Is it not fair also to assume that the warming effect in the atmosphere has a spectrum of responses? Why should everything respond to it?
For what it's worth, the current wisdom for hurricanes is a decrease in overall Atlantic hurricane activity but an increase in the strength of the events when they do happen.
Also a warming of the Atlantic means that the genesis points of hurricanes - especially those forming from African easterly waves - moves further east into the Atlantic as the warm pool of water than can support hurricane activity expands. This means that storms have more chance of recurvature and stay away from land. Why must climate change always be associated with negative impacts?
It comes to a pretty pass when open debate on a topic is frozen out because someone takes a contrary view to the majority. It happened in the 1960s in nutrition where anyone who disagreed with the heart disease / fat intake hypothesis that was shot down in flames. Nowadays we're slowly debunking the idea that saturated fat is bad for you.
I'm not saying that this is the case with climate change as it's so obviously happening but I feel the ears should be open to reasoned thinking. For instance I've not seen any attempt to explain the US Hurricane drought from 2006-2016 through the lens of climate change because things got better, not worse in terms of impacts.