There was so much quotable material flying around this week due to Hurricane Sandy, I could probably have a QOTW every day. But I thought this one was particularly well done:
It is true that Sandy was a human-caused disaster. We build cities on the coast. We don’t adequately protect them. We don’t heed evacuation warnings. That is where the blame lies for this one, not climate change.
See Eric Berger’s SciGuy column in the Houston Chronicle:
There will probably be fewer Sandy-like storms in the future
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
We saw that in the Tohoku quake as well. Footage recorded from smart people who heeded the tsunami warnings shows how cars, in traffic, being hit by the tsunami. People on the coast ignored it too. Many went back to their houses to pick up stuff, then they were hit.
Our problem is that we think we can violate the law of unintended consequences with impunity.
Wow. Common sense. A rare quality these days.
Isnt there a really old book that tells us not to build houses on sand? I doubt these people read that sort of book eh?
If he had common sense he would avoid the meaningless word “denialism”.
It is true that Sandy was a human-caused disaster. We build cities on the coast. We don’t adequately protect them. We don’t heed evacuation warnings. That is where the blame lies for this one, not climate change.
========
That quote cannot be disputed.
Chris Edwards says:
November 3, 2012 at 7:04 pm
Isn’t there a really old book that tells us not to build houses on sand?
Yes there is:
Matthew 7:25-27
New International Version (NIV)
25 The rain came down, the streams rose, and the winds blew and beat against that house; yet it did not fall, because it had its foundation on the rock. 26 But everyone who hears these words of mine and does not put them into practice is like a foolish man who built his house on sand. 27 The rain came down, the streams rose, and the winds blew and beat against that house, and it fell with a great crash.”
Too true!
Reminds one of the human habit of building on flood plains then being very annoyed when expected seasonal floods wreck houses, infrastructure and even drown people!
Exactly. And ditto for fire codes which allow structures way to close. Ditto for electrical codes that do not encourage underground emplacement in storm drains. .Gas-lines that are not flexible and have area auto shutoff in the event of earthquakes, floods, fire, or pressure loss.
People actually pay extra for waterfront property.
And in Italy they apparently still build houses out of rocks that fall asunder during earthquakes.
I’m glad I live near the top of a hill, far from the local creek and well above it, with plenty of lower places for the water to go before it rises into my basement.
The even dumber habit is the government provides low cost flood insurance which just relieves the owners of responsibility of building in areas which are subject to frequent floods.
Part of the reason that we don’t heed storm warnings is that it is difficult to determine if the pro AGW crowd is hyping the storm warnings or if the warning is for real.
DaveW
Alexander K said on November 3, 2012 at 8:26 pm:
Here in central Pennsylvania along the Susquehanna River, including the West Branch, there are lots of towns built on historic flood plains, because the river was used for transportation so those flat spots were where settlements grew. It’s the same in many places in many states and many lands.
So lots of places have flood walls, surrounded by levees with floodgates that get closed when the river looks really bad, etc.
Some have something, but not enough. Harrisburg can be vulnerable. At Lewisburg, home of Bucknell University, there are low spots that are often flooded, as is the area directly across the river where there are some homes and a trailer park. Etc. For some it’s acceptable they’ll get flooded at some point, hopefully not too often. For those with mobile homes and RV’s, and some of those are the only homes of some people, moving if needed is just part of life.
There have lately been proposals floated for building more flood walls, protecting more areas. But they get shot down. The costs have grown considerably in the several decades since the last ones were built. Many areas would technically be classified as wetlands, there would be numerous environmental impact studies and reports demanded with matching lawsuits, etc.
Plus these days, if a proposal did get nearly ready to start, there would be a sighting of a single rare purple and green speckled salamander, identifying the proposed construction area as the sole habitat within hundreds of miles of this obviously endangered creature, thus the project would be killed off by a judge to avoid harming the unique habitat, even if said salamander matches those of a large non-endangered healthy population a few states over and it smells like some activist brought one in so it could be fortuitously “discovered” in time…
AGW Alarmism also allows the flouting of planning rules to be blamed on Climate Change – If you look at what has happened of late in places like Bangladesh there have been building on areas subject to storm surge and the authorities allow it.
Then when the obvious happens and the vulnerable buildings get swept away with loss of life and infrastructure, the governments that allowed this to happen by bad planning simply blame Climate Change and BINGO! – they can claim more money to build the same vulnerable places all over again.
Oh! – and what happens when anyone dares to question this stupidity?
