Guest essay by Eric Worrall
LSE Grantham Institute Communications Director Bob Ward has written a post for the Guardian in which he admits he’s not sure of how anthropogenic CO2 might be impacting hurricanes, but he thinks President Trump should answer for them anyway.
Irma and Harvey lay the costs of climate change denial at Trump’s door
The president’s dismissal of scientific research is doing nothing to protect the livelihoods of ordinary Americans
Bob Ward
Sunday 10 September 2017 09.05 AEST
As the US comes to terms with its second major weather disaster within a month, an important question is whether the devastation caused by hurricanes Harveyand Irma will convince Donald Trump and his administration of the reality of climate change.
The president’s luxurious Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida may escape Irma’s wrath, but with the deaths of so many Americans, and billions of dollars in damage to homes and businesses, the costs of climate change denial are beginning to pile up at the door of the White House.
…
Climate change cannot be blamed for the hurricane count in any single season, nor for the occurrence of any single storm, but there are three ways in which it is making the consequences worse.
First, although the intensity of a hurricane depends on many factors, warmer seawater tends to promote stronger storms. Average sea surface temperatures have been rising, and some parts of the North Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico are warmer than average at the moment, which is a key reason why both Harvey and Irma became so strong so quickly.
Second, a warmer atmosphere can hold more water vapour, which can result in heavier rainfall. That is true not only for hurricanes but also for weaker storms across the world. Even relatively mild tropical storms can cause great damage by dropping huge volumes of rain over one area.
Third, apart from strong winds and heavy rainfall, hurricanes cause damage through storm surges as their winds push seawater ahead of them. Storm surges can inundate extensive low-lying coastal areas, sweeping away everything in their path. Sea levels have been gradually rising globally, making storm surges bigger and deadlier.
Scientists are still not sure about the other ways in which climate change may be impacting hurricanes. The main reason Harvey created such extreme flooding around Houston was that it stalled over the city and dumped rain for several days without moving on. We do not know if climate change played a role in creating the atmospheric conditions that made that happen.
…
Read more: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/sep/10/hurricane-irma-harvey-climate-change-trump
The biggest problem for alarmists like Bob is there is no upward trend in hurricane frequency or intensity.
As I noted in a previous post, NOAA doesn’t think the alleged impact of anthropogenic CO2 on storm intensity is detectable. (h/t Benny Peiser)
… It is premature to conclude that human activities–and particularly greenhouse gas emissions that cause global warming–have already had a detectable impact on Atlantic hurricane or global tropical cyclone activity. That said, human activities may have already caused changes that are not yet detectable due to the small magnitude of the changes or observational limitations, or are not yet confidently modeled (e.g., aerosol effects on regional climate). …
Read more: https://www.gfdl.noaa.gov/global-warming-and-hurricanes/
Here is what the IPCC says about climate change and hurricanes;
… Current datasets indicate no significant observed trends in global tropical cyclone frequency over the past century … No robust trends in annual numbers of tropical storms, hurricanes and major hurricanes counts have been identified over the past 100 years in the North Atlantic basin … In summary, confidence in large scale changes in the intensity of extreme extratropical cyclones since 1900 is low …
Read more: http://rogerpielkejr.blogspot.com.au/2013/10/coverage-of-extreme-events-in-ipcc-ar5.html
Speculative climate models suggest there should be an upward trend. But that predicted projected upward trend has not been observed in the real world.
Many climate alarmists seem to think we should treat climate model projections as equivalent to real world observations. For example, climate scientist Kevin Trenberth said the following back in April this year;
… With climate models as tools, we can carry out “what-if” experiments. What if the carbon dioxide in the atmosphere had not increased due to human activities? What if we keep burning fossil fuels and putting more CO2 into the atmosphere? If the climate changes as projected, then what would the impacts be on agriculture and society? If those things happened, then what strategies might there be for coping with the changes?
…
The models are not perfect and involve approximations. But because of their complexity and sophistication, they are so much better than any “back-of-the envelope” guesses, and the shortcomings and limitations are known.
