Another year of not living dangerously in spite of 'global warming'

While at AGU14 they were still pushing the failed film Years of Living Dangerously, weather disasters supposedly exacerbated by global warming fail to materialize for the second straight year.


2014 a quiet year for weather disasters in the U.S.

Doyle Rice, USA TODAY

The U.S. lucked out again this year, as large-scale weather catastrophes — including devastating and deadly hurricanes, tornadoes and wildfires — were few and far between.

Not since Superstorm Sandy devastated the Northeast in 2012 has a single natural disaster cost the U.S. tens of billions in damage, according to a report released today by CoreLogic. Sandy cost the U.S. about $70 billion.

“This is two straight years without big disasters,” said Tom Jeffery, a senior hazard scientist at CoreLogic, a private research and consulting company based in Santa Ana, Calif., that provides information and services to businesses and government.

Hurricanes, large tornado outbreaks and wildfires tend to be the biggest and costliest weather disasters in the U.S. each year, Jeffery said.

In terms of wildfires, 2014 has had the lowest amount of acreage lost to the blazes in the past 10 years.

Full story

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Greg Woods
December 30, 2014 6:37 am

‘Superstorm Sandy’ – He who controls the vocabulary controls the narrative.

Reply to  Greg Woods
December 30, 2014 8:06 am

True. The ghastly term “weather bomb” has suddenly become popular with alarmists like the UK Met Office. Of course headline writers love the melodrama so expect usage to spread and to be applied to everything apart from the mildest of weather.

Reply to  artwest
December 30, 2014 8:50 am

“Weather bombs”? Might that “punchy” term encompass 2014’s most conspicuous examples of destructive weather?:
HotWhopper’s squally tempests-in-a-fusspot; David Appell’s gas-bag, dumb-ass backing-winds; and ATTP’s low-pressure-trough snow-jobs

Keith Willshaw
Reply to  artwest
December 30, 2014 9:57 am

Absolutely true, the latest ‘weather bomb’ consisted of less than an inch of snow.
Snow in December – who’d a thunk it !

Harry Passfield
Reply to  artwest
December 30, 2014 11:55 am

“Weather bombs” – brought to you courtesy of the ‘weather bums’ at the MO. (BBQ Summer; snow-less Winters, anyone?).

Reply to  Greg Woods
December 30, 2014 9:43 am

My pet peeve as well. Tropical Storm Sandy doesn’t make the pathetically horrible response by the emergency planning agencies and governments (and people) look heroic… so “superstorm” covers their multitude of sins and errors, even though it means absolutely nothing. Just more propaganda.

Reply to  nielszoo
December 30, 2014 11:00 am

While I aree with the terminology complaint, lets not lose track of the fact that Sandy inflicted a tremendous amount of damage. In that sense it was a super storm.
What bugs me is the lack of honesty in reporting just why it was so destructive.

Robert B
Reply to  nielszoo
December 30, 2014 11:45 pm

A super storm is one category above a storm. Its either a hurricane or its a tropical storm.
Sub hurricane doesn’t have the right ring to it.

Reply to  Greg Woods
December 30, 2014 11:03 am

Let’s face it. These alarmists are now embarrassed by the lack of extreme weather / climate events. Even when they ‘produce’ the ‘events’ they failed to back it up with peer reviewed evidence showing a worsening TREND over at least 30 years (climate). Even if they manage this I demand they show it’s not caused by natural climate changes like El Nino. Sorry to be a pain in the arse but science demands these kind of requests otherwise we would all believe in witches and voodoo. Am I being unreasonable??
See the randomly chosen bad / wild / insane weather of 1935 or 1936.

Reply to  Jimbo
December 31, 2014 4:31 am

Computer modelling consistently wrong, alarmist luminaries’ predictions consistently wrong, extreme weather events diminishing, sea levels consistent, sea ice levels expanding…
But apart from that, they might just have a case for bankrupting economies. Hard to tell, really.

Reply to  Jimbo
December 31, 2014 9:30 pm

“last two years” and before that, not much either. Used to work on natural disasters. Work kinda dried up.
A few idjuts decided to go create a few disasters and set fires on purpose just so they could get FEMA overtime…feels the same with the current idjuts. Naming snow blows, winds desperate. Next we will be counting snow flakes.

Joseph Murphy
Reply to  Greg Woods
December 30, 2014 11:41 am

Sandy was a tropical storm on landfall. Did not even qualify as a hurricane. It did have quite the low pressure associated with it though. Maybe that is the super part.

Robert Wykoff
Reply to  Joseph Murphy
December 30, 2014 5:22 pm

The ‘super’ part is because the timing of landfall was coincident with a king tide, which is a lunar event caused by global warming

December 30, 2014 6:43 am

Ah, but this is not news-worthy, hence is not news. Naughty step, naughty corner, for you.

Dodgy Geezer
December 30, 2014 6:43 am

…“This is two straight years without big disasters”…
Someone had better do something about that fast! Do you know how many jobs are at risk in the insurance industry if disasters become rare?
Luckily, the airline sector is still holding up…

Winnipeg Boy
Reply to  Dodgy Geezer
December 30, 2014 7:25 am

Insurance industry jobs lost; none. Just bigger profits.
Construction jobs lost; plenty.
Another episode of theory vs reality.

Reply to  Winnipeg Boy
December 30, 2014 7:48 am

Aye, and now theorize the probable boom in construction if the global moneys spent on this AGW nonsense had been spent developing the Third World. Then factor in new housing starts due to grass roots economic gain in the western nations resulting from affordable energy, unhampered with excessive taxation.
Yet the negativity propagated policies that rain down on us are justified by the media as being positive actions for our own good.

Reply to  Winnipeg Boy
December 30, 2014 8:25 am

No job lost in the short term, but if there were no natural disasters for decades, people would definitely stop buying insurance.
As for more construction jobs, even this is doubtful, it depends on what people were planning on doing with the money that had to be used in clean up after a disaster, many people in the absence of a disaster would spend money on renovating their home or building bigger homes, these plans would likely be put on hold or canceled in the wake of a natural disaster.
Disasters or wars are never an economic boom for the country as a whole.
Consider reading this book.

Reply to  Dodgy Geezer
December 30, 2014 9:10 am

People speculate already if QZ8501 was destroyed by bad weather caused by climate change. Well done.

Reply to  Hugh
December 31, 2014 3:46 am

People?? CEO Fernandes said it! I guess it’s better than blaming himself, pilot error, inadequate training etc. He’s the VICTIM here of course – just use the G-word and you can never be blamed.

Kamikaze Dave
December 30, 2014 6:45 am

True, but watch out when the next big storm strikes. The CAGW wackadoodles will be as thick as flies on a dead horse (not a bad analogy, IMHO) screaming their usual doom and gloom about global warming, and their media acolytes will goosestep in perfect harmony with them. We would serve ourselves well to prepare for this eventuality.

Reply to  Kamikaze Dave
December 30, 2014 10:00 am

Kamikaze Dave 6:45am.
“…thick as flies on a dead horse…”
Would that be the dead horse they’re still trying to flog after all these years?

Kamikaze Dave
Reply to  DaveF
December 30, 2014 10:10 am

Roger that.

December 30, 2014 6:47 am

Although the temporary respite in U.S. disasters may continue for a while, it is unlikely to extend much farther into the future, the CoreLogic report stated. “A more likely scenario would be a return to higher numbers and more damaging events.”
….there’s something in the water

Reply to  Latitude
December 30, 2014 7:46 am

That is not a bad prediction. Take Florida for example. We have not had a hurricane make landfall in 9 years or so. There is little reason to doubt that someday we will see a hurricane hit the state and it will be much more damaging than the none that have hit for nearly a decade.
If a storm hits anyplace it is said to be caused by CO2 but if a storm does not come it is just not noticed. CO2 is the new witch’s brew —- it can do anything. Just ask the Pope.

Reply to  markstoval
December 30, 2014 8:17 am

It would have killed them to say…….A more likely scenario would be a return to normal

Bruce Cobb
Reply to  markstoval
December 30, 2014 8:24 am

“Take Florida for example.”
You forgot to say “please”.

Reply to  markstoval
December 30, 2014 9:31 am

And when we do return to normal, even if it’s just for one year, watch alarmists call every hurricane and storm that comes along “unprecedented.” After a long lull, a return to normal will seem like extreme weather. All it will need is a little hype, and we all know there will be no shortage of that.

Steve Keohane
December 30, 2014 6:52 am

“Not since Superstorm Sandy devastated the Northeast in 2012”, have to call it “superstorm” because it was too minor to rate as a hurricane. Pitifully grasping at straws.

Reply to  Steve Keohane
December 30, 2014 7:28 am

Well they are having something called “Weather Bombs” in the UK now. We used to call them winter storms but that isn’t doomsy enough anymore so Weather Bombs it is. Sort of in keeping with the centenary of WWI I suppose or something.

Reply to  Keitho
December 30, 2014 7:52 am

‘Ferocious weather bombs’ if you don’t mind.

Reply to  Keitho
December 30, 2014 7:55 am

We have “Weather Bombs” here in Canada, to go along with a dizzying array of bureaucratic descriptions that makes one believe that there are under-employed civil servants whose only job is to think up names: we have severe weather alerts, warnings and something called a “special weather statement”. I’m not sure if there is a boring ol’ regular weather statement. I guess most of us can get that by looking out the window.

Reply to  Keitho
December 30, 2014 8:03 am

That’s part of the far left spin that imagines weather events as weapons of mass destruction.

Reply to  Keitho
December 30, 2014 8:51 am

Yes they now have named winter storms in the US.

Reply to  Keitho
December 30, 2014 12:51 pm

When the first named winter storm hit, for the first time they had something genuinely unprecedented.

December 30, 2014 7:12 am

Although the temporary respite in U.S. disasters may continue for a while, it is unlikely to extend much farther into the future, the CoreLogic report stated.
do tell captain obvious. The longer you watch the weather, the more likely you are to see a storm bigger than any storm seen previously. If you live long enough, you will eventually see days that are hotter, colder, wetter, dryer, clearer and stormier than any days you have seen previously.
To the climate scientist, this is evidence that the weather is becoming more extreme. It must be, because the longer you watch, the more likely it becomes you will see new records being set.
Now ask yourself this simple question. Is there anything in human experience that doesn’t set new records the longer you watch? Does this mean that everything in life is becoming more extreme?
Because if we were to stitch human lifetimes together like tree ring histories, and each human sees new records the longer they live, then 10 lifetimes ago the climate must have been mellow indeed, and 1000 lifetimes ago it must have been placid, and back in the time of the cavemen, climate must have been completely static, with each day exactly like the other.
Thus, the ice ages could not have existed, because that would have been more extreme, at a time when CO2 levels were very low. And as we know, CO2 is necessary for extreme weather, and if we eliminate CO2 we will eliminate extreme weather. Tree ring history proves this to be true, so says the IPCC. The logic of climate science.

Reply to  ferdberple
December 30, 2014 8:02 am

I did something like you suggest several years ago. The gentle 350 year long warming of our climate can be discerned . I have repeated the item here;
—— —-
I thought it would be an interesting exercise to try and smooth out the short term temperature trends that will make someone in their 30’s today say-‘it’s got warmer in my lifetime’- a point which their great grandparents might disagree with, having lived through the warm 1920’s and 30’s
Consequently I decided to see what temperature a person living a three score year and ten life span in England would experience (using CET to 1660)
This table is based on the average annual mean temperature enjoyed by the ‘British Everyman’ through each year of each decade. This assumed he was born at the start of a decade and died the last year of the decade seventy years later. These are the calculations;
Someone born in Britain in 1660 and living to 70- Average annual temp 8.87c
Someone born in 1670 and living to 70 Average annual temp 8.98
1680 9.01
1690 9.05
1700 9.19
1710 9.21
1720 9.17
1730 9.14
1740 9.04
1750 9.03
1760 9.08
1770 9.10
1780 9.07
1790 9.12
1800 9.15
1810 9.13
1820 9.14
1830 9.12
1840 9.10
1850 9.14 (Start of the Hadley global temperatures)
1860 9.17
1870 9.21
1880 9.30 Official end of the Little Ice Age-Start of GISS
1890 9.39
1900 9.40
1910 9.46
1920 9.497
1930 9.60
1940 9.70 (projected to 2009)
1950 9.76 Extrapolating current trends (our favourite phrase)
1960 9.79 Using advanced modelling techniques to create a robust scenario.
The 1950 and 1960 decade use an average from the first three years of the 2010 decade to complete the 70 years)
The depths of the LIA can be clearly seen, but what I find interesting is that temperatures have risen only some 0.6 degree C since the warmest period of the LIA, which does not suggest a runaway climate change scenario to me.
(The slightly cooler average temperatures in the LIA are primarily due to colder winters – summers were pretty similar)
Of course, were it possible, it would be most interesting to extrapolate this back to the MWP and Roman optimums, as it would put today’s apparently modest rises into a proper perspective.
Is anyone else reading this living in a country with long records-Holland, Denmark, Sweden etc, and would care to compile a similar chart on the same basis, that smooths out the short term noise?
—– ——-

Reply to  climatereason
December 30, 2014 2:39 pm

Really impressed with the work you did. Thank you.

Reply to  climatereason
December 31, 2014 7:51 am

Tonyb: It’s good to see a comment using figures from the CET!
I never tire of pointing out that the pre-industrial value of CO2 is deemed to be 280ppm, and now it’s 400. That’s a 43% increase, yet the CET shows a value of 8.83 degrees Centigrade for the year 1659 – the same as for 2010!
Yes, before the alarmists jump up with accusations of cherry picking, of course the example’s been shown to make the point – BUT – the CET as I mention in another post on this thread has never reached an annual average of 11C in its entire history, but it’s come close even as far back as 1686.
For interest, I did some 30-year average calculations a while back. 1951-1960 came out at 9.52C, 1961-1970 was 9.26C, and 1971-1980 came to 9.52C. I must look at a few more!

Gary Pearse
Reply to  ferdberple
December 30, 2014 10:58 am

Fred, if “records” were random, they would follow the formula Ln N, where N is the number of years being assessed and the first data point is considered a record. For example if N=100, then the number of records to expect in a century of, say, floods, rainfall, temperature highs, temperature lows, etc. would be Ln 100 =4.6 (say 5). If N= 200, there should be 5.3 (still 5!). If N=500, 6.2 (say 6). For a thousand years, 7 (6.9).
Yeah, I know there are underlying cycles so it isn’t simply random, but the notion does tell us that, if at a given locality, there were 3 or 4 records successive records during the 1930s-40s there would not be a high probability for a new record expected by 2000. I believe the high temperatures set in the 1930s is, in actuality, still the global record. Hansen knew that 1998, with the strongest El Nino in a long time, was the best chance there was for a global record to be set. This is when he fiddled the GISS to push the 1930-45 section of the curve down several tenths to create the new record. In the US in 1997, 1937 still stood up as the record before he got his hands on the numbers. 1997 is now considerably above 1937. Globally, certainly the Arctic and the NH showed the 30s and early 40s to be comparatively warm.

Richard Barraclough
Reply to  Gary Pearse
January 2, 2015 4:18 am

and coincidentally, the CET has just set another new record for 2014 (about 10.93 C, with possible minor adjustments still to be made), beating the previous warmest of 10.87 set in 2006, and the next warmest of 10.72 set in 2011
So, the 3 warmest years in the 350 year record are all within the last decade.

