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 350.org * | 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) | ||
| UNSURE/ASK ANOTHER/ DIFFERENT QUESTION: | COMPLETELY OFF TARGET POOR GEOGRAPHY | ||
| 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.
I gave this comment on the alarmist websites:
You can not be offended on science:
“The Impact of Climate Change on Natural Disasters” (http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Features/RisingCost/rising_cost5.php): “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 (http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/08/080812160615.htm): “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.” (…)
http://www.ipcc-wg2.gov/SREX/images/uploads/SREX-SPMbrochure_FINAL.pdf:
“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: http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_0ZFCv_xbfPo/TPVCoSze2OI/AAAAAAAAAqY/ejjP2WxM7gs/s1600/norm1.jpg
http://www.jpands.org/vol14no4/goklany.pdf: 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 (http://blog.chron.com/climateabyss/2011/12/dispatch-from-agu-an-equable-climate-curveball/).
Bad weather of the past caused by horse farts? C02 below 390? You decide.
http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/bad-weather/
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. http://www.cnn.com/2012/10/31/us/sandy-climate-change/index.html?hpt=hp_t1
http://www.cnn.com/2012/10/31/us/sandy-climate-change/index.html
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”.]
Did the Little Ice Age cause the Great Hurricane of 1780? Low co2? You decide.
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 warmingclimate change.According to George Monbiot Warmists are stupid.
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.
Chris Landsea may have taken his information from 2011 noaa:
http://www.gfdl.noaa.gov/global-warming-and-hurricanes
And a 2012 paper from noaa:
http://www.gfdl.noaa.gov/global-warming-and-21st-century-hurricanes
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.
Like many other contributors here I have just read the Wiki write ups on the 1954 and 1938 Hurricanes . . http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1938_New_England_hurricane#New_York . . . http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hurricane_Hazel 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.
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.
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”.
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]
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?
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).
Add Shepard Smith who yesterday eluded that more events like this are coming even to Canada insinuating global warming.
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.
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”.
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.
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.
@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.
IanM
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.
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
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
/sarc
since the 60’s, public schools have been promulgating stupid.
cagw is directly related to stupid.
there’s stupid in the pipeline.
Two dead as Cyclone Nilam crosses Tamil Nadu coast
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Two-dead-as-Cyclone-Nilam-crosses-Tamil-Nadu-coast/articleshow/17037812.cms
http://www.intelliweather.net/imagery/intelliweather/sat_indoexfd_580x580_img.htm
Care to compare “Damage Assessments”, anyone?
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
http://news.nationalpost.com/2012/10/30/hurricane-sandy-a-divine-slap-on-the-face-of-u-s-arrogance-toronto-islamist-website-declares/