor effects never seen or noticed before, which act during storms. If the lightning seen around the periphery happens to be in the opposite polarity to the lightning seen in the eye, it follows that there has to be toroidal current flow, and within this, motor effects working either to increase the intensity of the storm, or to reduce it. Again the energy polarity multiplier framework tells us, those forces are likely to increase it.
There we might be seeing a new negative multiplier coming into effect.
In any case we should expect negative multipliers. Not positive.
You can always read more about the energy polarity multiplier framework, its in the book I urge folk to read in my profile.
