Guest post by Steve Goreham
Hurricane Sandy has come and gone, leaving a path of destruction. More than 100 people have been killed and 8.5 million lost power. Nineteen states from Maine to Tennessee were impacted, with deaths reported in 10 states. Widespread flooding and fires caused extensive damage in New Jersey and New York. More than two feet of snow fell in western Maryland, West Virginia, and parts of Tennessee. The power of nature in action is frightening to behold.
But some believe that mankind is now causing hurricanes, or making them worse. Former Vice President Al Gore warns, “Hurricane Sandy is a disturbing sign of things to come. We must heed this warning and act quickly to solve the climate crisis. Dirty energy makes dirty weather.” Activist Bill McKibben declares, “…what it means that we’re now seeing storms of this unprecedented magnitude. If there was ever a wake-up call, this is it.”
These comments are an outgrowth of Climatism, the belief that man-made greenhouse gases are destroying Earth’s climate.
The theory of man-made global warming claims that an increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide is causing stronger hurricanes and storms, droughts and floods, the melting of Earth’s ice caps, and dangerous sea-level rise. Mr. Gore now paints the Halloween image of “dirty weather.”
Yet, carbon dioxide is only a trace gas in our atmosphere. Only four of every 10,000 air molecules are carbon dioxide. Mankind’s contribution in all of human history is only a fraction of one of those 10,000 molecules. Nevertheless, proponents of the theory of man-made climate change now claim that this one molecule was responsible for Sandy, a hurricane with a 1,000-mile diameter.
But hurricanes are the result of larger forces. Sunlight falls directly on Earth’s Tropics, where much energy is absorbed, and indirectly on Polar Regions, were little energy is absorbed. All weather on Earth, including hurricanes, tropical storms, tornados, storm fronts, and the jet stream, along with ocean currents, acts to redistribute heat from the Tropics to the Poles. Hurricanes are born in the Tropics, where water evaporates from warm oceans, forming powerful rotating storms. Earth’s rotation then bends the path of hurricanes as they move north from the Tropics.
A large hurricane releases heat energy at the rate of one exploding 10-megaton nuclear bomb every 20 minutes. Climatists claim that CO2, a trace gas, controls the weather, a system of huge forces with thousands of times more energy. This is more like the flea wagging the dog than the tail wagging the dog. Even more incredible, some claim that we can control the weather by controlling this trace gas. “Man-made warming has consequences. The time to act is now,” according to environmentalist Joseph Romm.
But, wasn’t hurricane Sandy unique in history? Well, not quite. The 1821 Norfolk and Long Island hurricane battered the New Jersey coast with winds estimated at 135 mph (Category 3), much stronger that those of Sandy (Category 1). Manhattan Island was flooded to Canal Street and this occurred at low tide. In 1954, Hurricane Hazel struck the Carolinas with 140 mph winds (Category 4). Hazel continued north along the U.S. Atlantic coast, through New York State and into Canada. Deaths from Hazel totaled 95 in the U.S. and 81 in Canada. More than 80 tropical or subtropical cyclones have hit the state of New York since the 1600s.
Climatism plays on human fear of nature to promote policy. Subsidize wind and solar power, stop using fossil fuels, switch to electric cars, change your light bulbs, green your business, become a vegetarian, have fewer kids, we are told. If you do all these things and more, then man will be able to control hurricanes, stop the rise of the seas, and save the polar bears.
Climate alarmists excel at gathering government funding to “fight” climate change. Today, the U.S. government is spending almost $9 billion each year in grants to study man-made climate change. Tens of billions more are spent for green energy subsidies, grants and loans. The world is spending over $250 billion each year to try to “decarbonize” national economies. Yet, mounting evidence shows that climate change is natural and man-made influences are very small. Suppose we shift efforts away from misguided efforts to control climate and toward solving the real problems of our nation and the world?
Steve Goreham is Executive Director of the Climate Science Coalition of America and author of the new book The Mad, Mad, Mad World of Climatism: Mankind and Climate Change Mania.
Related articles
- A note to Bill McKibben: get used to it, few care enough to pony up money for your concerns (wattsupwiththat.com)
- This is the new normal, warn climate scientists. (smh.com.au)
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
It has nothing to do with burning of fossil fuels. It all began with the Spanish plundering the sacred Mayan gold.
there are a few SENSIBLE climate people ‘out there’ who are credible like AW and telling it as it really is. Take for instance the following:
Risk Experts Say It’s Not Climate Change, It’s Coastal Communities. It’s been a common reaction in the days after the hurricane, or post-tropical storm, or whatever we’re calling the 1,000 mile-wide wall of wind and rain that blasted the Northeast on Monday, to blame the shocking wave of destruction on global warming.