…
The reality is climate models ARE computer driven guesses. Climate models have never been validated in any meaningful scientific sense – an issue which bothers some climate scientists so much, they argue that the definition of science itself must be changed, to accommodate climate models’ lack of scientific falsifiability.
… Climate models are important and complex tools for understanding the climate system. Are climate models falsifiable? Are they science? A test of falsifiability requires a model test or climate observation that shows global warming caused by increased human-produced greenhouse gases is untrue. It is difficult to propose a test of climate models in advance that is falsifiable.
Science is complicated – and doesn’t always fit the simplified version we learn as children. …
Read more: https://wattsupwiththat.com/2017/08/10/claim-climate-science-does-not-have-to-be-falsifiable/
I believe it is past time people who attempt to promote computerised guesses as established fact are held to account for their nonsense. The scientific method, falsifiability, is what separates science from superstition. Scaremongering, attempting to lay blame on President Trump for natural disasters on the basis of unproven climate model projections, projections which have no corroboration from real world observations, in my opinion is beneath contempt.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Anyone with a smug grin on their face is likely lying to you. Anyone trying to blame Pres. Trump for global warming is lying to you, with the same smug grin. Looks kinda like Michael Mann with a closer shave, but just as dumb.
” but there are three ways in which it is making the consequences worse.
First, although the intensity of a hurricane depends on many factors, warmer seawater tends to promote stronger storms. Average sea surface temperatures have been rising, and some parts of the North Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico are warmer than average at the moment, which is a key reason why both Harvey and Irma became so strong so quickly”
Go on then, show us your math. WTF does this have to do with carbon dioxide, besides the square root of (SNIP) all? I eagerly await your non-response.
I’d become an American and vote for him, if he did that.
Oops…not sure what happened there.
Anyway really skeptical…I’ll play your game.
IF what you say is true (and I agree with you by the way – bite my tongue) then what happened all those other 12 years when NO cat 3 of higher hurricanes landed on mainland USA?
And other parts of the world’s oceans are colder than normal… your point is??
Certainly there is no sign of any CO2 warming….. unless, of course, you are REALLY GULLIBLE…
and swallow the AGW scam with your Klimate Kool-aide
From JoNova
1.It’s only the 7th most intense at landfall in US history.
2.It formed over water that was two degrees cooler than normal,
3.1893, 1933, 1950, 1995, and 2005 had more Accumulated Cyclone Energy by Sept 10.
4.In 1933 two hurricanes hit the US in just 24 hours
5.In 1893, 1909, 2004 there were three Cat 3+ landfalls in US (blame climate change).
6.NOAA itself says there’s no evidence anyone can detect that greenhouse gas emissions have an effect on hurricanes.
2 degrees coler than normal….. seems you ae being really gullible about ocean warming,
but before landfall is was the most extreme storm of its kind in the Caribbean…
The severity at the US coastline is a rather parochial way of looking at this
And how does the fact it formed over cooler water come into it?
Plenty of warmer water was around to give it cat 5 energy…
…observed during the satellite era. Griff, you are precedented.
Yawn. HYPED as one of the strongest.. in a TINY thirty year period.
You really are a silly little boy, griff.
and you will never grow out of your childish attention-seeking without medical and psychological help..
The “claim” is that the average temperature of the oceans has risen 0.001C. Just how much stronger do you believe that would make your average hurricane?
Beyond that, the claim that we can measure the average temperature of the oceans to 0.1C is absurd. The claim that we can measure it to 1 thousandth of a degree is so laughable that only a charlatan or a moron would try to make such a claim.
Bob Ward, seems to suggest that until Donald Trump became President, Hurricanes didn’t exist.
Another strawman title, similar to the “Michael Mann’s claims that Harvey was caused by global warming are destroyed by an operational meteorologist”
babazaroni, whines again.
Lets read what BOB wrote,
“Irma and Harvey lay the costs of climate change denial at Trump’s door”
Your turn……
When you have no substantive point, you whine about trivialities. Babs has perfected this art form.
Bob layed an egg at President Trump’s door. I’ll bet Bob denies it…..