Steve Oregon
December 30, 2014 7:20 am

Meanwhile the climate circus never ceases.
They have reached the tipping point of “Peak Insanity”.
Fate of Earth’s Ice Comes Further Into Focus
The Evergreen State has proposed one of the world’s most sophisticated and all-encompassing climate-pollution pricing programs …

Reply to  Steve Oregon
December 30, 2014 8:03 am

Please tell me that’s not a real word now. Carbon-Pollution was bad enough.

Bruce Cobb
Reply to  schitzree
December 30, 2014 8:33 am

The Climate And Clean Air (CACA) Coalition not only uses the “climate pollution” phrase, but divides into short-term and long-term categories. Oh, the insanity.

Reply to  schitzree
January 1, 2015 11:07 am

“caca” is French for poop.

Reply to  Steve Oregon
December 30, 2014 11:07 am

This is where I would make a cmment on how screwy our Governor is. As in I sometimes think he’s channling Jerry Brown. But since I’m still registered as an Oregon voter, I’ll refrain, since Oregon may have the most inept state government in the country.

Steve Oregon
December 30, 2014 7:22 am

The link.
I take an occasional look over there and it’s always an amazing discovery of stupidity and falsehoods.

Reply to  Steve Oregon
December 30, 2014 8:10 am

Uhg. Yep, right there in black and white. Climate-Pollution. Every time I think they can’t get any worse, they prove me wrong.

December 30, 2014 7:41 am

Yet, our esteemed leaders, the EPA and their servants Obama and Kerry display great faith in “The lie”.
This is an essay On “The sin of the world” and “The lie”, what does that mean?

December 30, 2014 8:21 am

This fight is not about the weather or the climate, not about warming or cooling.
It is about the fight for the truth.
Win this and still the msm and the redistribution cult will be about another lie to spread the wealth around and or reducing the number of humans.
Lies kill.
Truth is life.
Seek life.

Alan Robertson
Reply to  fobdangerclose
December 30, 2014 8:50 am


December 30, 2014 9:03 am

For decades now the warmist scientists have demanded better science commuication. Now, since the Smith-Mundt Modernization Act of 2012, it is finally legal to disseminate propaganda on US soil.
So, what stops them from wholesale invention of disasters and outright falsification of climate data and scientific papers? It’s an entirely rational decision and extremely cost-efficient given the amount of taxpayer dough one can extract.
Warmist climate scientists should talk to the guys in the econ department, ask the marketing profs.

December 30, 2014 9:03 am

“Hurricanes, large tornado outbreaks and wildfires tend to be the biggest and costliest weather disasters in the U.S. each year, Jeffery said.”
When did wildfires become “weather” disasters?

Reply to  Taphonomic
December 30, 2014 10:38 am

High winds, low rainfall, and high temperatures contribute to the number of wildfires.

Reply to  rogerknights
December 30, 2014 11:03 am

So do arsonists and careless people.

Reply to  rogerknights
December 30, 2014 11:09 am

Most wildfires are cased by lightning.

Reply to  rogerknights
December 30, 2014 12:30 pm

Arsonists are the biggest problem here in Oz.

Reply to  rogerknights
December 30, 2014 3:16 pm
Here are the historical stat’s over 2001 to 2013, more fires caused by humans 814,207 vs lightning 140,522
More acreage burned by lightning, 55.5 million vs human 33 million

Bubba Cow
December 30, 2014 9:26 am

no such thing as luck

Bruce Cobb
December 30, 2014 9:28 am

CoreLogic sez:

Although the temporary respite in U.S. disasters may continue for a while, it is unlikely to extend much farther into the future, the CoreLogic report stated. “A more likely scenario would be a return to higher numbers and more damaging events.”

So, are they saying that sometimes when you roll the weather dice you get low numbers, but you can’t then expect those low numbers to continue, or something else? They do seem to be implying “climate change” would be the driving force to higher numbers and more damaging events.

December 30, 2014 10:02 am

The “Scottish Sceptic” wrote in a recent post:

As I said a while back (The limits of Climate Hysteria) we’ve now reached the stage in these “climate wars” whereby the climate itself is the main combatant forcing the ranks of the delusional public academia, to be dragged kicking and screaming to the reality of our ever varying climate, as the climate itself now imposes discipline where the idiots in the so called “institutions” of so-called “science” failed.
One of the things that the “man in the street” can know without spending too much time to investigate is that the academics, activists, and other science “experts” do not know any more than anyone else and that they have lied over an over again to promote their political agenda. Every day, it seems, there is a new post someplace on how the data sets are corrupted and how the predictions of the “experts” are so way off the mark.
The all time worst hysteria in my opinion was all the claims that the polar bears could not handle a few degrees warming. (I think that was the worst — there are so many candidates)

December 30, 2014 10:17 am

Therefore, to keep warm, I will continue to poke my log fire with a stick

Reply to  Anoneumouse
December 31, 2014 10:46 pm

Presumably not just any stick. My personal preference is for sticks made of carbon pollution; they burn better 😉

John F. Hultquist
December 30, 2014 10:21 am

The U.S. lucked out again this year, as large-scale weather catastrophes — including devastating and deadly hurricanes, tornadoes and wildfires — were few and far between.” [Doyle Rice, 2014, USA TODAY]
Doyle seems like a nice guy, so should be warned to be looking over his shoulder for nefarious characters. He directly contradicts powerful political (Obama), religious (Francis), rich (too numerous to mention), pretty (DiCaprio), and dumb (Gwyneth) people.
His photo on USA TODAY does show a man that can look after himself.

December 30, 2014 10:41 am

Keep an eye out for them VORTEXs. Never had cold like that before. They’ll get you in a flash. Cold winter weather is a sure sign of global warming. As is today’s total ice extent, the highest since 1984 on even date. And it is likely the total ice mass is the highest since 1974, or tge highest estimated ever.

December 30, 2014 10:59 am

Come on now, smart people know that a lack of weather disasters is just more proof of AGW.

Reply to  Jukin
December 30, 2014 11:12 am

More weather disasters is also more proof.

David Ball
December 30, 2014 11:10 am

Galveston Texas, around 1900. Worst natural disaster in US history. By far.

December 30, 2014 1:21 pm

while partly-taxpayer-funded SBS TV in Australia runs the series flop, Years of Living Dangerously, on not one, but two of their channels over the christmas/new year season, an “ominous”, possibly “malevolent” cyclone in North Queensland is causing tensions amongst the locals!
31 Dec: Courier Mail Brisbane: Brian Williams: Monsoon trough brings chance of season’s first cyclone
QUEENSLAND could face its first cyclone of the season in the next two weeks, with the monsoon trough expected over Northern Australia about the end of the week.
While it sounds ominous, the monsoon is actually critical to Queensland’s drought-hit land and could be the saviour of the beef industry this year…
For those watching and waiting, the next few days will be a tense time.
On average 11 cyclones form annually, although fewer than normal are predicted this year due to El Nino-like conditions…
Northern Territory weather services manager Ben Suter said the monsoon’s arrival was close to average, with it usually appearing in the last week of the year.
“The monsoon is the heartbeat of the climate system in the tropics — providing relief from persistent heat and humidity with cloud cover, cooling rain, thunderstorms and occasionally more malevolent weather such as tropical lows,’’ he said…
meanwhile, the monsoon perspective from India:
WalkThroughIndia: The 10 Major Monsoon Festivals in India
As the monsoon arrives in India in June, it’s a best month to enjoy the wet weather and monsoon festival in India. Generally the monsoon festivals fall during the holy month of Shravan, during this there are plenty of fairs and festivals that celebrated with dancing, singing and feasting welcome the rains. India’s festivals celebrate not only gods and goddesses but also wind, rain, fire, trees and animals known as holy animals. There are numerous traditional fast and festivals celebrated during the wet season, some of them are Ganga Dussehra, Rath Yatras, Kanwarias, Janmashtami, Barsha Mongol Ramadan and Splash fairs are one of the most important part of all monsoon festivals…

December 30, 2014 1:52 pm

Words in Climate Science often have no meaning.
A woman in an upscale bistro, feels it is a disaster when they run out of olives for the pastrami and olive sandwiches.
My neighbor thinks it is a total disaster that his paper was not delivered for 2 days out of the last week.
My wife thinks it is an incomprehensible catastrophe that I used the all the Parmesan cheese and did not put it on the shopping list.
Alarmists state it is an unprecedented sign of global apocalypse when it snows in the winter and ice melts in the summer.
It is unfortunate that alarmist followers, governments and the media are incapable of recognizing meaningless hyperbole when it comes from the climate lobby. I guess the blinders are hard to take off, but using blinders is not a virtue, and instead embrace of ignorance as a virtue.
Meanwhile there are many people and places in the world who are experiencing such immense suffering that they are at a loss for words to describe it.

December 30, 2014 1:53 pm

What we’re experiencing is CAGW argument weirding. The longer we go without the global temperature increasing at the predicted rate, the closer global CAGW believers’ arguments resemble the excuses of an apocalyptic church whose predicted end-of-the-world day passed without incident..

Reply to  MJW
December 30, 2014 8:28 pm

My favourites:
(1) Global warming can be very uneven – even causing abnormally cold winters in some places.
(2) Heat has diffused from the atmosphere to the deep ocean without warming the water in between.
(3) Carbon warming is being temporarily neutralised by natural climate volatility – but will soon return.

December 30, 2014 2:06 pm

Does anyone know where I can apply for compensation for the $300 I had to send my water company for the a new water meter in my garage, after the old one froze and cracked in February 2014.
I also had to rent a propane heater for five hours to heat my garage and unfreeze the pipes.
Since I have read that unusually cold weather is one of the 186 known symptoms of climate change, I believe I am clearly a victim of climate change, and should be entitled to money from some climate change victim’s fund — wasn’t that Democrat billionaire Tom Steyer going to start such a fund?
Although I’m not a Democrat, I am always on the lookout for free money, and do not want to let my water meter “crisis” to go to waste!
— My Due Diligence:
I favor more CO2 in the air.
And I favor more warming.
But lets keep that quiet until I get my money.

December 30, 2014 4:09 pm

Diasappointing. You start off with the grand statement “weather disasters supposedly exacerbated by global warming fail to materialize for the second straight year”, but then it becomes clear that you are just referring to roughly 7% of the world’s land surface. What is happening in the rest of the world?

Reply to  RoHa
December 31, 2014 10:58 pm

We had a hum-dinger of a thunderstorm a few days ago in the Huon Valley of southern Tasmania. Last time we had one with such torrential rain was 30+ years ago, but this time we also had wind that drove the rain and hail almost horizontally, and several litres of rainwater made their way past a hitherto leakproof window frame. Does that help your understanding of the rest of the world?

Thai Rogue
December 30, 2014 5:44 pm

The Age in Australia today suggests that floods in Thailand and Malaysia, caused by climate change, could have been responsible for bringing down the Air Asia plane. I am not making this up:

December 30, 2014 8:57 pm

A couple of days ago the BBC headline was something along the lines of “Record cold temperatures for the UK” – the follow up article stating the UK has reached lowest temperatures for 2014 (obvious really considering last years’ wet and mild winter) – the headline since revised to “Record 2014 freeze”…but the ‘damage’ has already been done, that of the impression already made that winter has never been colder since records began.

December 31, 2014 12:46 am

Back in mid-December, I posted here that I’d like to predict (as far as I can) what the Central England Temperature record (CET) average reading for December 2014 will be.
To save readers looking back, here’s what I said:
” No computer models, no fancy statistics, just a plain inspection of the record’s figures and a bit of simple arithmetic.
From January to November inclusive, the monthly averages in degrees Centigrade for 2014 are 5.7, 6.2, 7.6, 10.2, 12.2, 15.1, 17.7, 14.9, 15.1, 12.5 and 8.6.
The hottest average for a year was 2006, showing 10.82⁰C.
So, assuming that we hit this figure again, let’s have a look at what December may bring.
My calculation comes to 4.04⁰C, but I’m going to round off this figure (four hundredths of a degree means nothing) – so, I suggest that December’s CET temperature will be 4⁰C at the most, but in all likelihood less than that, since I doubt we’re going to see the record average of 2006 again this year.
Four degrees Centigrade for December? Not at all an unusual figure, and that’s going right back to the 1600s.
The coldest December ever was -0.8⁰C in 1890, and the warmest was 8.1⁰C in 1934, a value also seen in 1974.”
I decided to play with my back yard thermometer as well, just for fun – I keep readings throughout the year, unless I’m away.
On December 28th, my amateur results indicated my prediction would be right. The thermometer is calibrated in whole degrees, and I estimate to the nearest half degree, always at around six o’clock in the morning. On the 28th, the average for December was on course to be 4.7⁰C
There is of course the heat island effect of our nearby central heating system gas boiler to consider, as well as the fact that we live in a town!
What’s the point of all this? The point is that there are over 350 years of values in the CET, with a wide spread of December values as I’ve mentioned above.
But the year’s average has never ever reached 11⁰C, hence my confidence in my observations.
Bringing things right up to date, here we are in the early morning of the last day of 2014 in the UK.
Recent days have been quite cold for this part of the world, with temperatures zero or slightly below.
My final estimate for December 2014 based on my amateur temperature readings is 4.2⁰C.
The CET value will surely be less than this, and I await the final official result.
This means temperature-wise it’s business as usual, a normal year, no suggestion of disastrous man-made warming to be seen, and a December value comfortably within the expected values
It’s not a surprise, is it?

Richard Barraclough
Reply to  Carbon500
January 2, 2015 4:24 am

December came in at 5.2, so 2014 easily surpassed the previous record

December 31, 2014 8:29 am

It haws become clear that the US Weather Service has bought into the Catastrophe Idea of Climate Change. Instead of the usual Winter Storms “Another Alberta Clipper” is bringing cold and snow, we are now treated to Named winter Storms much like Named Tropical Storms and Hurricanes. Also we have “New” Winter Terminology like “Polar Vortex” which sounds so much more ominous than a High Pressure Center. So Winter Storms are now more widely interpreted by laymen as “Unusual” events instead of typical weather events.

December 31, 2014 3:31 pm

This is probably worth repeating:
The current climate is completely normal. It is well within all past parameters. Global temperatures are completely normal. Everything being observed now has happened in the past, and to a greater degree.
There is nothing either unusual or unprecedented happening.
In fact, we are in a true “Goldilocks” climate: not too hot, and not too cold; but just right.
It is hard to spin that, but they’re certainly lying trying!

January 1, 2015 6:44 pm

A Year of Living dangerously is showing on Aust.TV on the SBS station. I just happened to tune in for a few minutes, and they were going on about cracks appearing in arctic ice, somewhere, and the breaking up of ice flows. (That’s normal) Are they desperate or think we are 12th year high school students? Needless to say, I stayed on that broadcast for less that 1 minute.

January 1, 2015 11:03 pm

the obvious failure of alarmist weather events to materilize is why the UN is now using 2050 alarmist claims.

January 2, 2015 7:16 am

Please stop calling it “Super Storm Sandy”. It wasn’t.
It was an absolutely normal storm that is fully to be expected there. Even that it arrived on a very high tide is to be expected (just not very often).
I go out of my way to call it “Absolutely Ordinary Storm Sandy” (and sometimes add “That wasn’t even a hurricane when it hit) to emphasize that point.
I’ve not had anyone do much other than smile at the statement and agree… One or two look a bit puzzled, but adding that ‘not a hurricane’ and ‘less than 1800s era storms’ usually causes enlightenment.

January 3, 2015 2:24 pm

FoodPorn – Beware your food supply.Climate is controlled where you do NOT understand it – your ultimate food supply does not grow in frost – at least you can exhale now. And stay warm. So what about $1 Trillion misapplied by – science.

%d bloggers like this: