Next time somebody tries to tell you hurricane Sandy was an "unprecedented" East Coast hurricane, show them this

All one need to do to explode the memes that paid political activists Bill McKibben and Brad Johnson are pushing is to look at a history book. In this case, WeatherBELL’s Joe Bastardi points us to NOAA’s National Hurricane Center history book:

Source: http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/data/images/tracks/majors_1951_1960.jpg

Joe says via Twitter:

Track of major hurricanes, 1951-1960..for the record: http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/data/images/tracks/majors_1951_1960.jpg … How would you like that period (54-60) pic.twitter.com/mIfH8CGt

And…

So what were those 6 IN TWO YEARS ( 5 majors)??? CAROL, EDNA, HAZEL, CONNIE,DIANE IONE, Nothing even CLOSE on east coast since then

Along the same lines of looking at history, what was the CO2 level then? The Keeling Curve tells us:

Source: http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/ccgg/trends/

Looks like the CO2 level was less than 310ppm prior to 1958, when the data begins.

So here’s the question, if 350 ppm is the “safe” level as defined by activists Dr. James Hansen and Bill McKibben how did all those hurricanes happen back then?

From http://www.350.org/en/node/48

Regarding the last question, we are only doomed if we continue to listen to opportunists like Bill McKibben that try to spin fear of climate (aka Tabloid Climatology) into every weather event now.

h/t to Tom Nelson

In related news, see why the sea floor geography increased the storm surge, as Dr. Roger Pielke Jr. explains:

New York City is particularly vulnerable to storm surge because of a geographic characteristic called the New York Bight.

See the full post here

Advertisements

  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
dwright

Also know as Manufactured Consent.
Their desperation is showing like dirty underwear after a 2 week bender.
It happened, but no one wants to admit the fact…
Dale

Vince Causey

I am equally baffled as to where the term “frankenstorm” came from. I assumed it was invented by HuffPo or Hansens, but I read somewhere that it was from NASA, which is strange considering the modest windspeeds. Perhaps they were referring to the huge area covered by Sandy. Those sat images looked like something out of “Day after tomorrow”, or the cover of Al Gores latest book.

clipe

Canadian perspective
http://www.ec.gc.ca/Hurricane/default.asp
Copy, paste and affix to URL in address bar:
?lang=En&n=1B2964ED-1
Looks like: http://www.ec.gc.ca/Hurricane/default.asp?lang=En&n=1B2964ED-1

The history of storms that do damage in the MidAtlantic to the Northeast goes back even further than the 50’s and we have photographic evidence of them. Here is a series of photos of Ocean City Md. after the Great Chesapeake Hurricane of 1933:
http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/eastern-shore/bal-1933storm-pg,0,6378003.photogallery
Look at those photos and you see great similarity to what happened to the coastal towns of NJ.

Next time somebody tries to tell you hurricane Sandy was an “unprecedented” , show them this

Dennis Gaskill

I think “frankenstorm” kinda fits in with a Halloween theme; we have to have a theme don’t we?
No real information was forthcoming from the lame stream Media.
Hysteria and Hype!

Werner Brozek

Whatever the motivations behind Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s decision to cite Sandy and climate change as a reason for his endorsement of President Obama, it has the effect of relocating responsibility for Sandy’s devastation from NYC City Hall to Washington, DC.
Why stop there? In the U.S., emissions fell.
See http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/06/05/usa-co2-emissions-fall-7-7/
In China, they went up.
See http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/07/06/co2-emissions-china-is-the-big-hockey-stick-in-the-room/
Now exactly what does Bloomberg expect from Obama? Does he expect Obama to spend tens of billions to reduce CO2 which will do nothing or does he expect him to spend billions wisely by helping New York build systems that will protect the city from the effects of future storms?

John Robertson

Interesting looking at other images showing hurricanes/storms hitting the US during the period 1931 through 2010 – simply change the dates on the link (consistent ten year period xxx1 to xxy0 only)
http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/data/images/tracks/majors_1951_1960.jpg
to the ten year period you are interested in, so for 1991 – 2000 change to:
http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/data/images/tracks/majors_1991_2000.jpg
1951 to 1960 is certainly the greatest number of landfall hurricanes in that period by far!

john

And when non-union crews come in to restore power, this happens.
http://www.waff.com/story/19981857/decatur-utilities-crews-home-after-issues-with-union

clipe

In 1995 JLK was contracted to conduct a study that would help explain the observed record of cooling at stations in coastal eastern Canada and western Greenland. A relationship between this trend and variability of the Canadian Polar Trough was discovered and a new 50 kPa index called the Baffin Island – West Atlantic Index was introduced. A co-authored paper was published and the work was presented to the 20th Climate Diagnostics Workshop in October, 1995.
http://www.library.ubc.ca/archives/u_arch/knox.doc

Vince Causey says:
November 2, 2012 at 2:15 pm
I am equally baffled as to where the term “frankenstorm” came from. I assumed it was invented by HuffPo or Hansens, but I read somewhere that it was from NASA, which is strange considering the modest windspeeds. Perhaps they were referring to the huge area covered by Sandy. Those sat images looked like something out of “Day after tomorrow”, or the cover of Al Gores latest book.

The motivation for the term was the idea that Sandy would merge with two other weather systems heading eastward, creating a monster storm cobbled together from different sources, the way Frankenstein was created from parts of different people’s bodies.

I’m not even entertaining the notion of hurricanes being caused by human activity, in whatever way or even who ever says they are. I’m actually considering sitting all this nonsense out until the fever breaks, election fever that is. But it’s just so fascinating, who knows?

BTW, Frankenstein was the creator of the monster, and just like AGW creating a “frankenstorm” it is pure fiction.

Sparks says: November 2, 2012 at 3:46 pm
……….
Nope.
The AGWs thought their Christmas came early, so they named it after Frankincense and myrrh
🙂 (sarc off)

The claim I hear is that Sandy is “unprecedented” for because of size and coming this late in October. One can look at the hurricanes in October for the 1800 and 1900s and see that isn’t accurate, but I think that is what drove the concept of the “Frankenstorm”

Gunga Din

What’s “unprecedented” about Sandy is the attempts to cash in on it.
(Oh wait. I forgot Katrina. Maybe we need a “Cash in on it/Political Hay” scale for hurricanes from now on.)

clipe

1925-2
Storm #2 began on November 29, 1925 in the Caribbean Sea. This storm contained winds of 156 km/h (85 knots) at its maximum strength making it a category two storm. Storm #2 entered the CHC Response Zone on December 3rd as it was weakening into a tropical storm. It brought winds of km/h (40 knots) to the CHC Response Zone. Storm #2 later dissipated on December 4th and did not cause any damage in Canada.

http://www.ec.gc.ca/Hurricane/default.asp
?lang=en&n=A170B8D0-1

I wounder if the rise in CO2 is the cause of the recent rise in obesity? It correlates.
REPLY: or, said another way…”does this trace gas make me look fat?” – Anthony

RockyRoad

Here’s a flood of a different nature that was man-made:
http://news.investors.com/photopopup.aspx?id=632002

David Ball

It is extremely entertaining to watch the contortionists spin their way out of documented “precedence”. You really have to be creative to pretend a storm like this has never happened in this way ever before. Stitch a bunch of poorly linked pieces together.
I guess this is what is needed to re-animate the corpse of CAGW. Frankenstorm might be more apropos than I first thought.

Gunga Din

Dennis Nikols says:
November 2, 2012 at 4:29 pm
I wounder if the rise in CO2 is the cause of the recent rise in obesity? It correlates.
REPLY: or, said another way…”does this trace gas make me look fat?” – Anthony
======================================================================
If CO2 can magnify heat ………………..

Luther Wu

Since Mayor Michael Bloomberg has been touting “Global Warming” since he took office, why has he done nothing to prepare his city for an event such as this?
The reason is simple: Michael Bloomberg could care less. Let the peasants pay for it all.
The only reason he and his elitist peers use the terms “Global Warming” in the first place is because they think that it gives them the air of being hip and cool, since the term has become de rigueur in the upper social circles. Bloomberg and the like are actually less free than many of us, because they must conform to the social edicts of often cruel, yet clueless doyennes who call the shots…
equally laughable and disgusting, really.

Luther Wu

REPLY: or, said another way…”does this trace gas make me look fat?” – Anthony
______________
You talkin’ ’bout that brief methane ballooning in britches?

Sandy became a large-size hurricane (although only Cat-1) in significant part
due to “baroclinic forces”, which are extratropical influence.
Next, Sandy did that strange left turn, due to extratropical influence. I suspect
that may be related to Sandy having hurricane-qualifying winds only in its
southwest quadrant while moving or turning westward, or about to do so.
If not for greatest winds being where they are normally not greatest, and if
Sandy was to be classified on wind strength where winds are normally worst,
Sandy would have been classified as a 70 MPH tropical storm.
The hurricane-qualifying winds were only offshore, only in a not-bad direction
when close to shore should they have hit shore, and may be only indirectly
measured, possibly extrapolated “in ways that count”. Sandy may get altered
in post-season re-analysis, such as what downgraded Irene from hurricane to
tropical storm in its stretch from about Maryland to NYC.
The large wind field size is due to factors related to Sandy officially having
changed from a hurricane to an extratropical cyclone before landfall. So,
Sandy landfell as a bad Nor-Easter. A few of those do have eyes.
New York City had record storm surge – this was a bad storm taking a bad
course for NYC.
I would consider this storm somewhat of a hybrid of post-North-Carolina
Hazel of October 1954, and the 1991 “Hallaween Storm” / “Perfect Storm”.
Hazel landfell around Myrtle Beach, SC and brought hurricane-qualifying
winds all the way to about 70 miles north of Toronto. Hazel was an
extratropical cyclone by the time it got from NC to VA.
Don’t forget Agnes of June 1972.
These storms do not appear to me getting worse. Such freaky storms
are merely infrequent, and now one had to hit NYC in a bad way.
For the record – the highest flooding of the Schuylkill River in Philadelphia
is from the “Saxby Gale” (hurricane) of October 1869. I suspect that
hurricane’s leading rainband merged with or became a frontal boundary,
and extratropical forces assisted a band of heavy rain, fueled by tropical
moisture, to pound badly for a prolonged period of time where it would make
the Schuylkill get to highest in Philadelphia history.

[snip – waaayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy off topic – Anthony]
.

bw

At and just before landfall, Sandy was NOT a hurricane. There were no sustained winds anywhere near land that qualified for the 33 meters per second hurricane threshold.
Scanning for the maximum sustainded winds in the area from the NDBC I found the max was
28.3 meters per second (55 knots) at Robbins Reef, NJ recorded by ROBN4
26.8 meters per second (52 knots) recorded by station CMAN4 at Cape May, NJ.
Other stations were less, eg. SJSN4 (Ship John Shoal, NJ) max was 26.3 meters per second.
NDBC 44065 and 44025 off New York Harbor showed 24.4 and 25.1 meters per second.
Station 44009 off Delaware at 23.7 meters per second.
Other stations were substantially less, especially land stations.
http://www.ndbc.noaa.gov/station_page.php?station=robn4
Also, read the NHC reports, before landfall, they always over-estimate the surface winds estimated from aircraft. Sandy might have been a hurricane well off-shore, but it weakened when it merged with the cold front some hours before landfall.

David Ball [November 2, 2012 at 4:31 pm] says:
It is extremely entertaining to watch the contortionists spin their way out of documented “precedence”. You really have to be creative to pretend a storm like this has never happened in this way ever before. Stitch a bunch of poorly linked pieces together.
I guess this is what is needed to re-animate the corpse of CAGW. Frankenstorm might be more apropos than I first thought.

It is amazing isn’t it! Any scientist, or really anybody at all, that uses the word “unprecedented” is doomed to fail immediately, and I’m sorry, should be summarily rejected from any position of importance. There is almost nothing that can be described using the word “unprecedented”. Not even their own innate stupidity.
What we are seeing is the literal definition of doomsayers, who are well-represented throughout human history, formerly warning of catastrophe from a comet spotted in the sky or a plague decimating the population, resulting in the summary sacrifice of a hundred cattle or maybe virgins to appease the angry Gods.
This time around they want us to pay an even higher cost by sending civilization back to the dark ages where these very doomsayers ironically would fit right in. These nitwits were harmless when they only strolled through Times Square wearing sandwich boards that said: “The Day Of Judgment is at Hand. Repent!”. Somehow we allowed them to migrate from there to positions in the Media, Academia and Scientific Institutions.

Spence_UK

Check out Hurricane Agnes in 1972 as well:
link
Because apparently hurricanes just don’t suddenly turn left like that without global warming. (Once again, I posted this at Phil Plait’s place – after he smeared Dr Pielke Jr by linking to Joe Romm – but it got disappeared. Phil doesn’t like the science)

[snip – waaayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy off topic – Anthony]
Eh?
Werner Brozek asks above: “Now exactly what does Bloomberg expect from Obama?” and I respond (in a not so direct way) with an implication that Bloomberg has taken a lesson from Rahm E. in ‘never letting a crises go to waste’?
Ooooookaaaayyyyyyy …
.

pokerguy

“So here’s the question, if 350 ppm is the “safe” level as defined by activists Dr. James Hansen and Bill McKibben how did all those hurricanes happen back then?”
Sorry, this just isn’t a good argument. It leaves one open to this of (course phony baloney) reply.”Guess we were wrong. 350 ppm is not safe after all. Which (naturally) means things are much worse than we thought.”
Facile arguments reflect poorly on skeptics just as efficiently as they do on warmists.

JamesD

Cat 1 storm. Full Moon. High Tide. Very negative NAO provided blocking and turned the storm right into the “funnel” causing the surge. Nothing about CAGW.

Larry Ledwick (hotrod)

Some how this whole saga reminds me of some Will Rodgers quotes.
It isn’t what we don’t know that gives us trouble, it’s what we know that ain’t so.
Will Rogers
There are three kinds of men. The one that learns by reading. The few who learn by observation. The rest of them have to pee on the electric fence for themselves.
Will Rogers
Larry

Justthinkin

Werner Brozek says:
November 2, 2012 at 2:44 pm
Now exactly what does Bloomberg expect from Obama? Does he expect Obama to spend tens of billions to reduce CO2 which will do nothing or does he expect him to spend billions wisely by helping New York build systems that will protect the city from the effects of future storms?
Well,being a good DemoncRat,Bloomberg will hope he spends billions on AGW,and throw a few bucks his way.
Cripes. These eco-cultists are getting desparate. It’s to the point now where they have not only soiled the respect of reputable scientists,now they have made the word unprecedented passe.
And as an aside,Frankinstein built the monster,whose name was Adam.

Gunga Din

Blade says:
November 2, 2012 at 5:39 pm
There is almost nothing that can be described using the word “unprecedented”.
=================================================================
How about they way they are using “unprecedented”?
(I doubt the word has ever been more popular.)

Chris Edwards

Nice that someone mentioned the storm of 1987, that destroyed nearly 80% of the mature trees in Kentm Sussex and surrey, not that much property damage as the brits build the homes properly, look at the pictures from NJ the condos are Ok but the wood homes get swept away like toys, also the exploding transformers, why were they not disconnected before the water hit? why were the subway tunnels not protected with flood gates? I suspect the answers are all the same, the feds have picked up the tabs in the USA so why worry?

All one need to do to explode the memes that paid political activists Bill McKibben and Brad Johnson are pushing is to look at a history book. In this case, WeatherBELL’s Joe Bastardi points us to NOAA’s National Hurricane Center history book:
I don’t see the significance of posting an image of hurricanes passing east of New York City. Hurricanes have counterclockwise winds, so the storm surge is to the right side of a hurricane’s direction.
We were lucky Sandy had better ground speed than the forecast, which allowed it to pass by faster. The mph of ground speed was suppose to drop from 19 to 9 to 3 in 12 hour intervals, but it increased to 28 as it changed course and went through New Jersey. Sandy had sustained winds of 90 mph before landfall, but unfortunately for NYC that wind direction was blowing the surge right at them.

Gunga Din

Chris Edwards says:
November 2, 2012 at 7:34 pm
Nice that someone mentioned the storm of 1987, that destroyed nearly 80% of the mature trees in Kentm Sussex and surrey, not that much property damage as the brits build the homes properly, look at the pictures from NJ the condos are Ok but the wood homes get swept away like toys, also the exploding transformers, why were they not disconnected before the water hit? why were the subway tunnels not protected with flood gates? I suspect the answers are all the same, the feds have picked up the tabs in the USA so why worry?
================================================================
I think that you also have to consider that the local office holders at the time(s) the suggestions came up didn’t think beyond the poll numbers and their term of office.

ossqss

Upon further review,,,,,,,,,, the only thing that will be unprecedented will be the amount of lawsuits with respect to mold.
Make a note of that.

Steve D

I think it was at the low end of category 1, is that correct?

gingoro

Once the pro AGW/Climate Change lobby called the storm frankenstorm or used the adjective unprecedented I found that my tendency was to discount many of the storm warnings. IMO many of the forecasters have been co-opted by the AGW forces and I find their writings less than trustworthy. I wonder how widespread such distrust is?
DaveW

James Mayo

Regarding use of the word unprecedented. “They keep using that word. I do not think it means what they think it means.”
I think we should just start replying in kind to any climate tabloid use of unprecedented with a single word declaration.
“Inconceivable!”
JM

James Mayo says:
November 2, 2012 at 10:25 pm
Regarding use of the word unprecedented. “They keep using that word. I do not think it means what they think it means.”
I think we should just start replying in kind to any climate tabloid use of unprecedented with a single word declaration.
“Inconceivable!”
JM

For everyone who doesn’t like the word unprecedented and believes Sandy was precentented, let’s start by naming one hurricane in that area heading in a westerly direction. Don’t embarrass yourselves by taking too long giving an example, because you didn’t hesitate to make all these articles and posts claiming there were precedents. And, before anyone tries to pull the bull, yes the direction of a hurricane when it hits land is very important to the amount of storm surge.
Cough up with a precedent!

RustyW

I guess NOAA’s knowledge base on this subject doesn’t go back beyond 1951.
I heard a meteorologist say during the storm that the “left turn was unprecedented” meaning the change of course from the expected NW to ENE was something that had never happened and should not happen. But it did happen in 1938. It has even been covered on the History Channel. They never learn. This hurricane did exactly the same thing as is happening now, for the same reason, only a little farther north, and not complicated by other storms from the west. It was more concentrated, with peak winds of 180 mph or so, but in a smaller area, and the damage it did was prodigious. Watch it here:

or here:

It had no doubt happened before, and will probably happen again. Just a matter of time, but we don’t seem to be able to remember anything for more than 50 years, which is why AGW gets so much traction. The geologists are laughing up their collective sleeves.

Dan

What I’ve been hearing warmists say is that the effects of Sandy were magnified due to the higher sea levels which were due to global warming. Thoughts?

D Böehm

Gary Lance,
You are such an obnoxious little puppy. The direction of a hurricane has nothing to do with whether it is ‘unprecedented’. See Rusty W’s post above. The hurricane of 1938 made the same move as Sandy, and it was a much stronger Cat 3 storm, with 120 mph winds. You are still a wet behind the ears juvenile puppy who knows nothing except the talking points you get from from alarmist blogs. And as we see here, you are proven wrong once again.

Kev-in-Uk

pokerguy says:
November 2, 2012 at 6:09 pm
I’d agree with that sentiment – the trouble is; that with trying deflect the NUTTY claims of AGW effects, there will always be another one around the corner (and probably a direct opposite of the first claim!).
The various AGW ‘effects’ can be twisted to the ‘data’ or vice versa (as we all know). That is, of course, the sign of the religous zealotry expounded by the warmista – and one, which, to be frank, we cannot really deal with in true science terms.
Nevertheless, the skeptical side must stick to actual facts, and in your example, the argument would NOT be that 350ppm ‘may not be safe’ but that more clearly that ‘Hurricanes and or hurricane intensity/frequency are unrelated to increased CO2’ as the data shows – end of discussion! The positive correlation by the warmista is NOT demonstrated and the hypothesis of CO2 causing increased hurricanes is simply rejected. Those are the facts, based on the real data!
In short, double bluffing or twisting the presentation of facts to the level of the warmista is simply bad science and we should avoid it at all costs.

nevket240

http://www.skynews.com.au/eco/article.aspx?id=812413
more scumbaggery from Australias finest.
disgraceful
regards

Spence_UK

I’ve added the 1938 storm to the track of Agnes 1972 on the damage estimator, so people can see the tracks. It seems this sort of storm, with the sharp left turn, occurs around once every 30-40 years; not unprecedented, not unexpected. Agnes was a bit weaker since it already made landfall in Florida prior to hitting New York, but only just weaker than Sandy (TS vs. Cat 1). New England 1938 turned less tightly, but was a cat 3 at the time of the turn. A link to the tracks is provided below.
Agnes and New England 1938 Tracks

There has been an unprecedented increase in the use of the word ‘unprecedented’.

I see desmugblag.com have an article on Bloombergs lurid cover page that has aroused a whole raft of… three comments.
Lol.