The experts who build the sophisticated models that the insurance industry uses to assess risk, say that global warning wasn’t the first factor responsible for the damage caused by Sandy and other recent storms. Instead, it’s where we’ve built our homes.
“I don’t know that we have the historical track record to say that weather has become more volatile, but as a society we’ve become more vulnerable to weather risks. There are a lot of people who live in areas that are susceptible.”
“The big elephant in the room is not climate change,” said the creator of the modern catastrophe modeling industry. “It’s the increasing property values. We continue to build bigger, more expensive homes along the coast.”
In the late 80’s, the U.S. had gone decades without a hurricane landing, and insurance companies were grossly underestimating the risks involved. Models showed, for instance, that if a Category 5 hurricane hit Miami, the losses would have been on the order of $60 to $70 billion.
“The insurance companies thought it was $7 billion. They weren’t monitoring the trillions of dollars of property being built on the coastline.”
After Hurricane Andrew created about $21 billion in insured losses, the catastrophe modeling business took off. To understand the expected cost of a storm, and ultimately, how much property owners should pay for insurance, the modelers map tens of thousands of storms over real-life physical data.
Each of the hypothetical hurricanes in the catastrophe models is unique, though some more unusual than others. In the real world, storms are unique too. Certainly, much was made of Sandy’s mix of tropical weather with blocking weather patterns from the north and west. But as a destructive force, Sandy is less unusual.
The so-called Long Island Express, a 1938 hurricane that wrecked the Northeast, racked up $35 billion in insured damages in 2012 dollars. A 1926 hurricane that leveled Miami caused insured costs of $126 billion by today’s dollars.
“Sandy was unprecedented, it’s a 500-year, 1000-year event, when they focus on the meteorology. The impacts of Sandy are not unprecedented.”
We can expect more terribly destructive storms – not because of global warming, but because of the concentration of population and property in harm’s way.
appology here is the link from when that ‘sensible’ article came: http://observer.com/2012/11/risk-experts-say-its-not-climate-change-its-coastal-communities-stupid/
The theory of man-made global warming claims that an increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide is causing stronger hurricanes and storms, droughts and floods, the melting of Earth’s ice caps, and dangerous sea-level rise.
CO2 has not been causing any warming for a while. The 1998 mark is still not beaten on four major data sets. As well, six major data sets have 2012 in 10th place and with just a few months left, the relative ranking will not change much. And if it is not causing any warming, how can it cause all the rest of the above?
Only four of every 10,000 air molecules are carbon dioxide. Mankind’s contribution in all of human history is only a fraction of one of those 10,000 molecules.
———-
Misleading use of statistics.
Today, the U.S. government is spending almost $9 billion each year in grants to study man-made climate change. Tens of billions more are spent for green energy subsidies, grants and loans.
When the big earthquake hits San Fran or LA we will be broke. Just sayin’
Suppose we shift efforts away from misguided efforts to control climate and toward solving the real problems of our nation and the world?
Agree 100%. And in this same vein I’d prefer not to call people like Joe Romm “environmentalists” as it give them an air of legitimacy and denigrates real environmentalists who want to solve real problems. Climate Alarmist or Climatist is appropriate for the Joe Romm crowd.
Nevertheless, proponents of the theory of man-made climate change now claim that this one molecule was responsible for Sandy, a hurricane with a 1,000-mile diameter.
———-
More misleading statements about what proponents claim. He was more honest in the previous paragraph.
Good post, can I add the one that killed maybe 800… 1938
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7rRP8gT9jKs&feature=youtube_gdata_player
LazyTeenager says:
“Misleading use of statistics.”
Not really. Just stating a fact.
Honestly, Lazy Teenager, You couldn’t have picked a better handle. D Böehm is correct. Stating facts. Where do you get the idea that those were statistics?
D Böehm says:
November 4, 2012 at 3:14 pm
LazyTeenager says:
“Misleading use of statistics.”
Not really. Just stating a fact.
————————————————
DB, you are wrong, Lazy is right.
Arithmetic does not apply to warmism. It is a religion, a question of faith.
D Böehm says:
November 4, 2012 at 3:14 pm
Not really. Just stating a fact.
But even the facts can be misleading out of context…
Yet, carbon dioxide is only a trace gas in our atmosphere. Only four of every 10,000 air molecules are carbon dioxide. Mankind’s contribution in all of human history is only a fraction of one of those 10,000 molecules.
Is factual right, but a non-argument: it doesn’t say one damn thing about the influence of those four molecules. Just try the same ratio of cyanide molecules on your body…
Not that I expect much influence of the extra 1 human made molecule CO2 in 100,000 others on our climate and certainly not on the number of hurricanes (to the contrary…). But skeptics shouldn’t use this kind of arguments in a for the rest good article, as that is easely undermined by counter-arguments…
Ferdinand Engelbeen stated on another thread:
“In my opinion even a doubling [of CO2] would have little impact, as clouds are a negative feedback (while all current GCM’s include clouds as a positive feedback!), thus a doubling of CO2 would have only moderate (and thus globally positive) effects.”
So then, no problem. More CO2 will have a positive effect. More is better.
What is misleading about the facts?
Not sure your point other than to prove your screen name or at least part of it anyway. “lazy”
What about the fact that the rise of CO2 in the last 50 years is not matched by a rise in average global temperatures? Let alone a hockey stick? I think that is a fact [remember even warmists have been known to email “Hide the decline”], that both sides agree on.
Well, the ‘fear of warming’ no longer carries as much sting as it might if warming were continuing, so the alarmists and fear-mongers need something with which to bolster their failing paradigm.
LazyTeenager says:
November 4, 2012 at 3:08 pm
well YOUR saints (Mann, Jones, Hansen, and others) know haw to apply the misleading use of statisitcs.
“Is factual right, but a non-argument: it doesn’t say one damn thing about the influence of those four molecules. Just try the same ratio of cyanide molecules on your body…”
If the atmosphere is 1.0% natural H2O and only 0.001% manmade CO2 then the ratio of one to the other is 1000:1.
Are you saying that if someone was poisoned with a mixture of 1000 parts ricin and 1 part cyanide then the cause of death would necessarily by the cyanide?
So while your argument may be a good one, it carefully omits the natural elements that swamp the man-made one.
Ferdinand Engelbeen says:
November 4, 2012 at 3:44 pm
D Böehm says:
November 4, 2012 at 3:14 pm
carbon dioxide is only a trace gas in our atmosphere.
“Just try the same ratio of cyanide molecules on your body”
That’s the POINT he MADE.
The universe is a proportionate-physics built system. Things, that are alike, weigh similarly, have similar physical size, and operate, proportionally, PRECISELY as things with PRECISELY the same number of positive, neutral, & negative charge carriers: protons, neutrons, electrons.
Carbon dioxide makes it’s way into the environment from the same physical heights and geometries as natural overall, with exception of aircraft traffic.
that much cyanide naturally bonded to nutrition probably DOES course through one’s body.
The fact you don’t get that is how Magic Gassers got you thinking Magic Hockey Stick Math that looks into Magical Bore Holes that IGNORE that PROPORTION of ‘LIGHT/canopy HEAT/canopy HEAT/roots WATER/canopy WATER/roots SPACE to GROW/canopy SPACE to GROW/roots
FIFTEEN SEPARATE ELEMENTS in PROPER PROPORTION
thing
holding BORE HOLE SIGNTS
back
from being REEL SIGNTS.
Ouch to my terrible editing again sorry. Point is, if you realized what you’re saying you’d realize that same check holds up for Magic Gas hypothesis and it fails on it’s FACE.
And there’s a lot of people who don’t get THAT.
AND, the ‘cyanide in your body’ argument PASSES that test and it’s obvious YOU don’t know.
So…
Thanks for playing though, perfesser borehole.
LazyTeenager says:
November 4, 2012 at 3:08 pm
Only four of every 10,000 air molecules are carbon dioxide. Mankind’s contribution in all of human history is only a fraction of one of those 10,000 molecules.
———-
Misleading use of statistics.
====================================================================
And “Coal trains of Death” is not misleading?
Oh, wait. Hansen said that. No statistics involved.
(Mods, Sorry to be off topic.) /sarc
People who don’t believe in a proportionate-physics universe BELIEVE in Magic Gas.
It’s that simple.
“…some believe that mankind is now causing hurricanes, or making them worse”.
——————————————–
No, it was divine intervention to help obama:
http://tinyurl.com/cmhyazt
People who believe in Magic Gas, thus, ALSO believe, we can’t check the atmosphere for risen gas-specific spectra of LIGHT in the infrared.
We just don’t have thuh tek naw luH gee … two no fer SHUR!
Pfft…