The AGW Alarmist crowd usually have no answer to the truth of the situation and so as well as using the term Denialist – they tend to sprinkle in terms like “Racist” as well because those people asking the awkward question “just do not care!”
The hills along the coast of Japan are dotted with old stone slabs saying “Houses below this marker are at risk from tsunamis” and “When an earthquake hits, head for the hills. Don’t go back for your valuables.”
They are largely ignored.
Not many cities built on mountains. When our hunter-gatherer ancestors took up farming the most productive and easily worked land was on river banks in the flood plain area. Old habits die hard.
Chris Edwards: Isnt there a really old book that tells us not to build houses on sand? I doubt these people read that sort of book eh?
I prefer “The Three Little Pigs”, there’s better advice in there, what with the tale referring to houses being blown down.
But reference to fairy tales of any kind adds nothing to a rational debate.
It might seem stupid to build houses on the coast in storm areas. But the likelihood of getting hit by a storm in any year on the North East coast is very remote according to the 2009 report “New York City Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan”. Should we instead abandon the North East Coast for Florida? But Florida and the Gulf of Mexico has greater risk of storm damage. California perhaps? With the strong likelihood of an earthquake I will take my risks elsewhere.
There are many parts of the world where people are at risk from natural disasters. Many, like Japan and China have huge population densities. It is the sort of high cost, low probability event we take out insurance for. Further, we also take precautions. In the Japanese earthquake of last year, the death toll was remarkably low considering the magnitude and duration of the quake.
This was because buildings had been constructed to withstand the shaking. Compare the death toll to much smaller earthquakes in less developed countries.
What is needed in these events is to get a perspective, and looking at both both the magnitude and frequency of events. Furthermore, we need to look at the likelihood that a particular event is attributable to climate change. The principles to do this are laid out here.
On a closer reading … it looks like he is bailing out (due to obvious contrary evidence) of the “CAGW means more stronger hurricanes” belief and replacing it with “CAGW means less stronger hurricanes” belief. The CAGW part of the original belief stays in.
Not much of a change. 🙁
Or am I missing something here?
To the person who preferred the three little pigs to the Bible: Please check how much of the Bible has been proven accurate by archaeology and parallel historical accounts; check how little has been disproven; then think on the quote, “The fool says in his mind, There is no God.” Think also on why there are computer hackers, burglars, and looters, even though the people who commit these things know they are wrong, and tell us why those people do what they do, and how they know they are wrong. The article is correct: Most of the dangers to humans from natural events come from human choices, not the events.
We live on an active planet. Nowhere is 100% safe. Enjoy life whilst you can. hope for the best, plan for the worst.
Not only do people live in flood plains and then are surprised when they get flooding, but their response to a storm is at times less than intelligent. It’s sad that in my area most deaths “due” to Sandy were by CO poisoning from generators. Why are people running these things? To watch TV of course.
Richard111 says:
November 4, 2012 at 12:34 am
Not many cities built on mountains. When our hunter-gatherer ancestors took up farming the most productive and easily worked land was on river banks in the flood plain area. Old habits die hard.”
Before cheap and abundant sources of energy like fossil fuels, humans had to live near waterways for ease of transportation, harnessing the energy of flowing water to grind their grains, and exploit the fertile flood plains. Now that we have fossil fuels to allow easy travel anywhere and fertilization of barren lands, we still have the desire to build homes right at the edge of the mean high tide line. Why?
When I foolishly lived near a river prone to flooding, it was for the beautiful scenery and the daily ability for fishing. But the yearly hassle of flooding, ruined furniture carpeting and drywall, and the inconvenience of occasional evacuation taught me a lesson. Now I live on the upper leeward side of a hill. Still pretty scenery but no more easy fishing. But no more flooding and even at the peak of Sandy I stood in my yard with a burning candle. The boundary layer was calm even though the tops of the trees were swirling and snapping off.
Doug UK says:
November 3, 2012 at 11:09 pm
AGW Alarmism also allows the flouting of planning rules to be blamed on Climate Change
====================================================================
Bloomburg believes in CAGW. He believes sea level is rising. He endorses Obama because of his alleged belief in CAGW.
As mayor of New York for 11 years, he has done NOTHING to protect Lower Manhatten from the presumed rising tide. It cannot be rationalized that he blames CAGW and yet did nothing to prepare.
There’s also an old story about building your house out of wood: “I’ll huff and I’ll puff and I’ll blow your house in.”