Reality check: Who believes Hurricane Sandy was/was not caused by global warming?

This list of who’s who is instructive to review. It says a lot about credibility of the “Sandy was caused by global warming” argument being pushed by activists and media.

Compare who’s pushing the agenda versus who isn’t buying into the hype.  See below. 

Links to their statements are designated with an asterisk * – click on the * to see the story

Says Global Warming IS the cause of Hurricane Sandy Says Global Warming IS NOT the cause of Hurricane Sandy
Name affiliation/link Name affiliation/link
Al Gore activist Climate Reality Project * Dr. Martin Hoerling NOAA *
Joe Romm activist CAP  * Dr. Roger Pielke Jr. UC *
Bill McKibben activist * Dr. Karsten Brandt donnerwetter *
Chris Mooney activist and blogger, Grist * Dr. Chris Landsea NOAA NHC *
Roseann Barr actress/singer Pres.candidate * Dr. Ryan Maue Weatherbell *
Meghain McCain no known credentials * Dr. Patrick Michaels VA state climo/ Cato *
Dr.Katharine Hayhoe Texas Tech * Dr. Judith Curry Georgia Tech *
Dr. Michael Oppenheimer activist EDF * Dr.Norman Page PhD – Geology *
Jennifer Granholm TV host/fmr governor * Dr.Gerald North Texas A&M *
Dr. George Lackoff Berkeley * Eric Berger Houston Chronicle SciGuy *
Dr. James Hansen activist, NASA GISS * Tom Chivers UK Telegraph *
Van Jones apologist and activist * Andrew Revkin New York Times *
 Chris Matthews  Hardball * Deniers are pigs. Dr. Roy Spencer UAH *
 Bill Clinton  #42 *  Joe Bastardi  WeatherBELL*
 Dr. Stephan Lewandowsky  Pollster *
Michael Moore  Sicko (on CNN)
Dr. Randall Dole (NOAA):Dr. Peter Stott of the UK Met OfficeDr. Kevin Trenberth (NCAR)   *  Dr. Michio Kaku *
Dr. Kerry Emanuel (MIT)  *

From this comparison it seems clear that activists are pushing the idea that Hurricane Sandy is cased by AGW/Global Warming.But what about the hundreds of other storms?

Readers are invited to submit other entries in comments.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
lurker passing through, laughing
October 30, 2012 5:00 pm

The question is leading to odd answers. It is not at all clear what the believers are actually saying they believe.

October 30, 2012 5:02 pm

George Lackoff (rhymes with…) Oops! I digress.
I am a degreed chemical engineer and am reasonably confident that global warming/climate change had nothing to do with Hurricane Sandy,

October 30, 2012 5:02 pm

It makes me sad that Dr. Hayhoe is associated with Texas Tech, they have such a wonderful Wind Research Center. Meggie Mac, well, she’s the daughter of Senator McCain. Fruit, trees, and all that.

October 30, 2012 5:10 pm

It can’t have been caused by AGW as there has been no recent global warming…but then maybe that’s too hard for them to comprehend; sigh.

October 30, 2012 5:11 pm

Imagine if the Galveston 1900 storm came again. The alarmist machine would melt.

October 30, 2012 5:11 pm

The very obvious conclusion is that storms that do a lot of damage are the ones that are caused by AGW!
Hence Katrina, Sandy et al all qualify.
Other storms that take place away from ill protected areas full of ill prepared people and web cams to document the scary pictures simply don’t qualify and don’t need a mention.

October 30, 2012 5:12 pm

Global warming can now align different weather systems at the perfect time. It can also cause the moon to be full at high tide for added effect. There is now nothing global warming can’t do. I am in awe! Now I know how the true believers feel. It’s almost …………..divine!

Roger Knights
October 30, 2012 5:12 pm
R. Shearer
October 30, 2012 5:13 pm

I blame B.ush

David L
October 30, 2012 5:14 pm

I discovered a new positive climate feedback. Burning fossil fuels releases CO2 which causes global warming. Global warming causes hurricanes. Hurricanes hit populated areas and knock out the power grid. All the people that believe in global warming then run gasoline powered generators, releasing more CO2, until the power grid comes back on.

October 30, 2012 5:15 pm

Mosh is on record at Dr. Curry’s blog as a definite yes at

The frankenstorm is directly tied to global warming.

. I’m a definite we don’t have enough information yet to say something that foolish. Solve the feedbacks first then look for secondary effects.

Doug Proctor
October 30, 2012 5:15 pm

Recall how only professional scientists had a right to an opinion of this sort? That would kinda cut the left side down a bit, don’t you think?

October 30, 2012 5:18 pm

It was a butterfly here in San Diego – darn thing flapped its wings before I could swat it… Sorry ’bout that.

October 30, 2012 5:19 pm

Says Global Warming IS the cause of Hurricane Sandy:
Governor of New York State Andrew Cuomo
Well, that was inferred from his recent (today’s) comment when he says something is causing ‘these extreme weather events”. As a politician he has probably not specifically come out on either side excepting his ‘posturing’ to what looks like on the surface as support for conclusions congruent with CAGW philosophy.

Charlie A
October 30, 2012 5:20 pm

Most things in life are not black and white. It is quite possible that anthropogenic CO2 has affected the climate, and therefore hurricane Sandy in some way.
What’s not clear is the magnitude or type of effect. I think it was Judith Curry that noted that one probably effect of warmer Atlantic ocean is to move the formation of hurricanes over closer to Africa, which would cause a higher percentage of hurricanes to stay mid-Atlantic rather than have USA landfall.
So for all I know at this point, increased CO2 has protected the USA.
Another blog post to remind everyone at this point is the BS Button post of Roger Pielke, Jr that reports on the IPCC SREX findings.

October 30, 2012 5:22 pm

I think a list of this nature to be expanded to a greater degree or time frame would be a good idea.
When one sees his/her name clearly in the CAGW camp and published as such it would be a wake up call.
To find that one’s opinions and views are being compiled into a format that reveals where they stand / their beliefs on this issue may seperate the “me too” s to think rationally. I can see a lot of value in this approach.

October 30, 2012 5:22 pm

R. Shearer says: October 30, 2012 at 5:13 pm
I blame B.ush
That one has been used so often, it should have its own domain, like .com, .net, .edu… .booooosh!

Peter Miller
October 30, 2012 5:23 pm

Of course, Hurricane Sandy was caused by global warming.
We should have all learned by now that global warming is the cause of everything bad in our world from acne to toe fungus to populist politicians..
The greatest hurricane of all time – at least in recorded history – probably occurred in 1780 in the middle of the LIA. Obviously, just another inconvenient fact to be ignored by alarmists.

October 30, 2012 5:24 pm

I would hope we could all agree that storm frequency should decrease in a (for the sake of argument) warming world, since the temperature gradient from tropics to poles should presumably decrease. As noted on this blog recently, colder planets have higher wind speeds.
If (again FTSOA) tropical & temperate zone ocean temperatures increase, the strength of the less frequent storms could increase. However, late season Sandy formed over cooler water & when it made landfall was not hurricane strength (wind speed in 50 kt range, not 72). Not to mention that subtropical Atlantic SSTs don’t show any more warming than the planet as a whole these long 16 years & counting. (Please correct me if wrong about these regional data.)
What made it (in popular imagination) a Frankenstorm was its collision with an unseasonably early cold air mass. This half of the equation does not compute with global warming, except via hilarious gymnastic contortions (associated with the need for “climate change” rather than “global warming” to maintain the myth of human culpability, hence grant dollars, Euros, etc).
In fact, it’s history is no different, indeed less dramatic than earlier pre-human carbonated air storms. To me, this looks like QED, but maybe that’s just me.

Sceptical Lefty
October 30, 2012 5:25 pm

Such a poll may provide useful information as to INFLUENCE in the real world, but it is irrelevant to any determination of objective truth.
It is also interesting to note the absence of the word “anthropogenic”. Are the goalposts shifting again?

October 30, 2012 5:27 pm

Some of the statements about hurricane Sandy made by Brian Williams of NBC
The new normal.
Is New York the new Amsterdam?
From New York to LA people are wondering what is going on?

October 30, 2012 5:30 pm

30 Oct: Sydney Morning Herald: Peter Hannam with Reuters: Sandy has lessons for Australia, BoM says
Scientists are ***reluctant to attribute any single weather event to the effects of global warming. Climate models, though, predict fewer – but more intense – major storms such as cyclones or hurricane
“This is the sort of thing we’re warning about increasing over time,” Dr Braganza said. “We are breaking records across metrics where we’d expect to break records as the planet warms.”…
Dr Will Steffen, a member of the Australian Climate Commission, noted that Sandy is only a category 1 hurricane, but the damage will likely be significant because of its huge size and the fact that its landing coincided with a high tide.
“Sea-level rises – the observed sea-level rise around the world over the past century, and the projections for further rises – are related to climate change,” Dr Steffen said.
“It is the combination of sea-level rise, storm surge (like the one coming in from Sandy on the eastern USA coast) and high tides that lead to the worst flooding events.”
“The point here is that even modest rises in sea-level – of just tens of centimetres – can lead to much higher probabilities of high sea-level events,” Dr Steffen said.

David Ball
October 30, 2012 5:40 pm

Has it been established that Sandy was a “Hurricane”?

October 30, 2012 5:41 pm

How does global warming affect the moon?

October 30, 2012 5:52 pm

bikermailman says:
October 30, 2012 at 5:22 pm
R. Shearer says: October 30, 2012 at 5:13 pm
I blame B.ush
That one has been used so often, it should have its own domain, like .com, .net, .edu… .booooosh!
The domain names and .net are available. go to to claim them.

Bill Illis
October 30, 2012 6:02 pm

98% of the planet had perfectly normal weather today.
1% was much colder than normal.
1% was much warmer than normal.
And 1% had a hurricane which is perfectly normal for this time of year.

October 30, 2012 6:02 pm

JOE BASTARDI on Fox News: My father [also a meteorologist] used to call it “the shortcut storm.” He said he was confident he would see it before his days were numbered, and he’s finally seen it, okay? That’s the first thing. Second thing is, get used to it along the East Coast. Maybe not this kind of track, but we are in a perilous time because the Atlantic’s warm; the Pacific’s cold. It’s the 1950s all over again. It has nothing to do with global warming, it has everything to do with nature, and then we’ll go back to where we were in the sixties and seventies.
Do you realize we had ten major hurricanes run the Eastern Seaboard between ’54 and 1960? Six of them in ’54 and ’55 — six hurricane hits — from North Carolina northward. So, you know, the old Bachman-Turner song, “You ain’t seen nothing yet”? If anything, I was too quick on the gun several years ago when I said we were gonna see this type of thing.

D Böehm
October 30, 2012 6:03 pm

I voted. Once. Fun, but polls like this are not science. They do show a consensus, though.

October 30, 2012 6:06 pm

Probably being too simplistic here with my BSME Thermodynamics vs PhD models etc, but:
Given that a Hurricane is a Carnot-cycle heat engine with dT = T seawater – T high alt air;
If global warming causes higher T high alt air;
System energy will be lower with global warming, not higher.
(assuming T-seawater is constant)

October 30, 2012 6:10 pm
P Wilson
October 30, 2012 6:10 pm

It seems improbable. Hurricane Hazel generated 100mph winds, increasing to 150mph when it reached Carolina destroying entire towns -with storm surge of 14.5 feet, passed through Washington, Pennsylvania and New York and then onto Ontario where it met a cold front, and it maintained its intensity – category 4 – all the way.. All this after killing 1000 people in Haiti, and that was in 1954.
Of course, we don’t know, partly due to increased technology and modern communications, how considerable hurricanes were prior to the 19th century

October 30, 2012 6:11 pm

One thing that needs to be hammered home. This was NOT a big hurricane. It WAS a bad thing, no doubt. But many people in the path are now saying “That wasn’t so bad”. When a really bad storm does hit, they may well ignore the warnings. This is the real danger of calling this thing a “Frankenstorm”.
Really bad storm. Yes.
Unprecedented. No.
Worst. No.
I seem to remember a tale from my childhood that is apropos here. Something about crying wolf. No matter what side of this argument you support.

Craig W
October 30, 2012 6:14 pm

I blame man-bear-pig … because AGW would not exist without Gore’s mythologically induced perseverations.

October 30, 2012 6:15 pm

Did not James Henson predict a sea level rise that would flood NYC? Is this what he meant?

October 30, 2012 6:19 pm

“Reuters) – Sandy, one of the biggest storms ever to hit eastern United States, flooded servers of Datagram Inc in New York City, bringing down several media websites it hosts, including Huffington Post and Gawker.”
Reuters is of course playing the alarmist game but Huff Post out is an ironic result…

Larry Geiger
October 30, 2012 6:23 pm

If that hurrican Hazel video wasn’t enough to convince someone, then it’s just time to give up. That was an amazing video.

October 30, 2012 6:23 pm

It was a Cat. 1 storm. This is insane. As someone said, the landing on a full moon at high tide was big. The wind damage was minor, because …. it was a Cat 1 storm. Couple that with the nice funnel into NYC and you get storm surge.

October 30, 2012 6:32 pm

I’m glad to see links to what these people are supposed to have said. But when I followed through, it didn’t seem to correspond very well:
1. Hansen – I couldn’t see anything in Revkin’s article quoting him on Sandy, or even on hurricanes
2. Pielke – the article just talked about the cost of past hurricanes – nothing about cause
3. Hayhoe and North comes from a Fox News article. But what do the quotes say?
Hayhoe:“Add to that the temperature of the Atlantic Ocean, which is about 2 degrees warmer on average than a century ago, said Katharine Hayhoe, a climate scientist at Texas Tech University. Warm water fuels hurricanes.”
Well, the sea is warmer. And North:
“While components of Sandy seem connected to global warming, “mostly it’s natural, I’d say it’s 80, 90 percent natural,” said Gerald North, a climate professor at Texas A&M University. “These things do happen, like the drought. It’s a natural thing.”
Yet Hayhoe does in to one list, North into the other.

October 30, 2012 6:33 pm

Trenberth and Salinger both on the radio in New Zealand today promoting this as the result of human induced climate change .

John Parsons
October 30, 2012 6:36 pm

AGW couldn’t “cause” a storm any more than water could cause a storm. The question is: “What effect does human caused climate warming have on certain types of important weather events?” Is anybody here really proposing that the answer is “None”? JP

John West
October 30, 2012 6:37 pm

If we blame this week’s storm on GW then what do we blame last week’s lack of storm on? GW?

October 30, 2012 6:38 pm

Looks like the one in ’38 was also overlooked:

October 30, 2012 6:38 pm

The Governor of New York, self proclaimed friend of Al Gore says in one interview that this is the new normal, that we have to get used to more extreme and more frequent events, that 100 year storms now happen every two years, and in 10 seconds later says how no one has ever seen anything like this before……Make up your mind. Either it happens all the time, or no one can remember it happening.
How pathetic!

October 30, 2012 6:44 pm

David Ball says:
October 30, 2012 at 5:40 pm
> Has it been established that Sandy was a “Hurricane”?
Of course, until it got close to land. There was never a tropical storm or hurricane warning posted for NJ etc. Personally, given the eye on radar as it approached NJ, I think it probably was still mostly a hurricane at landfall, but certainly became extratropical soon thereafter.
It really doesn’t matter much – either way the waves on Long Beach Island came over the dunes, down the street and into Barnegat Bay.

Climate Weenie
October 30, 2012 6:47 pm

For crying out loud, it was a category 1 hurricane that happened during hurricane season!
It had a still memorable precedent in the Long Island Express which was a cat 5 storm:
It has happened ever since European settlers were here and of course it’s happened forever:
Note all the October and even November storms on the list.
But this one was a combo Nor’easter!
That’s happened also, of course:
Jeez. Confirmation bias has people so blinded, even when thirty seconds of web searching can refute it.

Don Worley
October 30, 2012 6:48 pm

I think the intense heat of the presidential campaign caused the storm to pop up.
Notice how when Obama flew to DC the storm suddenly lurched Westward.
Basic Neural Modeling.

D Böehm
October 30, 2012 6:48 pm

Here are some good pics of the flooding.

October 30, 2012 6:56 pm

dp says October 30, 2012 at 5:15 pm
Mosh is on record at Dr. Curry’s blog as a …

I think that is a ploy, a tactic, being shown there.

October 30, 2012 6:59 pm

Did we forget this one?
CONTACT: Blair FitzGibbon : 202-503-6141 :
Statement by Brad Johnson, campaign manager of Forecast the Facts and
“If the candidates won’t listen to the voters demanding they break their climate silence, maybe they will listen to Mother Nature’s October Surprise. We know the candidates will be asked about Hurricane Sandy, and will express their sympathy with those affected. They will rightly applaud the first responders, the compassion of neighbors, and the strength and resolve of the American people. But what their role as national leaders demands that they also do is explain that Hurricane Sandy is a true Frankenstorm, a monster created by man tampering with nature with oil, coal, and gas pollution.”
Wonder what side he’d go on.
Also, don’t forget the newest member of the Weather Channel stable – Dr. Jeff Masters.
He’ll say more later, but for now “…There’s so much more to say about Sandy–including how the storm may have been influenced by climate change–but I’ll save this for later posts, as it’s time to get something posted…” (dated October 30, 2012)
Naturally, all his faithful minions will agree with this.
So looks like the listing needs to be updated.

October 30, 2012 7:02 pm

Pressure was 940 stop focusing on the winds. NJ shore absolutely obliterated. NYC did have a higher surge than ever recorded, its not just a bad storm its one of the all time greats. Its probably the Mid Atlantic’s Hurricane of 1938, at least New Jersey. Wind gusts in New England were in the low 80’s. Still right now bands are rotating into Southeast New England, wind gusts are over 50 mph on Lake Michigan. Many areas over 2 feet of snow in West Virginia. No it was not caused by global warming but quit down playing the storm by looking at scattered weather observations and actually look at the destruction caused.
This is a synoptic set up over land meteorologists never get to see. Let’s not forget the damage caused in the Caribbean before Sandy headed north. Can you name a Hurricane in recent memory that hooked so rapidly west while being infused by a baroclinic zone due to a strong negatively tilted Arctic trough? Meanwhile the NAO is in a deeply negative phase enhancing the pressure gradient and blocking the usual track out to sea. All the while a blizzard rages on the cold air advection side of the storm.
Do people really think the sustained winds and wind gusts measured in the Great Hurricanes of the past are all 100 percent accurate? Why on earth would you claim Sandy wasn’t a Hurricane…plenty of wind gusts were over hurricane force and the storm surge was consistent of a category 3 hurricane. Sandy will take its place alongside Katrina, Andrew, Hazel, 1938, 1935, and 1900 in the most significant storms since 1900.

David Ball
October 30, 2012 7:02 pm

Ric Werme says:
October 30, 2012 at 6:44 pm
“It really doesn’t matter much ”
It matters a great deal. If it wasn’t a hurricane, that needs to be shouted from the rooftops.
WTF is “post-tropical”? Do they just make siht up as they go along?

October 30, 2012 7:09 pm

Global warming (caused by fossil fuel use) is responsible for my bad breath and thinning hair, and I intend to sue all the major oil companies for turning me into the thoroughly unpleasant person I have become!

October 30, 2012 7:09 pm

Most of the pseudo-scientists preaching the “global warming is causing severe weather” gospel are on the government dole. They depend on taxpayer-funded grants for their survival. If the AGW theory goes belly up (we can only hope it will happen soon), the research grants dry up. There lies their true motivation: keeping the grant money flowing. Their end-of-days rhetoric has nothing to do with saving the planet, which is quite capable of taking care of itself — with or without man’s presence.

October 30, 2012 7:09 pm

I’m sure the way CAGW acolytes account for CO2 lagging temperature increases, Hurricane Sandy is in response to future warming. And since it hit Atlantic City, the odds are much better than even that this is so.

Carl Brannen
October 30, 2012 7:11 pm

The subject came up as an example of planetary storms in the “astronomy news hour” here. A professor noted that storms of this size occur on the earth extremely frequently. But the earth is big so they usually miss New York City.

October 30, 2012 7:25 pm

Ric Werme says October 30, 2012 at 6:44 pm

Of course, until it got close to land. There was never a tropical storm or hurricane warning posted for NJ etc. Personally, given the eye on radar as it approached NJ,

Hmm … the eye as it approached landfall …. a little indistinct if I recall … also note the drop-off of precipitation to the east and in the NE quadrant as it approached land finally

October 30, 2012 7:27 pm

The baroclinic influence on this system is undeniable and took over long before land interaction.
It will come out in the wash.
The name was not changed to protect the innocent.

tom s
October 30, 2012 7:27 pm

The weather channel and NBC were colluding about this just now. I detest these people.

cui bono
October 30, 2012 7:27 pm

Bit O/T, but the Texans are getting snitty about NY’s lack of care of the Intrepid shuttle.
“You may recall that one criticism of Space Center Houston’s bid for a space shuttle was that it would have been vulnerable to hurricanes.
Well, I’m pretty sure we wouldn’t have displayed the shuttle in what appears to have been a glorified tent that could be blown down by tropical-storm force winds.”

James at 48
October 30, 2012 7:29 pm

I do believe it was, if not a result of climate change, a precursor of climate change. More precisely, I surmise it to be a sort of “standing wave” or constructive interference as a result of a type of ringing or overshoot … ringing or overshoot at the end of the interglacial.

October 30, 2012 7:30 pm

I heard Joe Bastardi on Fox last night saying it wasn’t global warming but a start of a cyclic trend similar to what was seen in the 1950’s.

Jeff B.
October 30, 2012 7:34 pm

In other words Socialists will rally behind anything that nets them more power. Solution? Don’t vote Democrat.

October 30, 2012 7:37 pm

Wait, isn’t there something unacceptable about compiling a list of scientists and a quick estimate of which side of a question they believe? I mean, I thought there was some reason Anderegg et al were not supposed to do that?

James at 48
October 30, 2012 7:38 pm

Meanwhile to the north:
There is something odd about this year’s freeze up. The big melt (or was it hypercompression) this summer / fall may have been the calm before the storm as it were. This will be fascinating to observe.

October 30, 2012 7:58 pm

TVNZ: is global warming/climate change a factor in what we’re seeing on the East Coast, in your opinion?
Jim Salinger in San Francisco: yes it certainly is…BLAH BLAH BLAH…global warming makes storms stronger. seas warmer…BLAH BLAH
VIDEO: TVNZ: What caused the Superstorm
Kiwi climate change scientist Jim Salinger is based in California and knows US and NZ weather.

October 30, 2012 7:59 pm

Lest we forget hurricane Hazel, 1954. A category 1 hurricane hitting Toronto…..CANADA!

October 30, 2012 8:04 pm

29 Oct: SBS Australia: Source: The Conversation: Hurricane Sandy ‘mixes super-storm conditions with climate change’
By Kevin Trenberth, University Corporation for Atmospheric Research
The sea surface temperatures along the Atlantic coast have been running at over 3C above normal for a region extending 800km off shore all the way from Florida to Canada. Global warming contributes 0.6C to this. With every degree C, the water holding of the atmosphere goes up 7%, and the moisture provides fuel for the tropical storm, increases its intensity, and magnifies the rainfall by double that amount compared with normal conditions.
Global climate change has contributed to the higher sea surface and ocean temperatures, and a warmer and moister atmosphere, and its effects are in the range of 5 to 10%. Natural variability and weather has provided the perhaps optimal conditions of a hurricane running into extra-tropical conditions to make for a huge intense storm, enhanced by global warming influences…
30 Oct: CBS Local Denver: NCAR Scientist Worries About Daughter While He Tracks Sandy
PHOTO CAPTION: Kevin Trenberth at NCAR talks with his daughter during Hurricane Sandy (credit: CBS)
Distinguished senior scientist Kevin Trenberth with the NCAR says Sandy is something else, and he’s been glued to his computer.
“The unique thing about this storm compared with a normal hurricane is the size is twice as big,” Trenberth said.
He says it will cause extensive flooding that many won’t be able to escape.
“It’s coming into one of the most populated areas in the world, and the number of people that are affected by this storm is perhaps unprecedented,” Trenberth said.

October 30, 2012 8:06 pm

_Jim says:
October 30, 2012 at 6:56 pm
dp says October 30, 2012 at 5:15 pm
Mosh is on record at Dr. Curry’s blog as a …
I think that is a ploy, a tactic, being shown there.

Regardless, it is the most unambiguous thing he’s ever written, so it stood out. Most of the time he kicks you off the sled and tells you to follow dog poo until you get to Dawson City or at least equally unhelpful blurbs.

October 30, 2012 8:08 pm

29 Oct: Christian Science Monitor: Superstorm Sandy Liveblog
The Huffington Post’s Tom Zeller quotes Kevin Trenberth, head of the Climate Analysis Section at the USA National Center for Atmospheric Research, who describes Sandy as representing “the new normal.”
“The past few years have been marked by unusually severe extreme weather characteristic of climate change.” Trenberth told HuffPo. “The oceans are warmer and the atmosphere above the oceans is warmer and wetter. This new normal changes the environment for all storms and makes them more intense and with much more precipitation.”…

October 30, 2012 8:08 pm

“100 year storms now happen every two years”
They first have to become once every 99 years and progress to ever higher frequency. They don’t just jump to once every 2 years. Even the IPCC says increase of frequency of events is not seen in the data.

October 30, 2012 8:10 pm

RayG says:
October 30, 2012 at 5:52 pm
R. Shearer says: October 30, 2012 at 5:13 pm
I blame B.ush
The domain names and .net are available. go to to claim them.
I just snagged Thanks Ray G! and R. Shearer!
Now I have to figure out what kind of website I want for it. A winter hobby. Thanks!

October 30, 2012 8:15 pm

31 Oct: WestAustralian: AAP: Seth Borenstein: Scientist predicted New York flooding
CLIMATE scientist Michael Oppenheimer stood along the Hudson River and watched his research come to life as Hurricane Sandy blew through New York.
Just eight months earlier, the Princeton University professor reported that what used to be once-in-a-century devastating floods in New York City would soon happen every three to 20 years.
He blamed global warming for pushing up sea levels and changing hurricane patterns…
Some parts of Sandy and its wrath seem to be influenced by climate change, several climate scientists said.
First, there’s sea level rise. Water levels around New York are nearly 0.3 metre higher than they were 100 years ago, said Penn State University climate scientist Michael Mann.
Add to that the temperature of the Atlantic Ocean, which is about .8 degrees Celsius warmer on average than a century ago, said Katharine Hayhoe, a climate scientist at Texas Tech University.
Warm water fuels hurricanes.
Sandy zipped north along a warmer-than-normal Gulf Stream that travels from the Caribbean to Ireland, said Jeff Masters, meteorology director for the private service Weather Underground…
Normally there are 11 named Atlantic storms. The past two years have seen 19 and 18 named storms. This year, with one month to go, there are 19.
After years of disagreement, climate scientists and hurricane experts have concluded that as the climate warms, there will be fewer total hurricanes. But those storms that do develop will be stronger and wetter…
Jennifer Francis of Rutgers University, an expert in how a warming Arctic affects extreme weather patterns, said recent warming in the Arctic may have played a role in enlarging or prolonging that high pressure area.
However, she cautioned it’s not clear that happened with Sandy.
While components of Sandy seem connected to global warming, “mostly it’s natural, I’d say it’s 80, 90 per cent natural,” said Gerald North, a climate professor at Texas A&M University…
On Tuesday, both New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg and Governor Andrew Cuomo said extreme events like Sandy are causing them more trouble.
“What is clear is that the storms that we’ve experienced in the last year or so, around this country and around the world, are much more severe than before,” Bloomberg said.
“Whether that’s global warming or what, I don’t know. But we’ll have to address those issues.”
Cuomo called the changes “a new reality.”
“Anyone who says that there’s not a dramatic change in weather patterns I think is denying reality,” Cuomo said.
“I told the president the other day: ‘We have a 100-year flood every two years now.”‘
For his published research, Oppenheimer looked at New York City’s record flood of 1821.
Sandy flooded even higher…
Oppenheimer walked from his Manhattan home to the river on Monday evening to watch the storm.
“We sort of knew it could happen but you know that’s different from actually standing there and watching it happen,” Oppenheimer said.
“You don’t really imagine what this looks like until you see it.”

October 30, 2012 8:20 pm

oops…borenstein article should be attributed to PerthNow website, not West Australian.

D Böehm
October 30, 2012 8:20 pm

Cecil Coupe,
Good for you. A man of action! Make good use of it.

D. Patterson
October 30, 2012 8:21 pm

Let it also be noted that Van Jones is a self-described Communist, radical Marxist activist, and leader of the so-called green movement opposed to capitalism and the fossil fuels industry.

October 30, 2012 8:26 pm

response to Al Gore:
30 Oct: Washington Times: PICKET: Al Gore blames Hurricane Sandy on ‘global warming’
New York and New England were hit with powerful hurricanes in 1821 and 1938. In 1821, the hurricane was called, The Great September Gale. In 1938, the hurricane, aptly named the Long Island Express, slammed New York and New England with winds of up to 120 MPH. The Berkshire Eagle lists other hurricanes and tropical storms dating back to 1635 that have hit the east coast.
Is Mr. Gore saying that these massive hurricanes were caused by some form of man-made global warming…really? Please.

October 30, 2012 8:34 pm

The fact is that ocean temperature anomalies were on the order of 2 degrees and warmer. Statistically, a percentage of that is due to anthropogenic warming. It’s really not that difficult of a question,

D. Patterson
October 30, 2012 8:40 pm

Seth Borenstein AP is once more serving as the MSM frontman for the Alarmist hoax team with the usual misrepresentations about temperatures and sea level heights.He neglects to tell the readers how sea level has been and is supposed to be increasing ever since the current ice age was interrupted by the warming climates of the present Inter-Glacial. It is also remarkable how Seth Borenstein omitted mention of how the sea level has been observed to uncharacteristically not increase significantly and/or ever so slightly decline in the recent decade or longer.
Seth Borenstein also neglected to report how the temperature changes in the Gulfstream relate to thecyclical switch in temperature regimes between the Pacific Ocean and the Atlantic Ocean.While one ocean increases in temperature, the other ocean decreases in temperature. They tend to offset each other with any residdual differences resulting in an overall change in global average of seawater temperatures.
In other words, Seth Borenstein is conveying yet more of the same discredited climate propaganda.

October 30, 2012 8:49 pm

Stephan Lewandowsky –
“Debating the extent to which Frankenstorm Sandy was put on steroids by climate change is a distraction.”
To be fair to the Professor, he also seems to suggest that superstorm Sandy might have been caused by tobacco smoking.

David Ball
October 30, 2012 9:00 pm

Jerky says:
October 30, 2012 at 8:34 pm
The difficult question is, can you show how the two are linked? You’ve done the easy bit.

October 30, 2012 9:01 pm

Hurricane Sandy is a warning sign of the sort of extreme event which is likely to become more frequent as the current global cooling trend accelerates from 2014 on. For details see my post
Hurricane Sandy – Exreme Events and Global Cooling
at my blog

David Ball
October 30, 2012 9:01 pm

Discovery Channel is “bending the storm over the table”, so to speak. Hope they have a warranty for that hype machine.

October 30, 2012 9:09 pm

“… anthropogenic warming”
It is impossible to determine if there is anthropogenic warming.

Darren Potter
October 30, 2012 9:13 pm

For sake of Alarmists surfing here — Let us suppose for a moment there is Anthropological Global Warming or Human induced Climate Change (HiCC) or whatever Alarmists are calling it this month…
What proof** do you Alarmists have that Hurricane Sandy was made worse by your claimed AGW? Is it not just as possible that Hurricane Sandy was lessened in strength by your claimed HiCC?
Put another way; Why is everything Alarmists contribute to man-made Climate Challenges – bad, worse, or devastating?
** Note Alarmists: Offering rantings by Chrissy “Tingles” (Spittle) Matthews about AGW deniers being “Pigs” isn’t proof.

October 30, 2012 9:18 pm

Seems to be a lot of 100 year events happening lately. Why did they pick the first part of the century to occur?

David Ross
October 30, 2012 9:24 pm

Kevin Trenberth is more explicit here (than he is in the above linked article):

Trenberth: Hurricane Sandy Mixes Super-Storm Conditions With Climate Change
by Kevin Trenberth
Global climate change has contributed to the higher sea surface and ocean temperatures, and a warmer and moister atmosphere, and its effects are in the range of 5 to 10%. Natural variability and weather has provided the perhaps optimal conditions of a hurricane running into extra-tropical conditions to make for a huge intense storm,

enhanced by global warming influences

Bloomberg and Cuomo are less restrained

Bloomberg and Cuomo blame Hurricane Sandy on climate change
PUBLISHED: 21:48, 30 October 2012 | UPDATED: 00:20, 31 October 2012
New York governor Andrew Cuomo and mayor Michael Bloomberg both pointed to climate change as the culprit for Sandy’s ravages as they addressed the scale of the destruction on Tuesday morning.
At a press conference in Manhattan on Tuesday, Cuomo said he had told President Obama that ‘we have a 100-year flood every two years now’.
He added: ‘There has been a series of extreme weather incidents. That is not a political statement. That is a factual statement.
‘Anyone who says there’s not a dramatic change in weather patterns, I think is denying reality.’
‘Whether that’s global warming or what, I don’t know, but we’ll have to address those issues.’

And as you might expect, it would be much quicker to list the people over at Huffpo and ThinkProgress that don’t believe Sandy was man-made. Expect to see much more like this:

George Lakoff: Global Warming Systemically Caused Hurricane Sandy
Global warming is real, and it is here. It is causing — yes, causing — death, destruction, and vast economic loss. And the causal effects are …
In Hurricane Sandy’s Fury, The Fingerprint Of Climate Change
Tom Zeller Jr.

October 30, 2012 9:24 pm
Climate change likely contributed to Sandy’s rage, with sea temperatures off the Atlantic U.S. coast being far above average. But hurricanes and storms have also occurred in the past for entirely natural reasons.
Stephan Lewandowsky

David Ross
October 30, 2012 9:26 pm

Oops, don’t know what happened to the formatting on my last post.

D. Patterson
October 30, 2012 10:00 pm

Jerky says:
October 30, 2012 at 8:34 pm
The fact is that ocean temperature anomalies were on the order of 2 degrees and warmer. Statistically, a percentage of that is due to anthropogenic warming. It’s really not that difficult of a question,

The fact is you don’t know the difference between a temperature anomoly and your place where the climate does not shine. Otherwise, you would be able to identify the alleged “2 degrees” temperature anomoly between what, what, and what. Of course, then you would have to explain how you identified an anthropogenic causee in a 2 degree increase in temperature when the alleged anthropogenic contribution to global average temperatures is alleged to be less than a single whole degree. That too presents a rather impossible problem to solve given how the temperature measuring instrumentation was not capable of being anymore accurate than a half degree, one degree, or more than one degree Fahrenheit depending upon the instrument.
As for your claim about being warmer statistically, such a remark is laughable. I’ll let you wonder why while the rest of us chuckle.

October 30, 2012 10:05 pm

Dr Norman Page says October 30, 2012 at 9:01 pm
Hurricane Sandy is a warning sign of the sort of extreme event which is likely to become more frequent as …

Deja vu? Katrina 2005? Haven’t we been to the rodeo once before? Seen this movie-picture alrady? Heard this song and dance before? Is there an echo in this room? Algore, is that you?
Is Global Warming Fueling Katrina? Aug. 29, 2005,8599,1099102,00.html
Hurricanes and Global Warming – Is There a Connection? September 2005
Global Warming Linked to More Severe, Frequent Hurricanes
Causes & Effects of Hurricane Katrina–11-2137.html

October 30, 2012 10:06 pm

[If you wish to be objectionable please back it up with facts. This is a content free post and seems to have no purpose other than to attract flames. You are a troll . . mod]

Darren Potter
October 30, 2012 10:06 pm

For the likes of Gore, Chrissy, Clinton, Rbarr, …
You Alarmists are pseudo-correct that humans have made hurricanes worse. Made worse, only in the sense that humans have propagated to the point where even a wimpy (no offense Sandy) Category 1 hurricane can not make landfall without doing damage.
Realizing the U.S. population has more than doubled over that past 60 years, resulting in large cities and more cities – in essence increasing the chances a hurricane will do damage. In that same 60 years, people have become more dependent on technology, and less self-sufficient (sad to say) – in essence increasing the impact of a hurricane.
Finally, there is no denying advances in technology have made dissemination of a hurricane’s impact far more reaching and detailed – in essence alarming. Alarmists can blame Gore for inventing the Internet, without it we would be blissfully unaware, other than perhaps what Walter Cronkite described on the evening news and the fuzzy b/w pictures in your daily newspaper.

October 30, 2012 10:10 pm

Jerky says October 30, 2012 at 8:34 pm
The fact is that ocean temperature anomalies were on the order of 2 degrees and warmer. …

Cite? Reference? Study? Survey? Periodical? Journal? Charts? Graphs? Author(s) name? Publication date? Volume number? Peer reviewers? Referee? Or … dinner napkin?

Mike Smith
October 30, 2012 10:12 pm

Note how those claiming an association between Sandy and AGW fail to cite any actual evidence whatsoever. They simply jump on the bandwagon even before anyone has had any opportunity to collect or analyze any evidence that is specific to Sandy. And they completely ignore the analysis of other severe weather events that has shown no association with AGW.
Pure unadulterated fluff. [Mod: note the polite choice of words requiring a great deal of self discipline]

October 30, 2012 10:15 pm

Sky News UK was interviewing a science type gentleman who stated that “the jury is still out” but at further insistence from the reporter suggested that the increase in sea level due to global warming may have contributed to the impact of the storm …!

October 30, 2012 10:36 pm

John Parsons said…”What effect does human caused climate warming have on certain types of important weather events?” Is anybody here really proposing that the answer is “None”? JP
Until you can show me definitive proof ,not climate models or eco-cultist adjustments,that humans can change Mother Nature,then the answer to your last question is YES.

October 30, 2012 10:38 pm

Salinger and Trenberth make me ashamed to be a New Zealander.
“Physics? What’s that? What relevance does that have? We’ll say it the way we want it.”

October 30, 2012 10:44 pm

From: 23–331PS
OCTOBER 7, 2005
Brigadier General David L. Johnson (ret.)
Director of NOAA’s National Weather Service.
Mr. Max Mayfield
Director of the National Weather Service’s National Hurricane Center.
Page 32…

Today, many more people live in hurricane prone areas than during the last period of high tropical activity, meaning that today’s storms will affect more people and cause more damage than historical storms.

Well, that seems to say it all as if everyone did not already realize it. Their testimony seems to also be strictly AMO related. However, tagged environmental activists are too dense to see these simple relationships. If you ever want to identify one, you know, for the list, just home in on these simple flaws common to their logic.
If you build on a beach, on an ocean water front, it’s neat I’m sure, but one day you will also reap what you sowed. I do feel sorry for all of those affected, my heart goes out to them, however, they must also bear the blame for their plight, it was their decision. After all, this is still a free country, no one put you there. Help them, of course, wish I could travel there right now to lend a helping hand.

October 30, 2012 11:07 pm

David Ball says:
October 30, 2012 at 5:40 pm
Has it been established that Sandy was a “Hurricane”?

This is what bugs me about the whole Sandy thing. Certainly it looks like a hurricane as it springs to life in the Caribbean, but by the time it gets to the Carolinas the cyclone really looks like it had become disorganized. No eye, lopsided, with the huge winter storm over the Appalachians making a beeline for the barometric low that now is a tropical depression. As the two merge, the center of cyclonic motion gets pulled into the larger Nor’easter. But I really don’t care what all the weather hacks are saying about the ‘size’ of Sandy the ex-hurricane, but it really didn’t look like much of anything once it passed Florida.
Some said that the barometric low was the lowest ever recorded, while others said it tied the New England Express of 1938. Either way the record was like all other ‘records’, by a tiny bit of a millibar. All the hoopla about the storm’s size is only because satellites could see how big it was. But the big storm, just looking at the animations is a hybrid. But a hurricane?
The link is the McKibbenization of the whole affair. Claptrap.

October 30, 2012 11:29 pm

Love this story! An intelligent and honest newspaper in DC? I thought they all went extinct.
There’s one against it being co2, a newspaper.

October 30, 2012 11:36 pm

Wow, and then this:

Is Mr. Gore saying that these massive hurricanes were caused by some form of man-made global warming…really? Please.

Two correct stories in one day! Amazing.

kadaka (KD Knoebel)
October 30, 2012 11:41 pm

David Ross said on October 30, 2012 at 9:26 pm:

Oops, don’t know what happened to the formatting on my last post.

You don’t have CA Assistant thus don’t have the Preview button to check formatting before posting, that’s what happened. 🙂

October 30, 2012 11:50 pm

I see they are still NOT listening to Dr. Chris Landsea. remember him? Of course you do. That; Kevin E. Trenberth is a [snip]. I see that this time around he is not sure, or ask another question. I bet he would love to call another press conference.

October 30, 2012 11:54 pm

dp says:
October 30, 2012 at 5:15 pm
“Mosh is on record at Dr. Curry’s blog as a definite yes at
But he says more;
“The science is pretty clear Joshua. There is heating in the pipeline.
heating we can do NOTHING to mitigate. We are seeing the effects of climate change today, there is nothing we can do except adapt in the short term. Stop being anti science.
The frankenstorm is directly tied to global warming.
There is heat in the pipe.
We will see more frankenstorms that mitigation can do nothing to stop.
Adapt now.”
Sounds more like someone from GISS?

October 30, 2012 11:55 pm

Probably the largest athropogenic effect on Sandy, was reduced urban aerosols over recent decades. Urban aerosols are known to decrease hurricane intensity substantially. With a secondary contribution from increased SSTs downwind from these urban areas on the US east coast, through increased solar insolation from decreased aerosol seeded clouds.
You can blame the catalytic converters and similar measures, like coal power station scrubbers for significantly contributing to Sandy’s intensity.

kadaka (KD Knoebel)
October 30, 2012 11:57 pm

OF COURSE Hurricane Sandy was caused by global warming!
If we had extreme planetary glaciation like was found billions of years ago, there wouldn’t have been enough open water to allow a storm like Sandy. There wouldn’t have been enough of a temperature gradient and enough available energy either.
Global warming gave us Hurricane Sandy. And still I WANT MORE WARMING. I’d rather seek shelter from a strong storm on occasion than try to survive on top of a mile-thick ice sheet with no food anywhere.
Fight the ice! Bring on the heat!

October 31, 2012 12:00 am

[snip , there are sites for this kind of post. WUWT isn’t one of them . . mod]

October 31, 2012 12:23 am

Well I expect there will be some shifty semantics around the meaning of cause.
Let me see now. Let’s say someone crashes into a tree with their car. It’s quite valid I guess to say that this happened because they depressed the accelerator to much. On the other hand to reject the notion that the cause was that they were having a heart attack at the time, —because—-, it was the accelerator being depressed, is just perverse.
By the way, I notice only warmists activists are called activists but some how climate skeptic activists are not call activists in that table.
REPLY: This is because with the exception of Pat Michaels, who now works with Cato, those on the right side don’t belong to NGO activist organizations. In retrospect, I probably should have made some labels clearer, such as for Dr. James Hansen, which could read “arrested activist”.


October 31, 2012 12:26 am

So 5 Doctors think it is caused by Global Warming, 10 Doctors do not. I’ll go with the concensus then.

October 31, 2012 12:28 am

_Jim says: October 30, 2012 at 10:10 pm
Jerky says October 30, 2012 at 8:34 pm
The fact is that ocean temperature anomalies were on the order of 2 degrees and warmer. …
Cite? Reference?
Bob Tisdale’s August SST post at WUWT sets it out.
Here’s the plot.

October 31, 2012 12:31 am

It takes a lot of chutzpah to accuse some folk of saying Sandy was “caused” by AGW while offering links as ‘proof’ which contradict your claims. There is a significant difference between claiming warming factors look to be enhancing storms,and saying they ’caused’ them.

October 31, 2012 12:32 am

Avaaz is twisting and turning to try and put the blame on climate change. See here–a-storm-of-silence
I wrote ‘bollocks’ on their Facebook page and linked to a previous post on this site.

October 31, 2012 12:44 am

Even though (they said) Sandy is one of the worst hurricane during 100 years but I think it is probably not the worst in mankind’s history. Well I’m also kind of unsure about global warming. It’s just a result of 100+ years research time (in comparison with our earth’s (too long) age). However I do agree about green living and eco-lifestyle. Let’s just reduce our greediness and be kind to our mother nature. God bless. Amen.

D. Patterson
October 31, 2012 12:55 am

John Parsons says:
October 30, 2012 at 6:36 pm
AGW couldn’t “cause” a storm any more than water could cause a storm. The question is: “What effect does human caused climate warming have on certain types of important weather events?” Is anybody here really proposing that the answer is “None”? JP

The answer is virtually none, meaning the influence is so very small as to be virtually undetectable and negligible in its outcome. It is sort of like asking yes or no to the question of whether an ant or a human being who falls into the sea causes the sea water to warm, the sea level to rise, and global warming to ensue as a consequence. How can you tell the difference between Hurricane/Tropical Storm Sandy and any of its predecessors in 1954, 1938, 1780, 1635, or any of the other great storms before the advent of the industrial age?

Roger Knights
October 31, 2012 1:11 am

Didn’t the alarmists say that Katrina was the start of a new normal too?

October 31, 2012 1:20 am

I originally put this in the previous thread, but I’ll repost it here since this thread is more appropriate. NASA “scientist” (I use the word losely; his scientific skills are meh at best) Dr Phil Plait, the “bad astronomer”, posted a weasel-like “it isn’t but it is” link between Sandy and global warming:
I posted there a criticism and a link to Dr Pielke Jr’s article about Chris Landsea, on why scientists harm their credibility by making these linkages; I thought Dr Pielke Jr would be less provocative as he is not a climate skeptic. But no, my post was deleted. I made a later comment under the name “Spence_EU” using hidemyass asking why he deleted my earlier comment; this one got posted, but no answer. It seems Dr Plait is happy to post up pseudoscience, but links to actual scientists active in the field get deleted. Go figure.

Al Gore
October 31, 2012 1:31 am

Hurricanes are made and kept alive by energy/temperature difference between sea and atmosphere, mostly around both sides of equator.
Closer to the poles the storms are mostly made and kept alive by air masses with energy/temperature difference.
This storm ended up being both in the end?
The cold air masses it met was made by global warming?

Bloke down the pub
October 31, 2012 2:37 am

‘Global warming is actually a misnomer. It should be called global swings.’
Is the quote above from Dr Michio Kaku the first usage of a new euphemism, or have I just not spotted it before?

Joe Good
October 31, 2012 2:39 am

I guess all these others were caused by global warming???

wayne Job
October 31, 2012 2:48 am

The long slow process of the Earth trying in vain to reach equilibrium sees the warm waters of three large solar cycles and a very big El Nino meandering northward. The warmth is meeting its match impinging on the ice of the far north and dumping heat to space. Sandy just released to space a couple of ergs and maybe a few jules and most likely some calories. These precious items are not being replaced at the moment as our energy supplier is on holidays for the forseeable future. Sandy can be looked upon as a bigass heat pump cooling the last warm waters in the north. Equilibrium is never possible for our planet and thus we have weather, at times less than conducive for us fragile creatures. That some people can blame weather on people, say’s much about their thought processes and even more about their scientific knowledge and research capabilities. I can only shake my head in wonder.

October 31, 2012 3:02 am

Nick Stokes says:
October 31, 2012 at 12:28 am
_Jim says: October 30, 2012 at 10:10 pm
Jerky says October 30, 2012 at 8:34 pm
The fact is that ocean temperature anomalies were on the order of 2 degrees and warmer. …
Cite? Reference?
Bob Tisdale’s August SST post at WUWT sets it out.
Forgive me, I’m a little confused with your comments regarding Tisdales’ August chart. It looks to me as if the entire Caribbean as well as the gulfstream from the tip of Florida to up past Hatteras is neutral in the SST anomaly temps as shown. Since Sandy followed this path, but didn’t linger above Hatteras for long before turning westward over land, how would the positive temperature anomaly shown north east of Sandy’s path affect her strength? I was under the impression that it is the ocean temperature and the amount of time that the heating under the eyewall convective area occurs is what governs a hurricanes potential strength. Sandy’s path saw none of this anomaly. Perhaps the anomalies had changed by late October and I was referred to the the wrong chart. Otherwise, I’m unable to rectify the statement about a 3 degree gulfstream anomalous SST having much of anything to do with this particular hurricane’s behavior.

October 31, 2012 3:06 am

The wonder is not that the storm hit and subways were flooded, but rather the wonder is that so many years passed without the hit occurring.
I can remember sitting around as a somewhat destructive young man, plotting “perfect storms” and “worse-case-scenareos,” and “the-storm-that-flooded-NYC-subways” was only one of many disasters we imagined occurring. We did that back in 1971.
If we “could see it coming” forty years ago, then wiser people could see it would happen as well. I can only suppose it was decided building some sort of water barriers was deemed too expensive.
Now NYC has a big mess to clean up. I hope they use the opportunity to build an amazing new subway. The danger, of course, is that the “bad-sort” get involved in the rebuilding. If that happens then what will be built will be an inferior boondoggle with sub-standard materials and leaks and falling ceilings, like Boston’s “Big Dig.” On the other hand, this could be a chance for New Yorkers to prove they are better than Bostonians.
In either case, I doubt a .6 degree rise in temperatures and 5 centemeter rise in sea levels had much to do with the flooded subways.

October 31, 2012 3:33 am

Yeah right, so Storm Sandy was caused by global warming. Warming right? Which is why it happened right at the end of October – well known as being the HOTTEST month of the year and right at the very PEAK of hurricane season. All that hot weather and AGW – the earth simply couldn’t take it.
Also Autumn high tides and areas of high population density are CAUSED by AGW. It is a well known fact proven by consensus amongst all the “right” people. /sarc_off

Ian W
October 31, 2012 3:35 am

There appears to be a psychological aspect here – some people are always disposed to blame anything that happens on their behavior or someone behavior and that the behavior somehow brought any problems down on them. In the early civilizations it was angering the gods, in early Christian times it something that had brought down God’s displeasure, now we have scientists with the same psychological need to blame chance events, laying the blame on carbon dioxide.
“The Great Storm of 1703 was the most severe storm or natural disaster ever recorded in the southern part of Great Britain. It affected southern England and the English Channel on the 26-27 November (December 7-8 in the modern calendar)”……
…..”The storm, unprecedented in ferocity and duration, was generally reckoned by witnesses to represent the anger of God—in recognition of the “crying sins of this nation”, the government declared 19 January 1704 a day of fasting, saying it “loudly calls for the deepest and most solemn humiliation of our people”.
Obviously this storm was NOT caused by Global Warming – it was caused by a previous God also angry at mankind’s behavior. The cure therefore was not to cripple power generation it was to have a day of fasting – which is just as (in)effective at stopping large storms.
The people on the left column are just displaying an atavistic tendency of attempting to find someone to blame for random events. In Salem it was witches.

October 31, 2012 4:01 am

I gave this comment on the alarmist websites:
You can not be offended on science:
“The Impact of Climate Change on Natural Disasters” ( “Climate change may not be responsible for the recent skyrocketing cost of natural disasters …” “As a result, global warming may cause the temperature difference between the poles and the equator to decrease. And as the difference decreases, so should the number of storms, says George Tselioudis, a research scientist at NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) and Columbia University.” “If we are creating an atmosphere more loaded with humidity, any storm that does develop has greater potential to develop into an intense storm,” says Tselioudis.”
However ( “We designed the computer simulations to show that as the ocean temperature increased, hurricanes would form more rapidly and easily, even in the presence of wind shear,” says Nolan, associate professor of Meteorology at the Rosenstiel School. “Instead, we got exactly the opposite result. As the water temperature increased, the effectiveness of the wind shear in suppressing hurricane formation actually became greater.” (…)
“The uncertainties in the historical tropical cyclone records, the incomplete understanding of the physical mechanisms linking tropical cyclone metrics to climate change, and the degree of tropical cyclone variability provide only low confidence for the attribution of any detectable changes in tropical cyclone activity to anthropogenic influences. ATTRIBUTION OF SINGLE EXTREME EVENTS TO ANTHROPOGENIC CLIMATE CHANGE IS CHALLENGING.”
“Projected changes in climate extremes under different emissions scenarios generally do not strongly diverge in the coming two to three decades, but these signals are RELATIVELY SMALL COMPARED to natural climate variability over this time frame.”
Hurricane losses: Fig. 1 and Fig. 2 and comment: “However, one should expect that even if there were no change in climate or climate variability, the proportion of events recorded in EM-DAT would increase over the decades …”
Sandy is the result summing: positive AMO, PDO (probably the summation is once every few hundred years old), and natural cyclical changes in the “tour” and the strength of the jet stream (now weakens and meanders – consequent effect of low solar activity 2008-10?) impact on regional atmospheric patterns blockade – strengthening the blockade (cooled air here – Canada).
And for those “alarmist”, who think that the former warming characterized by increase in the number of extreme events, I would recommend this post about “equable” climate (

October 31, 2012 4:11 am

Bad weather of the past caused by horse farts? C02 below 390? You decide.

October 31, 2012 4:12 am

Sandy gave the warmists a thrill up their leg, which they have obviously mistaken for sea level rise, melting ice, and CO2. CNN is close to having an orgasm over it.

October 31, 2012 4:20 am
Although you already have Michael Oppenheimer of Princeton on your list, you could add Ben Orlove of Columbia, and (non-scientists) Michael Bloomberg & Andrew Cuomo.
[Aside: I believe the Berkeley professor’s name is spelled “Lakoff”.]

October 31, 2012 4:28 am

Did the Little Ice Age cause the Great Hurricane of 1780? Low co2? You decide.

“The Great Hurricane of 1780 is considered the deadliest Atlantic tropical cyclone of all time.
About 22,000 people died when the storm pounded Barbados, Martinique, and Sint Eustatius in the Lesser Antilles between October 10 and October 16……..”

It’s clear that the Warmists are desperate. Remember a few years back when some sceptics pointed to freezing events and Warmists argued, quite rightly, that it was just the weather. Today they have done a U-turn and cling to weather events to prove global warming climate change.
According to George Monbiot Warmists are stupid.

Geroge Monbiot – Guardian – 6th January, 2010
“Britain’s cold snap does not prove climate science wrong
Climate sceptics are failing to understand the most basic meteorology – that weather is not the same as climate, and single events are not the same as trends……………….
Now we are being asked to commit ourselves to the wilful stupidity of extrapolating a long-term trend from a single event…………….”

So which is it Warmists? Where is the peer reviewed research clearly showing that hurricanes strength is getting worse??? Before you answer see Doplar Radar, satellites, mobile phones, more people, property etc.

October 31, 2012 4:29 am

Chris Landsea may have taken his information from 2011 noaa:
And a 2012 paper from noaa:

October 31, 2012 4:31 am

Its the moon stupids….
Most of the damage caused on land by tropical storm Sandy was due to flooding due to the position of the moon causing a high tide superimposed upon a storm surge due to low atmospheric pressure.
Flooding by hurricane Sandy in the ocean didn’t get a mention by the MSM.
We can safely conclude from this that global warming causes the position of the moon. On a clear night it is often said you can see the Mann in the moon who is a Nobel Laureate. QED.

October 31, 2012 4:45 am

Like many other contributors here I have just read the Wiki write ups on the 1954 and 1938 Hurricanes . . . . . and it is impossible not to see Sandy as being totally natural. The description of the whole process mentions warmer than normal sea surface, severe droughts leading up to the disaster. The descriptions of rain and runoff and even the floods storm surges and fires are all similar to that around Sandy.
There is no Anthropogenic fingerprint here. What is surprising though is how those with money will always build flimsy beach homes in dodgy areas. I guess they can afford the loss.

October 31, 2012 5:02 am

One of the problems with the entire debate is the fact that the phrase “Global Warming” has come to mean “Man-made Global Warming” and/or “Catastrophic Man-made Global Warming.” Sandra may very well be a function of “Globally Warmer Indicators” for all I know, but we don’t even have all of the data yet….that will take months.
That Mosher feels compelled to assign cause-n-effect [“Global Warming” caused Sandra] isn’t really a surprise to me (He’s a lukewarmer after all), but the fact that he’s confident to announce it NOW *is* a surprise, since he’s usually touting restraint on such conclusions when we don’t have all the data. But I think he uses the phrase “Global Warming” in its literal sense…not the CAGW manifestation.

Frank K.
October 31, 2012 5:22 am

Crabalocker says:
October 30, 2012 at 7:59 pm
“Lest we forget hurricane Hazel, 1954. A category 1 hurricane hitting Toronto…..CANADA!”
However, it should be pointed out that hurricane Hazel hit during the halcyon time period that NASA GISS uses to define “normal” (1950 – 1980). All weather during this period was perfectly normal – temperatures, precipitation. Even CO2 was normal. Life was good. Today, of course, everything is “anomalous,” “unprecedented”, and “abnormal”.

james grifffin
October 31, 2012 5:32 am

No warming for around 14 years….but CO2 has increased so where’s the correlation? Also now that the MWP has been restored there is nothing exceptional compared with anything we have seen for a thousand years. This was a storm caused by a number of freakish events….but the general public will believe it is to do with AGW. [snip . . OT . . mod]

Mike Lewis
October 31, 2012 5:37 am

Somewhat off topic and won’t be offended if this doesn’t pass moderation, but I’m curious what effect the hurricane had on sea surface temperatures? How wide, how deep, how much? Is there anything that would show this?

Chuck L
October 31, 2012 6:08 am

The poll now reads 2/3 “no” and 1/3 “yes.” Expect gratuitous insults from AGW acolytes about how stupid and ignorant the public is (and maybe add how they cling to their guns and religion, for good measure).

October 31, 2012 6:16 am

Add Shepard Smith who yesterday eluded that more events like this are coming even to Canada insinuating global warming.

David Ball
October 31, 2012 6:16 am

Nick Stokes says:
October 31, 2012 at 12:28 am
I looked at that, and it shows the same heat in Hudson’s Bay (or very nearly). This is a red flag for me. Probably not for you. There is no storm in up there. That goes for Jerky, too.

Bruce Cobb
October 31, 2012 6:23 am

Of course, it’s more nuanced than simply “caused by”.
I think Dan Miller’s position (from the James Hansen link) puts the position of most Alarmists more succinctly:
“No one is saying that a Hurricane Sandy would not have happened if not for climate change. But I believe there is little doubt that the record-breaking scale and potential destructiveness of Sandy is due in large part to the amplifying effects of warmer ocean temperatures, higher atmospheric moisture content, and unusual Arctic weather patterns.”
Whenever an Alarmist spews the phrase “there is little doubt”, you just know they are going to come out with the biggest pile of horse poo imaginable.
But, in addition to blowing smoke on the cause of storms like Sandy, the implication is always that there is a large, “proven” human fingerprint on those “amplifying effects”.
So, they pile horse poo on top of horse poo, creating a sort of “Frankenpoo”.

October 31, 2012 6:30 am

At 0925 segment toady TWC goes full forward on blaming global warming for some part of Sandy. Show steam coming from plants while talking about CO2, sea level rise, etc. Just terribly biased.

Peter Foster
October 31, 2012 6:59 am

Kevin Trenberth is NOT in the neutral category. He was on Radio New Zealand yesterday saying we could expect more of this sort of thing (hurricane Sandy) as oceans warmed etc etc etc. He clearly linked Sandy with global warming.

Ian L. McQueen
October 31, 2012 7:40 am

@Doug Proctor October 30, 2012 at 5:15 pm
“Recall how only professional scientists had a right to an opinion of this sort? That would kinda cut the left side down a bit, don’t you think?”
As close as I can tell the story after reading it 50 years ago:
A: “I believe that colds are caused by XXX (much detail and length here). Oh, by the way, I’m Billie Burke of Hollywood.”
B: “How do you do. I am Dr. YYY of the Mayo Clinic.”
End of conversation.

October 31, 2012 7:51 am

Voted, but had a little trouble. Couldn’t see the “Not bl**dy likely” Button.
An interesting point, I have just learned that the surge reached the high tide mark as it was in 1609 when there were oyster beds in Pearl Street … I think Joe Bastardi is right, with the Atlantic warm and the Pacific in a cooler phase more storms will make landfall.

October 31, 2012 8:11 am

George Lakoff
A familiar name from the 60’s, when I was a grad student at UCLA. I didn’t realize that a degree in linguistics could qualify you to make pronouncements in climate science. Guess I’d better get my name on the Oregon Petition.
John Slayton
MA, Linguistics

October 31, 2012 8:24 am

My research has shown excess levels of hot air coming from alarmist mouths (Verbalis Profluvium) may have caused this storm. I intend to milk the human suffering from Sandy by repeating this meme to further my own agenda and to use my own words as proof of my theory. In case anyone questions my data (not available upon request) I have adjusted for the background noise of deniers to show a hockey stick and thus proof.
My Nobel prize awaits

October 31, 2012 8:39 am

since the 60’s, public schools have been promulgating stupid.
cagw is directly related to stupid.
there’s stupid in the pipeline.

Laurie Bowen
October 31, 2012 10:22 am
October 31, 2012 10:24 am

These guys believe Hurricane Sandy was an Act of God. Literally.
Hurricane Sandy a ‘divine slap on the face of U.S. arrogance,’ Toronto Islamist website declares

October 31, 2012 10:47 am

Add to Global Warming IS the cause of Hurricane Sandy column Cara Santa Maria – Huffington Post. senior science correspondent Cenk Uygur – TV host Daniel Kessler – activist

D Böehm
October 31, 2012 11:02 am

Hurricane activity has been trending downward:

James at 48
October 31, 2012 11:03 am

RE: wayne Job says:
October 31, 2012 at 2:48 am
Be scared, be very scared. Indeed the energy loss to space in this event was tragic. It’s gone forever. In spurts, the current and temporary faux “melt age” will reveal its true persona, the cold, ice covered 4/5ths death.

October 31, 2012 11:26 am

If one hurricane was caused by AGW then all hurricanes must be caused by AGW???

Laurie Bowen
October 31, 2012 11:44 am

mwhite says:
October 31, 2012 at 11:26 am
Yeah, sure! That and you shouldn’t have made the gods angry!

October 31, 2012 11:48 am

I believe the hurricane itself is a standard tropical Atlantic cyclone. It seemed to follow a normal track until it encountered a high pressure zone west of Greenland which caused it to approach land in a perpendicular manner which is unique.
The storms direction, coupled with hitting during a full moon high tide, caused an incredibly large storm surge.
As for the damage, I haven’t seen it discussed yet, but I will certainly be looking for information on the impact of the land filling of Manhattan island which has significantly changed the nature of lower Manhattan over the last 150 years.

Laurie Bowen
October 31, 2012 11:55 am

Zafar Bangash, director of the institute, said Tuesday he did not write the post, headlined: “Hurricane Sandy delivers slap on US face.”

October 31, 2012 12:01 pm

That well known expert on climate science, Daryl Hannah, comments in the Guardian. She doesn’t mention Sandy directly but links to it from the word ‘superstorms’.

October 31, 2012 12:52 pm

Global warming did not cause Sandy Christopher Monckton of Brenchley explains facts to ‘bed-wetters’

Here, in one long, breathless sentence, is the complete answer to the bed-wetters who say global warming caused Sandy:
Extreme weather comes and goes in cycles (get used to it); occasionally you get a rare concatenation of circumstances (as we scientists say, “s–t happens”); there are more weather-watching instruments now than there were (think satellites); more reports of bad weather circulate (and reach a wider audience than ever); climate extremists unimpressively blame global warming for opposite extremes (heat and cold, flood and drought); there has been far too little warming so far to make any major difference (1 degree F in 60 years); the warming of recent years is well within natural variability (from 1695-1735, before man could have been to blame, central England warmed by 4 degrees F in just 40 years); extreme events are just as likely in cooler as in warmer weather (mathematically speaking, the climate behaves chaotically); warmer weather causes fewer storms, not more (thanks to temperature differentials that diminish as the world warms); there has been no acceleration in the rate of global warming (it’s stopped for now); and the knock-down argument is that there has been no global warming for almost 16 years (none of the discredited models predicted that: instead, in 2008 the modelers said that 15 years or more without global warming would demonstrate a discrepancy between their computer predictions and real-world observations and measurements).

Physics Major
October 31, 2012 12:55 pm

There was a study published in Nature (I know) in 2007 that studied hurricane activity in the Caribbean over the past 5000 years using sand sediment cores from a lagoon. You can read the full abstract here , but I thought this part was interesting:

Comparison of the sediment record with palaeo-climate records indicates that this variability was probably modulated by atmospheric dynamics associated with variations in the El Niño/Southern Oscillation and the strength of the West African monsoon, and suggests that sea surface temperatures as high as at present are not necessary to support intervals of frequent intense hurricanes.

October 31, 2012 12:56 pm

[snip . . try and actually say something . . mod]

October 31, 2012 1:18 pm

gnomish says October 31, 2012 at 8:39 am
since the 60′s, public schools have been promulgating stupid.
cagw is directly related to stupid.

Hmmm … the ‘stupid’ would seem to track the promulgation or fan-out of TV, which bred it’s own form of ‘pop’ culture (I’m thinking of American Bandstand now) … as the Bell System matured and installed wideband (Television capable bandwidth; 4.5 MHz for a black and white NTSC signal in those days) transmission circuits between cities (including coaxial cable and the early TD-2 microwave network) telecasts from local television studios received a wider audience than was previously possible before the 1960’s …
We need to get Robin (of Invisible Serf’s Collar) on this … this would blend in well with her present study-subject.

October 31, 2012 2:08 pm

James Taylor: Leave It To The Global Warming Alarmists To “Make Fake Lemonade” Out Of Hurricane Sandy

Leave it to global warming alarmists to exploit the innocent victims of a human tragedy like Hurricane Sandy to spread the laughably false notion that global warming caused the storm. . . .

October 31, 2012 2:13 pm

D Böehm says:
October 31, 2012 at 11:02 am
Hurricane activity has been trending downward:
I don’t see a downward tend in ACE. Rather than trying to link GW with any particular storm, it seems to me that the total season’s energy drawn from the ocean would be the best possible connection point.

October 31, 2012 4:21 pm

PBS attributing Sandy to climate change in News hour in the climate change series – Bloomberg and Cumo. Joe Romm, Center for American Progress vs Kenneth Green American Enterprises

Frank Kotler
October 31, 2012 4:49 pm

Prior to extensive human fossil fuel usage, life expectancy was much shorter. Therefore I blame “Satan’s Rock” – not for the storm, but for the fact that I lived long enough to see it. Dratted fossil fuels!

Robert A. Taylor
October 31, 2012 6:17 pm

I know what REALLY caused Sandy – the Occupy Wall Street movement. 😉

October 31, 2012 7:42 pm

Global warming bah humbug! Al Gore go back to the rock you washed out from under, your an embarrassment to mankind!

October 31, 2012 7:46 pm

Sure did… Made the dinosaurs go extinct too.!

Mark Redmann
October 31, 2012 7:48 pm

Any educated person knows that no single weather event is caused by global,warmng. We were overdue for a storm like this even though it took an unprecedented track.

October 31, 2012 8:29 pm

that’s a loaded question. there is no such thing as global warming.

November 1, 2012 1:16 am

This morning on the News it is being claimed that “Superstorm” Sandy has claimed 70 lives, and it is tragic and very upsetting to see the names and photos of people who have lost there lives and to learn the circumstances of their deaths. it is horrible. My heart goes out to those families.
I’d like to know and understand how the same TV station ignore and refused to report on major meteorological events that killed hundreds.
I will only mention one report. do your own investigation on this. “human cost” and people who have died are being unfairly represented.
February 11, 2012
Europe: Record snow and freezing have killed 600 people

November 1, 2012 5:47 am

Hurricanes are cause by whale farts, but ALGORE probably contributes too!

November 1, 2012 6:51 am
November 1, 2012 7:10 am

Joe Romm can quantify it. He claimed the 100 year storm is now the 10 year storm. No calculations or references, but I’m sure he can defend that number……..

November 1, 2012 7:55 am

Pat Bagley, cartoonist for the Salt Lake Tribune, seems sure the storm was caused by GW and that such is the scientific consensus:
How can he be wrong? –AGF

November 1, 2012 9:11 am

Kristoff has an NYT editorial where he highlights Sandy as our wake-up call. His article flip-flops between declaring Sandy a product of global warming, and saying Sandy was not caused by global warming, but that Sandy does serve to illustrate what global warming will bring in the future.
He notes a couple details that contributed to the ‘perfect-storm’ conditions, and acknowledges that there have been storms of similar magnitude across history, yet then proceeds on to attribute this storm to neither established range of normal variability, or to a unique blend of circumstances ot create the perfect-storm situation, but to global warming.
A classic disorganized mix of it-is-here-now and it-is-sure-to-be-here-in-the-future. Might. Could. Maybe.
Messy thinking.
There are great comments. There are also comments from plenty of ppl who mix up here/now with future apocalypse.
NYT cut off comments at a paltry 156. Why? Probably because people are exposing the global-warming witch-hunt doomsday cult fear-mongering for what it is.
I would urge ppl to comment, but the NYT seems to have had their fill of decent, thoughtful comments.

Matt G
November 1, 2012 11:31 am

There is a clear link between those that say yes and those that say no. The link is the ones that say yes don’t have a clue about weather or/and are activists, so not surprising their knowledge of weather history and mechanisms/physics are seriously lacking generally (odd exception).
Serious questions to any saying yes, what is the difference between a hurricane that is influenced by AGW to one that is not? How can AGW create a hurricane that would otherwise by a bit of cloud with little rainfall? The reason being created from nothing seems to be the awful uneducated assumption.

November 1, 2012 5:53 pm

There are many reason we brought about reasoning to Sandy, we bring up the issue of global warming, politics, and other more. All these things happening in all the countries in the world is just giving us a message!!! We contribute to Global Warming, politics got nothing to do with Sandy but the Bible already says that during this last days things will happen to show that the time is near and we need to repent. Geography expert bring up ideas summing up all recent activities but no one got the answer.
all we gotta do is be prepared cause this is not the end its just the begining of every happening that will happen in this world.

November 2, 2012 1:24 am

Thank you for being scientific and not political. My question is when all the scientists on tv are actually politicians, what will happen to science? But I guess the military industrial complex will keep records. Maybe it’s not “global warming” whatever the heck that made up term is.. Maybe it’s the intentional and elaborate daily spraying of billions of tons of chemicals by drones and western militaries and NATO into our skies? They turn our blue skies in to white/grey polarized reflector and make the sun blaze half the sky, instead of where just the quarter-sized sun is shining. Or they spray different formulations of chemicals that form “clouds” from the dirty chem trails. They are already using HAARP to alter the atmosphere and electrifying the atmosphere to intensify smaller storms. “What in the World are they Spraying” a documentary on youtube.

November 2, 2012 4:07 pm

Global warming is the best thing since sliced bread ! It started in the 1840’s before anyone used oil,gas or much coal. But it is not influenced by man when the main influence is solar, and the greatest greehouse effects come from water vapour, not co2. In fact we a coming up out of a temperature low into the normal range again after about 300 years in a cool region. Get your fact straight from the “Global Warming Petition Project ” found on the web and written by real scientists not one who wish to rule by force!

November 2, 2012 9:44 pm

One thing IS clear, though. Everyone is now aware that climate change is real, and the debate is almost over now, whether or not they believe northeastercaine Sandy was caused by global warming, which it was not.

November 4, 2012 7:50 pm

Anthony Watts,
What’s wrong with Dr. Michio Kaku’s geography?

November 5, 2012 12:51 pm

When is the national weather service going to own up to the massive failure of not calling sandy a hurricane north of NC – VA border? A failure that gave millions a false sense of security. Instead they referred to it as a “post tropical cyclone” which no one on the east coast has ever heard of and sounds like a very weakened storm.
Bunch of putzes.

November 5, 2012 1:42 pm

I’m still holding out for whale farts, have you ever seen the size of those things??

%d bloggers like this: