New video from Bob Tisdale explains The Impact of Manmade Global Warming on a Blizzard Called Nemo and on Hurricane Sandy

Guest post by

The following video is an examination and discussion of the sea surface temperature data associated with the recent blizzard called Nemo, and with hurricane Sandy. There’s nothing unusual about those temperatures, and there’s no evidence of manmade global warming in that data. There is also a very brief discussion at the end of the video about the natural warming of satellite-era sea surface temperatures.

LINKS

These blog posts were referred to in the video.

The Weather Channel:

Winter Storm Nemo: Why We Named It

Climate Central:

Life-Threatening Blizzard Poised to Strike New England

Climate Progress/Think Progress

Historic Blizzard Poised to Strike New England: What Role Is Climate Change Playing?

Hmm.  “Poised” seemed to be the operative word that day.

My Blog Climate Observations:

1.   Dear Chicken Little: The Sky Is Falling (It’s Snowing) But Sea Surface Temperature Anomalies Off New England Are NOT Unusual

2.   Sea Surface Temperature Anomalies along Sandy’s Track Haven’t Warmed in 70+ Years

3.   October 2012 Sea Surface Temperatures and Anomalies Along Sandy’s Path Were NOT Unusual

4.   The Manmade Global Warming Challenge

5.   The Natural Warming of the Global Oceans – Videos – Parts 1 & 2

6.   Everything You Ever Wanted to Know about El Niño and La Niña…

SOURCES

The weekly Reynolds OI.v2 sea surface temperature anomaly data and maps are available through the NOAA NOMADS website.  And the ERSST.v3b sea surface temperature data is accessible through the KNMI Climate Explorer.

29 thoughts on “New video from Bob Tisdale explains The Impact of Manmade Global Warming on a Blizzard Called Nemo and on Hurricane Sandy

  1. Please refrain from calling the blizzard “Nemo” – it just encourages the people at the Weather Channel to beclown themselves with even more bizarre stunts…(I was going to mention that they were probably going to start naming tornadoes next, but that would just given them more ideas…)

  2. I have a question, even if the waters off New England are high by several degrees, how does a slightly warmer atmosphere by a few tenths of a degree, create multiple degree warmer water?

  3. You earlier chastised people associating global warming skepticism with references to a New world Order. Unfortunately, there is hard evidence for such an association:

    In the text “The First Global Revolution”, leading “intellectual elites” in the Club of Rome admitted that they manufactured the threat of anthropogenic global warming as a “unifying external threat” that would place the blame on humanity (and this would obviously make people sympathetic to the Globalist rhetoric of “global problems requiring global solutions”), and that appointed bureaucracies must replace any vestige of democracy as a governing force. The relevant chapter is called “The Vacuum”. Excerpts are as follows:

    “It would seem that men and women need a common motivation, namely a common adversary to organize and act together; in the vacuum such motivations seem to have ceased to exist‚ or have yet to be found.

    The need for enemies seems to be a common historical factor. States have striven to overcome domestic failure and internal contradictions by designating external enemies. The scapegoat practice is as old as mankind itself. When things become too difficult at home, divert attention by adventure abroad. Bring the divided nation together to face an outside enemy, either a real one or else one invented for the purpose. With the disappearance of the traditional enemy, the temptation is to designate as scapegoat religious or ethnic minorities whose differences are disturbing.

    […]The old democracies have functioned reasonably well over the last 200 years, but they appear now to be in a phase of complacent stagnation with little evidence of real leadership and innovation

    Democracy is not a panacea. It cannot organize everything and it is unaware of its own limits. These facts must be faced squarely. Sacrilegious though this may sound, democracy is no longer well suited for the tasks ahead [so obviously the “intellectual elite” should take over decision making – as they have been doing for a very long time]. The complexity and the technical nature of many of today’s problems do not always allow elected representatives to make competent decisions at the right time.

    […]The Common Enemy of Humanity is Man

    In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine, and the like would fit the bill. In their totality and interactions these phenomena do constitute a common threat which demands the solidarity of all peoples. But in designating them as the enemy, we fall into the trap about which we have already warned, namely, mistaking symptoms for causes. All these dangers are caused by human intervention and it is only through changed attitudes and behavior that they can be overcome. The real enemy, then, is humanity itself.” (Alexander King & Bertrand Schneider, The First Global Revolution: A Report by the Council of the Club of Rome (New York : Pantheon Books, c1991), pp. 107-108, 109-110, 115)

    Interestingly, in the 1970s, this think tank was warning of the “threat” of “global cooling” which would herald in a “new ice age”: http://www.scribd.com/doc/87504398/Goals-for-Mankind

  4. Then – I would like to bring up the recordings of the recent 4th World wilderness Congress that preceded the 1992 Earth Summit. Here people like you and I are called “the cannon fodder, unfortunately, that populates the Earth”. And a banking system set up by and for the Rothschilds is shown to be the centerpiece of the new mode of organization that “sustainability” measures will create. The attendees (like Maurice Strong) have no qualms about acknowledging the dominance of that family in World Affairs. Strong states that there is “no better person” to spearhead this project than Edmund Leopold de Rothschild, and that he (Rothschild) “epitomizes in his own life that positive synthesis between environment and conservation on the one hand and economics on the other” (Here Phillippe de Rothschild admits that his family is the “richest and most powerful family in the world”: http://www.scribd.com/doc/124350489/A-Rothschild-Confession
    ): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JUdgiehz9dU

    The following overview notes what this would metastasize into, that “The 4th WWC introduced the concept of a World Conservation Bank, leading to the formation of the The Global Environment Facility (GEF) of the World Bank.”: http://wild10.org/en/about/accomplishments

    We can see the outlines of these proposals being promoted at the present time. In a document called “Trading Emissions: Full Global Potential” (London: The Social Market Foundation, January 2008: http://www.smf.co.uk/assets/files/publications/SMF_Trading_Emissions.pdf) – written by Simon Linnett, Executive Vice Chairman of N.M. Rothschild, London (see “about the author” section of that document). In the document, he defines “greenhouse emissions” as the new form of “social market” and states: “That such a market has to be established on a world basis coordinated by an international institution with a constitution to match…. That, perhaps, it might be regarded as having wider benefits than merely `saving the planet’ – perhaps it might be the basis of a new world order, one that is not based on trade and/or conflict resolution. Perhaps one can see a way to achieve this goal through leadership, vision and some marginal and manageable renunciation of national sovereignty, how the world might just get there. The repercussions of addressing climate change may extend well beyond that single but critical issue…. Implicit in all the above is that nations have to be prepared to subordinate, to a certain extent, some element of their sovereignty to this world initiative.” He notes that “The political costs of such loss of sovereignty are lengthy. Loss of competitiveness (massively overstated in the activities in which energy is used – especially since trade will be more difficult, if, at the margin, transport is made more costly), loss of power and loss of direct control over economic levers are potentially the most significant and give the most cause for concern. But these actions are necessary if we are to answer the accusation that “it doesn’t matter what we do when China is expanding its energy usage at its current rate” – we have to bring China and India in and they are not going to enter a scheme where they do not have a “say”. When countries are already foregoing the right of direct control over monetary policy through the creation of independent central banks, this [the above] could be a relatively small price to pay for such inclusion.” He furthermore states that “The EU member states have recognised their need to subordinate sovereignty to the EU; in time, if this is to work, the EU itself will need to yield sovereignty to a bigger world body on carbon trading.” He states “Above all, this plan requires “sponsors” – a country prepared to host it and a senior politician prepared to lead this new initiative. If such a route map could be found, then perhaps we might be at the beginning of a new world constitution and a new world order.” He states that regulating this should be a “World Environment Authority” operating from a “world city with world skills and world facilities.” He then notes, in a section entitled “A natural role for London”, “London is a world financial centre (possibly “the” world financial centre).” and that “London would make a compelling case to house the World Environmental Agency.”

    Documents retrieved from the congress from which audio of Edmund de Rothschild was taken state the following (in the introductory email, I endorsed Mullins – an endorsement which I redact because he is such a problematic source, but I stand behind everything else in the email prefacing the document. The document itself gives insight into the accumulated degeneracy of the elite of the world at present): http://archive.org/download/GeorgeHuntUncedEarthSummit1992cobdenClubsPapersaldousHuxleythe_125/1-1-the-cobdenClubsPapers.pdf Excerpts are as follows: “The time is pressing. The Club of Rome was founded in 1968, Limits to Growth was written in 1971, Global 2000 was written in 1979, but insufficient progress has been made in population reduction. Given global instabilities, including those of the former Soviet bloc, the need for firm control of world technology, weaponry, and resources, is absolutely mandatory. The immediate reduction of world population, according to the mid-1970′s recommendation of the Draper Fund, must be immediately affected. The present vast overpopulation, now far beyond the world carrying capacity, cannot be answered by future reductions in the birth rate due to contraception, sterilization and abortion, but must be met in the present by the reduction of numbers presently existing. This must be done by whatever means necessary. … Compulsory cooperation is not debatable with 166 nations, most of whose leaders are irresolute, conditioned by localist “cultures” and lacking the appropriate notions of the New World Order. Debate only means delay and forfeiture of our goals and purpose. The UN action against Iraq proves conclusively that resolute action on our part can sway other leaders to go along with the necessary program. The Iraq action proves that the aura of power can be projected and sustained and that the wave of history is sweeping forward. … We are the living sponsors of the great Cecil Rhodes will of 1877 … We stand with Lord Milner’s credo. We too are “British Race Patriots” and our patriotism is “the speech, the tradition, the principles, the aspirations of the British Race”. Do you fear to take this stand, at the very last moment when this purpose can be realized? do you not see that failure now, is to be pulled down by the billions of Lilliputians of lesser race who care little or nothing for the Anglo-Saxon system? …The Security Council of the UN, led by the Anglo-American Major Nation Powers, will decree that, henceforth, all nations have quotas for REDUCTION on a yearly basis, which will be enforced by the Security Council by selective or total embargo of credit, food, medicine or military force, when required. … outmoded notions of sovereignty will be discarded and the Security Council has complete legal, military and economic jurisdiction in any region in the world, to be enforced by the Major Nations of the Security Council. The Security Council of the U.N. will explain that not all races are equal, nor should they be. Those races proven superior by superior achievements ought to rule the lesser races, caring for them on sufferance that they cooperate with the Security Council. … All could be lost if opposition by minor races is tolerated and the vacillations of those we work with, our closest comrades, is cause for our hesitations. Open declaration of intent followed by decisive force is the final solution.”

  5. Nice job!

    Where is the green screen and Bob doing the stand up presentation?

    Better yet, how about a live interactive discussion to help with questions?

    WUWT TV interview?

    Keep up the great sharing. It is appreciated by many!

  6. I determined you can’t change or win against the Double Eetendre rhetoric that is engraved in the American psyche. The words “Climate Change”, what means either “Man-Made” or “Natural”, or the words “Global Warming”, what means “Man-Made” or “Natural”. Who knows what the hell any one is talking about when those words are uttered?

    I say we use the current situation, as it is the only way to make progress, and because I give up on fixing the rhetoric.

    Just start using the literal meaning of words, it’s the path of least resistance and it’s just as effective. Here’s a recent example;
    “@climatebrad “carbon abolitionist” Lol dude, you’ll have to abolish yourself now, you are 18% carbon.”

    I like to say back to them; Climate Change has been happening for billions of years, what makes you think you can stop it? That sort of thing.

  7. Do you have any measurements on the percentage of worldwide climate that is made by man? When you get that figure, you get back to me and we’ll talk.

  8. bellicoseblissentia says:
    February 14, 2013 at 6:56 pm

    Thank you for your posts. If there is any doubt there is an actual conspiracy by a few wealthy people going on in the world to take control of the planet and enslave the sheeple, your writings should lay any of those doubts to rest. The sinister diabolical word game con/game plans by these people, powered by their massive wealth, is now easy for common people to figure out. It’s really not that complicated to understand.

  9. “Do you have any measurements on the percentage of worldwide climate that is made by man? When you get that figure, you get back to me and we’ll talk.”

    It’s 3 bags full, according to the black sheep.

  10. I have to give the Rothschild’s credit for creating a self fulling diabolical prophesy that benefits themselves and only their own wealthy families. Congratulations Lord Rothschild, in deceiving the entire planet.

  11. Robert Wykoff says: “I have a question, even if the waters off New England are high by several degrees, how does a slightly warmer atmosphere by a few tenths of a degree, create multiple degree warmer water?”

    The atmosphere doesn’t warm the oceans. Land surface air and marine air temperatures have warmed primarily in response to the natural warming of the oceans.

  12. Jeff Alberts says:
    February 14, 2013 at 7:07 pm

    “Manmade Global Warming”

    I prefer to call it Hand Crafted. ;)

    But that would imply that there was skill involved. I prefer “Mannufactured”.

  13. @ bellicoseblissentia says:
    February 14, 2013 at 6:55 pm
    “You earlier chastised people associating global warming skepticism with references to a New world Order. Unfortunately, there is hard evidence for such an association”

    I took the time to do a simple google search about the claim regarding plans for depopulation and came across a source rather quickly. The search leads to George Washington Hunt. He has his own website. I stopped reading after this self-introduction:

    “Hello, my name is George Hunt. I produce educational videotapes about the New World Order. I focus on the craven, immoral banking elite of Europe and America because they are the key figures of why there is so much evil in this world of ours. The Book of Revelations is very specific when it warns us about the members of the Synagogue of Satan. The words “synagogue” and “Satan” suggest that they are Jewish and they worship Satan. They certainly are as smooth.”

    https://wikispooks.com/ISGP/organisations/introduction/1991_09_22_supposed_UNCED_paper.htm

    http://wwww.archive.org/details/GeorgeHuntUncedEarthSummit1992cobdenClubsPapersaldousHuxleythe_125

    http://georgewashingtonhunt.blogspot.com/2011/03/george-hunt-africa-trip-i-arab.html

    What reassurance do you have that your “hard evidence” is not simply a forgery?

  14. Thank you for a well-done video. I found it easy to follow and very instructive. I have one quick question: From the temperature graph (pacific ocean temperature over time) it seems that temperatures go up after each el niño event. That is easy enough to understand. But it seems they then stay up, forming a new baseline? Since we have had el niños in the recorded past, that would mean that ocean temperatures would have to go up and up and up… I am sure I am missing something here, but what?

  15. Sandy maximum sustained wind speeds were about 25 meters per second at several offshore buoys. Wind speeds for a hurricane must be at least 33 meters per second sustained wind at the surface for one minute intervals. There are no land based surface stations showing sustained winds anywhere near the hurricane threshold. Wind speeds for land based stations were well below the offshore buoy speeds. The NHC gave deceptive advisories by claiming that surface speeds estimated by aircraft and radar were extrapolated to showing surface speeds at hurricane force, but there were no real surface measurements that verify those claims. They also were deceptive in calling gusts over 33 meters per second as “hurricane force” winds. Gusts are not sustained winds, gusts don’t define a hurricane. Does anyone think one gust over 33 meters per second could be called a hurricane?
    Then the media then gets excited and confused, starts saying there are “hurricane” level winds.
    Post-Sandy video recordings show damage consistent with wind speeds of a tropical storm, but nothing like a real hurricane.
    Most damage was flooding/storm surge based. Just because there was a lot of shore damage does not mean Sandy was a hurricane. Structures in affected states were never built to codes like those in Florida. The insurance companies may have paid some wind damage claims, but not because Sandy was a “hurricane”. Their lawyers know that the storm called “Sandy” did not meet the legal definition of hurricane.

  16. Ocean circulation systems such as ENSO act to pump heat from the equator to the poles. In the Atlantic the gulf stream plays a leading role in this. The warm water recently established of the NE USA has been carried there over the last few years so is a legacy of the warm period at the run of the millenium. Such historic warm water moving on up to the Arctic is giving us the current series of low summer ice minima.

    However it wont do so for much longer. The established cold temperatures in the equatorial south Atlantic will in time move up into the Carribean on account of the south-to-north heat piracy carried out by the south equatorial current and Carribean currents, which “piratise” warm water from the south Atlantic across to north of the equator. So heat piracy might turn into cold piracy.

    Once this feeds into the system the gulf stream and the north Atlantic will cool, and eventually summer ice minima in the Arctic will begin again their cyclical rebound and increase.

  17. @phlogiston:
    Ah, thank you. Basically, we are talking about a multi-decade oscillation then? Each el niño raises baseline temperatures for some time, but eventually, after more than 30 years (?), it goes back to normal?

  18. S. Meyer says:
    February 16, 2013 at 2:30 pm
    @phlogiston:
    Ah, thank you. Basically, we are talking about a multi-decade oscillation then? Each el niño raises baseline temperatures for some time, but eventually, after more than 30 years (?), it goes back to normal?

    Its not so much a single el Nino as a period of about 3 decades where el Nino’s predominate over La Nina. Bob Tisdale has shown that this is what accounts for the Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO), you get a period e.g. mid 40’s – mid 70’s where there are more La Ninas and a general cooling period, then from mid ’70s to about 2005 a predominance of el Ninos associated with the recent warming phase. El Ninos result in an excess of equatorial warm water which is then redistributed poleward over several years, accounting for a possible lag in Arctic ice compared to global climate trends. The water arriving at the Arctic from the gulf stream will have the heat “signature” of the equator several years previously.

  19. S. Meyer says: “Since we have had el niños in the recorded past, that would mean that ocean temperatures would have to go up and up and up… I am sure I am missing something here, but what?”

    Sorry for the delay in replying.

    Back to your question: It’s missed by lot of people, so don’t feel alone. The East Pacific hasn’t warmed in 31 years. In fact, it shows cooling when the data is adjusted for volcanic aerosols:

    The South Atlantic, Indian and West Pacific Oceans also cool between the strong El Nino events (note that it’s not every El Nino that causes the upward shifts, just the big ones that aren’t counteracted by volcanic aerosols):

    So we’ve got two subsets that would show cooling if it wasn’t for the strong El Nino events. And then there’s the North Atlantic. It has another mode of natural variability which has caused it warm at an excessive rate since 1975:

    The Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation will eventually reach its peak, stop warming at an excessive rate, and eventually cool—obviously, then it will no longer be contributing to global warming.

    Then all we need is a period without any strong El Nino events to warm the South Atlantic-Indian-West Pacific data.

  20. Alec Rawls, thanks. I used to enjoy public speaking but it’s been at least 2 decades since I’ve done that. The though of it now makes me cringe, That’s why I created the videos for the WUWT-TV special back in November.

  21. S. Meyer says:
    February 15, 2013 at 2:35 pm
    @ bellicoseblissentia says:
    February 14, 2013 at 6:55 pm
    “You earlier chastised people associating global warming skepticism with references to a New world Order. Unfortunately, there is hard evidence for such an association”

    I took the time to do a simple google search about the claim regarding plans for depopulation and came across a source rather quickly. The search leads to George Washington Hunt. He has his own website. I stopped reading after this self-introduction:

    You need to look at the info with more dispassion, which is how it was presented at one time for well over a decade on Hunt’s online presence. Mr. Hunt has recently added his personal religious opinion, which I don’t agree with. Hunt’s original impetus for the site was the death of his teenage son. His boy died on a ski hill in Australia in 1986, if I remember correctly. Hunt went to the Fourth Wilderness Congress in 1987 as a volunteer worker, one year after his teenage son’s death, out of a sense of profound grief because his boy, his child, was a greenie. He wanted to honor his kid.

    I am, however, capable of judging the original audio, which is so devastating that it shocks me that more WUWT readers haven’t heard it. I purchased the sources that Baron Edmund de Rothschild cites in his online audio to ascertain what he was talking about. Rothschild’s cites are not only laughable but contemptible; they are the origins of Bill McKibbens’ less than scientific rhetoric. I remained surprised to this day that the plan that Maurice Strong, Baron Edmund de Rothschild, Michael Sweatman, David Rockefeller, James Baker, and William Ruckleshaus were advancing is not more widely known. You can listen to them in their own words. They want to do to the world what the EU has done to Greece and Spain, which is devastate them.

  22. I remained surprised to this day that the plan that Maurice Strong, Baron Edmund de Rothschild, Michael Sweatman, David Rockefeller, James Baker, and William Ruckleshaus were advancing is not more widely known. You can listen to them in their own words. They want to do to the world what the EU has done to Greece and Spain, which is devastate them.

    should read

    I remain surprised to this day that the plan that Maurice Strong, Baron Edmund de Rothschild, Michael Sweatman, David Rockefeller, James Baker, and William Ruckleshaus were advancing is not more widely known. You can listen to them in their own words. They want to do to the world what the EU has done to Greece and Spain, which is to devastate their countries (as well as all of the peripheries) and impoverish the people, annihilate them financially so that they will accept the World Conservation Bank’s recipe to nab 35% of the world’s land as collateral for its existence, as explained and shown in the event’s proceedings.

Comments are closed.