U.N. leader: Sandy a lesson in climate change

United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon says one of the lessons from Superstorm Sandy is the need for global action to deal with future climate shocks.
Due to Sandy, “global action” is to be taken. But spending billions of dollars on things like carbon capture to potentially reduce the global temperature by 1/1000 degree in 100 years is not the global action that is required. Instead, a few million dollars should be spent to make sure the backup generators in the hospitals do not fail should another “Sandy” come next year.

There has been a dramatic change in weather patterns.
Back to the cooling pattern of the mid 20th century.
These guys ar so behind the curve.

Ban Ki-moon back to where he come. When your east coast residents clean up their corrupt and inept local officials, as they recover from the last storm, the UN is just a minor add on to the task. Straight into the east river with em. Actually start there and house the storm victims in the UN Headquarters. This would be the first time US citizens get value for their money from the UN.
And the drop in crimes, of rape, hit&run, and hazardous parking/no-pay would be a net gain to NY citizens. Hard times call for hard answers, there ain’t no such thing as a free lunch.

As everyone here is observing the comments are of much more interest to a student of politics than they are to a student of science. But we knew that before he opened his mouth.

I agree with Ban-ki moon that Sandy is a lesson of climate change. However I don’t agree of the cause and I don’t agree that we can influence the weather.
Looking at the history of hurricane storm surge impacts on the New York City area it becomes apparent that these events are more likely to happen during periods of climate change caused by low solar activity.

Time for a reminder:
“One must say clearly that we redistribute de facto the world’s wealth by climate policy. One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. This has almost nothing to do with environmental policy anymore.”
~ Ottmar Edenhofer, Co-Chair, WG-3, UN/IPCC

Degaulle used to call the UN “the thingy”. He was aware the UN (like the IPCC) is a bureaucracy spending much of the time seeking new reasons to justify it’s own existence.
Both tend to impose a global government, in the name of a superior interest of the world, interest citizens are not enlighted enough to understand.

Jamie Lee Curtis has a yogurt commercial about “the new normal”? Same thing here?

The wider community is not discussing ‘climate change’ – a planet’s climate is defined by the degree of inclination and all secondary inputs,including temperature variations from unknown causes,do not change a planet’s climate.
The following sequential images of Uranus are of considerable importance for a number of reasons –
http://www.daviddarling.info/images/Uranus_rings_changes.jpg
Axial precession goes from a long term axial trait to an annual orbital trait as the polar coordinates are carried around in a circle to the central Sun.
The spectrum of planetary or global climate goes from an equatorial climate with zero inclination to a polar climate with 90 degree inclination thereby replacing the older ‘no tilt/no seasons’ ideology which is now unsuitable for 21st century purposes.
An equatorial climate is defined as little or no fluctuations in conditions as a planet orbits the Sun while a planet with an inclination at the polar end of the spectrum experiences huge hemispherical fluctuations such as occurs on the surface of Uranus.
Sadly,the inability to define planetary climate through interpreting images correctly is a symptom of cascading failure or systemic risk as the modeling rut is so deep that few have looked out of the canyon of bandwagon ideologies to breathe the clear and unhurried air of climate studies as they actually exist