It’s obvious. Our election of Potus Obama was why we had no hurricanes in the U.S. It was his good “climate intentions” that prevented them all! LOL!
Back in 2003 after Katrina, the big headlines foretold of the impending doom-and-gloom of even more powerful and frequent hurricanes that would destroy us all in the next decade because of CO2. Well, it’s taken fourteen years before we even got a hurricane to come ashore in the U.S. and we’ve been lowering our CO2 emissions. Maybe we’re not creating enough CO2 to prevent this new series of storms and better burn more fossil fuels to prevent more catastrophe.
President Trump took office on the 20th January this year, in the 8 months since assuming Office he is apparently responsible for everything under the sun that is has, or is, or will be going wrong on Planet Earth. I had no idea how powerful a man he was, remarkable, really remarkable.
There is an obvious way to counter this nonsense about hurricanes being the fault of Donald Trump and that is to agree with their assertion that global warming means more extreme weather and the major victims of such extreme weather in the Northern Hemisphere are the southern states of the USA .
Given that the warmists also say that the accumulated global warming will continue for decades whatever money is thrown at the problem then any Green Fund money from the US should be used to rebuild and repair damage in the US.
But what did Obama do :
from the Guardian in Ja 2017:
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/jan/18/barack-obama-transfers-500m-to-green-climate-fund-in-attempt-to-protect-paris-deal:
– “Barack Obama has heeded calls to help secure the future of the historic Paris agreement by transferring a second $500m installment to the Green Climate Fund, just three days before he leaves office.
The fund was a key aspect of the Paris agreement signed in 2015, which aims to keep global warming “well below” 2C and aspires to keep warming to 1.5C.
Established in 2010, it is financed by wealthy countries and used to assist developing countries with adaptation and mitigation. It was widely seen as a key measure to bring both rich and poor countries to the negotiating table.
The US committed to transferring $3bn to the fund. The new instalment leaves $2bn owing, with the incoming president, Donald Trump, expected to cease any further payments. “-
That 1 billion USD would have gone along way to help mitigate damage to the poorer districts of Florida and Texas , build refuge stations , improve escape expressways etc , but instead has disappeared noone knows where.
Obama, the Clintons and Soros should be made to put back that 1 billion dollars to help the people of Florida (who probably contributed a large proportion of it originally) .
Dont just bemoan the stupid and pathetic drivel from lackeys such as Bob Ward of the LSE ( notorious for giving the son of Gadaffi a completely bogus PhD) , fight back for goodness sake (and for the world’s sake) and use their own tactics against them.
Most of Londoners knew the LSE as a home of the fervent revolutionary enthusiasm.
LSE founded by Fabians ‘quite literally’ woolves in sheep’s clothing and proud of that.
‘Remould it nearer to the heart’s desire’ ‘Pray devoutly hammer stoutly’
The Fabian window … shows Shaw, Sidney Webb and ER Pease, secretary of the Fabian Society, helping to build ‘the new world’. … The Fabian Society’s coat of arms is shown as a wolf in sheep’s clothing.
http://www.lse.ac.uk/alumni/LSEConnect/LSEMagazine/pdf/summer2006/FabianWindow.pdf
Now Dalai Lama thinks that the Potus will be responsible for wild fires and global floods.
I expect a bit less criticism from the pope, now he’s knocked his head on the popemobile.
I don’t think the old Donald knew what he got himself into at a rather mature age of 71, when the most of people take philosophical view of life and focus on enjoying retirement.
I have been retired for five years and find there is not enough time to do everything that I would like to do.
I think President Trump is having the time of his life and enjoying every minute of it.
In the climate-change realm models describe only the future climate , except it so happens that the weather does not obey the narrative . That said , there will hope that tomorrow will prove the false prophets right .
I don’t really like Trump, but saying that hurricanes are his fault is pretty schitzophrenic…
For an adult, agreeing or disagreeing with someone has nothing to do with whether you like them or not.
Too bad there are so few adults in this world.
Serene calm has returned to South East Florida beach . A visiting Canadian who sat out hurricane commented: ‘not much when compared to the Canadian freezing snow blizzard’
I thought that name sounded familiar, then I remembered the nickname “Rat Snake”.
Cut the man some slack. He’s employed to write self-serving drivel on behalf of his employer, and happens to be very good at his job…
… so we should pay generous green supplements on the top our exorbitant electricity bills because the ‘educated idi0ts’ like him are telling everyone we need to save planet from climatic cataclysm.
What makes it worse is that if the premise was right we would need LESS electricity as there would be global warming. Since heat retention by CO2 and other fossil fuel emissions is the claimed mechanism then no climate change is possible without global warming first and any evidence to the contrary has had to be faked.
Ah well. I thought the sarcasm was so obvious a /sarc tag wasn’t needed.
So the lack of damage Irma caused the US is the result of Trump’s leadership as well.
Bob Ward is a disgusting cynical moron seeking to profit off the suffering of others, no matter the facts, history, or truth.
Disjointed, equivocal case (?) by the head of the once great LSE. The Guardian must be casting about to have accepted this thin gruel. No wonder Europe’s economy sunk.
The Guardian is now promoting wind, on the basis apparently that all power is identical no matter how much the supply fluctuates…. Backup not included, no requirement in the spec for the delivery of usably constant power….
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/sep/11/huge-boost-renewable-power-offshore-windfarm-costs-fall-record-low
There is no reasoning with these people.
I used to like this site, but the increase in the number of ad hominum posts is really starting to get me down. If you can counter an alarmist’s statements with reasoned arguments, perhaps it would be better to avoid posting.
If that is snark, it is very good snark! If you meant to say “can’t”, hell even I have been known to engage in snark now and then. Especially when an “expert” engages in ad hominem which describes Bob’s statement exactly.
I agree; WUWT had a higher tone a couple of years ago, and an even better one eight years ago, when comments were all moderated.
My green taxes on petrol, electricity, gas and flights amount to well over US$ 500/annum, Bob Ward and I can afford to pay it but there are thousands or even millions in the UK who can not.
Bob Ward isn’t just any ‘common garden jorno’ who doesn’t know what he is talking about.
Bob Ward has a first degree in geology; as we know there are number of highly qualified geologist writing and commenting here, I would assume that most would strongly disagree with Mr. Wards propaganda. Bob Ward is qualified scientist but pursues shameless propaganda.
If he submits an article to WUWT attempting to prove that current global warming is caused by man I solemnly promise I will be very polite and only consider his scientific argument only.
Know thy village idiots along with useful idiots and grand-standers.
We didn’t learn about falsifiability when we were children! We learned it from Karl Popper, a philosopher whose understanding of science was far greater than he is given credit for in the quote about falsifiability. His intellect clearly exceeds the bounds of those self-serving knuckleheads who want to discard the standard. I didn’t see who wrote the snippet quoted but I have one thing to say to him/her: what an arse!
If storm intensity is related to the difference between warm waters and cooler air, shouldn’t CO2 trapping more warmth in the lower atmosphere decrease the intensity of these storms?
A better question is why this idiot gains access to media. Is it the old tabloid concept of in your face in the checkout isle? It morphed from celebrity news idiocy to political, news fakery, and Bill Nye-style pseudo science grandstanding. Keep it coming so it degrades the messaging of the others on the same track.
I do not accept the need for the gold standard of test to be applied to climate science. I merely ask that if companies who supply to low cost product outlets like Poundland have a standard then climate scientist’s work should pass that standard at a minimum.
As for for the comment about Trump we have long learnt to expect that from the organisation known locally as “Laughably Sh!t Eds”. What other educational establishment openly advocates there being no evidence for a premise but it should be blindly accepted anyway. Not even theological colleges demand such extreme examples of blind faith.
Bob Ward? A disgrace to the LSE.
I’m glad my honor student didn’t look in that direction.
Bob Ward almost has as much science credentials as Jennifer Lawrence.
I’d really appreciate it if some warmist could explain what could have been done since AGW was discovered/invented that would have prevented or ameliorated Irma/ Harvey. Other than undoing the Industrial Revolution.