Further Update:
Turns out I was hoping for too much. Brad Johnson found at least three scientists eager to be quoted in his follow up article: Kevin Trenberth, Michael Mann, and Gavin Schmidt. The quotes from these top scientists are worth going over there and reading. No additional comments are warranted.
Top Climate Scientist On The Monster Tornadoes: ‘It Is Irresponsible Not To Mention Climate Change’
Update by Ryan Maue:
Under the title of “Tornado and global warming“, Brad Johnson disgustingly uses quotes by Dr. Kevin Trenberth, and grotesquely blames the recent tornado outbreak on (GOP) congressional delegations in states that opposed climate legislation. I hope no scientist wants anything like this said on their behalf.
Update by Anthony:
4:45PM PST I have an updated article on this issue here:
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/04/29/the-folly-of-linking-tornado-outbreaks-to-climate-change/
9:30AM PST:
I was writing simultaneously with Ryan Maue and I couldn’t even come up with a title I was so disgusted. So I made the title “No title”. I’ve combined the articles. This is what I wrote:
This post has no title because the closest title I can think of is of the caliber of [expletive deleted]. The Center for American Progress and NCAR’s Dr. Keneth Trenbert invoke the thought of famous line from Joseph N. Welch “Have you no sense of decency, sir?”
I wonder how long they had to search for this particular (uncredited) photograph, choosing the juxapostion of the Chevron sign with the tornado. For all I know, it may even be photoshopped. (update: After about 30 minutes of searching, I found the original here http://yfrog.com/h232uwjij )
To say I’m disgusted, simply does not do justice to the feelings I have about this. The real test will be to see if CAP paid disinformer Joe Romm reposts this article from Brad Johnson on Climate Progress.
Here’s the proof that refutes the issue, and pigeonholes these clowns for what they are, which is nothing about science, but about hateful political cheapshots.
From the National Climatic Data center. Tornadoes of the intensity seen in Alabama this week (F3-F5) on the Fujita scale:
Source: National Climatic Data Center http://lwf.ncdc.noaa.gov/img/climate/research/tornado/tornadotrend.jpg
They New York Times got into the act too. CCM Mike Smith of Meteorological Musings writes:
Leave it to the NY Times to Write an Inaccurate and Insensitive Article
I had planned on moving on to other topics today. There is little more to say about the tornadoes of the last three weeks until the investigations are completed. As I was going through my email this morning, a reader sent me a link to this article inThe New York Times:
Predicting Tornadoes: It’s Still Guessing Game
Compared to the slime job by the Center for American Progress, it’s tame.
I urge readers to read this article below from Physorg and to use it and the graph above to refute comments in online forums.
“…it would be a mistake to blame climate change for a seeming increase in tornadoes”
Update: The graph that Joe Romm and Brad Johnson don’t want you to see: tornado deaths per million over the last century
Source: NOAA’s US Severe Weather Blog, SPC, Norman Oklahoma
http://www.norman.noaa.gov/2009/03/us-annual-tornado-death-tolls-1875-present/
Anthony says: “This post has no title because the closest title I can think of is of the caliber of [expletive deleted]. ”
There should be a standard notation that caliber. I propose CRnAPm, where n is the number of mentions of “global warming” in the article and m the number of scientific mistakes.
Geeyor, while the US seems to have become irrelevant in oil prices, other than our ability to cause inflation in other countries, I don’t think we are incapable of affecting prices we pay here. Improving our infrastructure and output would reduce US oil costs by transportation cost: http://www.econbrowser.com/archives/2011/04/keystone_gulf_c.html
There are other ways we can reduce the price the US pays:
Commodities will come down when we have the prospect of a good solid recovery. That will happen when the US has a solid, aggressive energy policy.
We need to stop tilting at windmills (they are not economical and only profitable for manufacturer/sellers).
We need to drill the Gulf, the coasts, ANWAR, and the Arctic. And, build some fracking distribution infrastructure.
Concerns about the arctic are silly. Likely, there is more natural gas than oil there. Horizon like spill worries will soon prove to be unfounded. The oil may be heavier and the temps reduce evaporation, but the gulf spill proved dispersants. The bacteria that process oil are most efficient in cool waters and high pressures. Even if the temps are too low for the gulf bacteria, certainly the arctic has its own share of seepage. It must have bacteria suited for its environment, otherwise there’d be a bunch of oil just below the ice.
The argument that we shouldn’t drill because we don’t have enough oil to reduce prices is a pitiful strawman. So what? That’s a good thing. Every barrel we produce increases GDP by the price, it also increases GDP a second time by reducing imports by the price. This is all before even considering multiplier effects.
In the meantime, while we are waiting for US production to come online, we should institute a carbon tax in the form of a tax on long positions in Oil. A tax rate which increases with the purchase price, and ends in 2-3 years (when US production begins coming online). There is a natural bias against the short side of commodity futures. A small tax would help balance things out. We need more down-side speculation. Of course, all the revenue should go to transportation or energy distribution infrastructure.
Also, don’t underestimate the signaling power of an aggressive US energy policy. When we hoard, how can we expect less of other producers. If we stop hoarding and announce that we must take advantage of our resources before alternatives collapse the price, the rise in other producers’ capacity and efficiency may well be fantastic.
Anthony & Ryan – thanks for calling these knuckleheads out on this! I know exactly where that photo was taken from and it’s authentic. It is disgusting that they’re taking advantage of this, but I knew it was only a matter of time before I saw the “warming connection” invoked.
I was, fortunately, spared damage at my home, but I have many friends who have lost literally everything in that very tornado. To take advantage in such a way is like a cheap sucker punch. But I suppose there are slimeballs like this everywhere.
Keep up the good work!!
While the loss of 250 lives is tragic, and my heart and prayers go out to people who have lost loved ones and property, the loss pales in comparison to the millions who will die of starvation and disease as a result of policy that futilely attempts to combat climate change.
Oh brother … Think Progress taking us back to the Dark Ages …
.
Tom Fuller – So true . Unfortunately they continue to get away with it .
I cannot say with certainty since I do not have the link to the video handy, but that looks like a still from the video of the tornado yesterday where a secondary vortex descended from the left and joined the main vortex. You can see the parts of it from the main cloud and the main vortex in the process of either forming or breaking up on the left side. While it is possible that I missed it, I do not remember any bright signs of any sort in that video much less a Chevron sign. The chances of this being a photoshop are very, very high. If somebody can pull up the video we can settle the issue. I would also remark that since power was almost certainly out in the area, an illuminated sign is unlikely although there appear to be some other less brightly illuminated signs in the picture, although the buildings are without lights that you would expect if the power were available.
Does anyone else see a pattern? When you look at the “Number of Strong to Violent Tornadoes” graph, it peaked in 1974 and then started to decrease. That would have been shortly before the Pacific Decadal Oscillation entered its positive phase. From 1950 to 1974, the graph shows a steady increase in tornadoes. That coincides with the negative phase of the PDO. We entered into another negative PDO a few years ago. Why would we not expect an increase in tornadoes over the next 25 to 30 years?
Keep Smiling 🙂
Jeff
Hmmm. Just anticipating the next fake linkage…
Breaking News! Alabama Pika Population Entirely Wiped Out By Tornadoes!
The EPA has announced massive emergency funding to find any survivors and restore the population, with ongoing monitoring until the sea levels flood things completely.
Look at them [insert cute pika photo]. Don’t you care?
The best part of the article:
“Johnson’s justification is that climate scientist Kevin Trenberth warned the American Meteorological Society in January that “Given that global warming is unequivocal, the null hypothesis should be that all weather events are affected by global warming rather than the inane statements along the lines of ‘of course we cannot attribute any particular weather event to global warming.’”
Isn’t that how you prove the existence of God…??
Surely this is all further evidence that even the AGWers realise that the facts don’t seem to be supporting the science. They thus have to resort to ridiculous politicisation and polemic to try and drum up support,
Your leftists seem to be just as stupid as our leftists.
@Mike g At the bottom of the financial meltdown, the price of oil went down to about $35/bbl in the futures market. Some of that was forced selling and margin calls some of it was outright fear of a depression. http://www.inflationdata.com/inflation/inflation_rate/historical_oil_prices_table.asp has a monthly crude price at the bottom for 2009 to the present. The low price was $31/bbl in feb 2009.
The most dangerous place to be standing after a freak weather event is between a grant-seeking climate scientist and a microphone.
Apart from his incredibly ignorant argument Brad Johnson’s web- site is about the worst presented site I’ve seen. It’s barely legible which I suppose matches his intellect. But all that is trumped by the pathetic statements and sentiment expressed in the comment section. ‘Burning witch’ mentality is still with us in spades. I guess that is one measure of human progress in our so called civilisation.
Douglas
So Mother Nature is punishing those who don’t believe in global warming by unleashing tornadoes? Doesn’t sound too different than when Pat Robertson said Hurricane Katrina was God’s wrath on New Orleans. Media Matters was all over criticizing Robertson for that idiotic statement: http://mediamatters.org/research/201001130044 – will they do the same here?
Of course I know they won’t – but it’s always good to point out hypocrisy.
Anthony, i see you don’t list Joe Romm in your blog roll anymore. Shouldn’t he be under “Tools”? 😉
Climate Pollution….?
The only climate that’s getting polluted is the political climate. I smell the odiferous, scent of sleazy, unscrupulous, politicians stumping in public.
This can be a good thing though. It’s nice to be able to sniff out the belly crawlers, web spinners, and other assorted vermin, before it’s time to go to the polls.
Brad Johnson has another article up about the “link” between AGW and the tornadoes;
quotes Trenberth, Michael Mann, Gavin Schmidt.
http://www.webcitation.org/5yJLBOgTq
This could become a great clusterf*ck for the lot of them… I mean, let them pat each other on the back as we watch the SST cool (see UniSys SST on the ENSO page!) … they are talking themselves into a tight spot…
Think(sic) Progress(sic) is well known for publishing this sort of drivel.
DirkH says:
April 29, 2011 at 1:57 pm
“Brad Johnson has another article up about the “link” between AGW and the tornadoes;”
Sorry, wrong link; their strange website with this webcite thing somehow fudges it all up. I mean this one:
http://thinkprogress.org/2011/04/29/climate-science-tornadoes/
I am disgusted by the fact that this disaster has been politicised to such a degree before the people who have been killed by these horrendous storms have been buried.
I would have expected a certain lag in attempting to ascribe either blame or causation for these events in order to permit the bereaved to re-arrange their lives.
Not to do so, whilst invoking the political leanings of the Representatives of the afflicted areas as a causative factor, is, to my mind, an act of crass stupidity and insensitivity.
One could expect nothing more from those who wish to profit from this tragedy.
How sad.
@Bennett says:
You can find the price of oil on 19 Jan 2009 here: http://www.prices-oil.org/daily-oil-prices/daily-crude-oil-prices-19th-january-2009/ in about .2 seconds if you don’t “stuble” while typing. FWIW Obama was inaugurated the next day.
@ur momisugly Bennett, Smokey and the rest re. price of gasoline and oil.
http://www.eia.doe.gov/oil_gas/petroleum/data_publications/wrgp/mogas_home_page.html
I’m not saying the govt. is always correct, but they’re pretty authoritative in this regard…… that said, there are always regional fluctuations.
Another fairly authoritative source, the NYSE in regards to the price of crude…………
http://www.nyse.tv/crude-oil-price-history.htm
Looks like Smokey pretty much nailed it.
Well, now – you good ‘ol boys down there had better get behind the science pretty darn quick if y’all ain’t gonna get some more of them TORNADOES…
Hanged if the Miss-hippy ain’t gonna rise up and DROWN all you non-believers real soon…